LL's new Age Verification procedure

[Gavin Hird]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

I'm sorry, but I think you're over-interpreting the reasons for changing the age-verification method.   

 

---

The only interpretation I have done is saying that using credit card info as verification for age is a breach of terms of the major credit card companies. :matte-motes-wink:

We know for a fact they changed payment processor for obscure reasons, and had all kinds of issues with PayPal. Getting rid of PIOF for account verification should bring them back in the clear with the payment processors. You don't have to be CEO to understand that.

... and as usual money talks. 

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

you didn't need CC info to age verifiy..this change isn't about account verifiy, it's the change to age verification ..you could be age verified without PIOF...

PIOF is only good for some adult places if your birthdate is old enough.. 

 

---

 You are obviously confused on that.

With the adult content policy Linden Lab provided two mechanisms to access adult areas and adult content searh.

• One was the age verify method where you had to "prove" your age by submitting documents or document ID numbers to a verification process administered by Aristotle
• The second was to register Payment Info On File, no more questions asked

If you satisfied one of those two criterias, you were able to go to all the Zindra regions, most other adult regions and do adult content search both in-world and later in the marketplace.

This procedure basically bypassed true age verification by equating a credit card account with being adult – a procedure that is in violation of the terms of Visa, MasterCard and possibly PayPal. This was one of the major criticim raised in front of the policy getting in effect.

Some sim and estate owners,

in addition

, set age verified as a requirement to enter their land, but that is outside the scope of Linden Lab's policy.  This addititonal protection some land owners felt they had is now gone, as in essense anyone can state their DOB to be whatever gives them age verified status, and access to the locked coffers. 

 

Blondin was not the only one behind the adult content policy, but he was more instrumental than most people seem to think. 

 

The reason why we will get full circle and have only two maturity ratings in the near future is that the new agve verify procedure quickly will obliviate M search, but also because Linden Lab has never been able to police their own policy. Because of that M regions are strewn with adult content and businesses selling content that is adult per their policy definition.

This has significantly disadvantaged everyone who moved to Zindra, because they by and large lost their customer base as customers were able to find adult content compelling enough in M regions to not account verify.

Region and business owners in private sims fared a little different as they most of the time managed to retain their original customer base despite having to set the region Adult. Most likely because the sim owners already had a relatively strong brand and customers who did not find alternatives (i.e. Xcite), and therefore got their customer base to go through the hoops of account verifying.  

---

 

 

 

no i'm pretty clear on it having to deal with it with my fiance for over 7 days of going back and forth with LL hehehe..that was actually having me in tears laughing at my fiance at times because of them calling him a teen  lol..

my point with account verification was it did not age verifiy you..it verified your account it did not mean you were age verified..

sure you could access some adult content but not everything..age verified you could without being PIOF..you can't get to it all with PIOF only..

here this may show what i was saying a little better..

"Having "Payment Info on File" means you're "Account-Verified" , but not necessarily "Age-Verified". You can be neither, either, or both. For example, if you purchase goods from SL Marketpace with a credit card, you have Payment Info on File status, and are "Account-Verified". You are not age-verified unless you explicitly engage in the Age Verification Process"

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/English-Knowledge-Base/Account-verification-types/ta-p/805983

 

if adult content is on M regions it needs to be AR'd..

i'm not sure what you feel defines adult content .. but if it's there then it needs to be moved..thats just lack of  enforcement and probably residents getting involved to make it known that content is operating on M lands..also a lot see adult content when there isn't any  because of the misunderstandings of the ratings definitions..

 

this change is not going to slow down or speed up anything..well maybe by a few minutes to go find some information that worked to get passed  age verifiy..

this change  just unloads a lot of headaches that came with the old one ..it's just as secure because it was never a meant as a blocker..it was a line that some had to lie to get over to gain access if they were too young to be there..

if they lied then that set up any problems falling to the one that lied and not the ones they affected..like LL or other users..because the ones lying were presenting themselves as adults to everyone around them in those adult areas..

thats all the protection LL needs against them if they get in..so it's just as secure with less headaches..

 

the reason we won't move to a G and A rating is because  there is not enough adult content to warrant  M becoming useless..it may seem like it because of search..

there are a lot of private residents that have nothing to do with search but use it to buy things for their private lives..

i think there is just too many thinking it is about protecting the kids from all the big bad moderate and adult reagions when it was just adult that LL had to worry about..

 

LL's definition of what adult is defines what moderate is not.. it is pretty clear cut what that is..

 

 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

I'm sorry, but I think you're over-interpreting the reasons for changing the age-verification method.   

 

---

The only interpretation I have done is saying that using credit card info as verification for age is a breach of terms of the major credit card companies. :matte-motes-wink:

We know for a fact they changed payment processor for obscure reasons, and had all kinds of issues with PayPal. Getting rid of PIOF for account verification should bring them back in the clear with the payment processors. You don't have to be CEO to understand that.

... and as usual money talks. 

---

If you say so, though I have to say it seems rather odd that,  if what you say is correct, it didn't occur to LL earlier that using PIOF as an alternative to age verification would be in conflict with PayPal's or MasterCard TOS and that it's taken so long for any objections raised by PayPal and the rest to become so serious they've had to abandon the practice.

Actually, I expected them to jump the other way when I learned Dragonfish were handling their non-US payment processing, since Dragonfish are used to operating in an enviroment where it's a legal requirement on them and most of their customers to verify people's ages if they want to keep their gaming licences.  

I don't know how Dragonfish do it -- I would suspect they ask companies like Experian or Equifax, who offer a bona fide identity verification and credit reference service as opposed to whatever Aristotle provided , to check people's ages on their behalf at the same time they're checking that the card numbers offered are genuine and are trying to determine what credit limits to apply to gambling accounts, at least when they're dealing with European applicants.     But certainly, the new relationship with Dragonfish should have made verifying many people's ages considerably easier for LL.   

Maybe Dragonfish told them what it would cost to get the job done properly.

 

[Gavin Hird]

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

if adult content is on M regions it needs to be AR'd..

i'm not sure what you feel defines adult content .. but if it's there then it needs to be moved..thats just lack of  enforcement and probably residents getting involved to make it known that content is operating on M lands..also a lot see adult content when there isn't any  because of the misunderstandings of the ratings definitions..

  

---

I am sorry, but we - the Zindra community, have been sitting in meeting after meeting after meeting with Linden Lab representative handing them lists and ARs of litterally thousands of sims and parcels being in violation of the adult content policy. 

The response? "We don't have resources (manpower) to enforce the policy". 

Absolutely nothing happens. 

[Innula Zenovka]

I've only twice submitted ARs about this -- both times for Adult content on G rated land rather than Mature, as it happens, and maybe that's the difference.   Both times I did it through the normal AR procedure rather than bothering Blondin with it, and both times the matter was resolved in a day or so, once by the content being removed and once by the sim being re-rated.

[Gavin Hird]

Maybe Innula, but Linden Lab is a US company, so they have to be in compliance with US payment processor requirements and legislation. How Dragonfish handles it in Europe is only of some bearing to them.  Also, Linden Lab does not hold any gambling licenses, and they won't as it is in violation of US legislation. 

Dragonfish may most likely be in compliance with EU legilsation on handling person data, something Aristotle never was. The information they asked for on the age verification page was totally illegal for Europe as no government agencies are allowed to verify the information they collected unless the collector has a license to do so. Aristotle did not.  Linden Lab did not. 

My hunch is that upholding their current practice both for the PIOF and Age Verify method was in violation of both legislation and payment proessor terms, they just gave in and adopted the "industry standard" method. 

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

if adult content is on M regions it needs to be AR'd..

i'm not sure what you feel defines adult content .. but if it's there then it needs to be moved..thats just lack of  enforcement and probably residents getting involved to make it known that content is operating on M lands..also a lot see adult content when there isn't any  because of the misunderstandings of the ratings definitions..

  

---

I am sorry, but we - the Zindra community, have been sitting in meeting after meeting after meeting with Linden Lab representative handing them lists and ARs of litterally thousands of sims and parcels being in violation of the adult content policy. 

The response? "We don't have resources (manpower) to enforce the policy". 

Absolutely nothing happens. 

---

i never owned zindra lands.. but  i understand that frustration..we ended up having to change over to adult with our sims at the time....not as frustrating as the move you all went through thats for sure..

i just want you to know i was amining more at lack of enforcement  but didn't want to get tagged for not saying lack of reports either..hehehe

now that you have confirmed that part i can eliminate it and just say..lack of enforcement hehehe

[Gavin Hird]

You are right they did a slightly better job on G regions, particularly before the teen grid merge. But M is still a zoo.

Many businesses simply stopped advertising (thus being in compliance with that part of the policy), retained their customer base and grew organically from there. Now with the marketplace, you can place a server on any land you want, fill it with adult content and sell happily on SLM. Again this scews the market. 

[Innula Zenovka]

Yes, Gavin, but I think we're at cross purposes. 

What I meant was that LL and Aristotle, right from the start, had clearly been at a complete loss about how they might reliably verify the age of European customers while staying within European and national laws governing this area.   Then along came Dragonfish, who do actually have some expertise in this area, and I expected -- mistakenly, as it turns out -- that LL would take the opportunity to sack Aristotle, at least when it came to verifying EU residents' details, and ask Dragonfish to undertake the task instead.

As it happens, that's now academic because LL's simply decided that they don't need to involve a third party to check the veracity of what people say their ages are.    But, if they'd felt they needed to be seen to undertake some sort of independent check, they had a ready-made solution to hand, at least for many non-US residents.

But I suppose it could quite well be as you suggest and that the matter's primarily been decided by PayPal's attitude to how US customers' details are verified.   After all, the clear fact that age verification was broken, or illegal, or both, when applied to non-US residents has never seemed to bother anyone in the past.

[Gavin Hird]

I think the handling of European customers also might have been a strong motivation why they pulled the UK office. 

If you have a subsidiary inside the union, you must be in compliance with all EU regulations to be able to operate there. This includes everything from TAX, VAT, person data, consumer legilsation like EULA's that does not mean **bleep** inside the union if in violation with the law (and it is), copyright legislation and gambling just to mention a few.  In essence, all EU customers must be handled per EU legislation if you are incorporated inside it. 

[Ceka Cianci]

i guess what i was trying to get at is this..payment info for becoming account verified was just that it was used for account info..  not the age verifiying process..it did not use banking or credit card information of any kind..

why would  this change be impacted by things it never used or asked for?

 

this change is to the new age verification..not a change to account verification..

 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

i guess what i was trying to get at is this..payment info for becoming account verified was just that it was used for account info..  not the age verifying process..it did not use banking or credit card information of any kind..

why would  this change be impacted by things it never used or asked for?

 

this change is to the new age verification..not a change to account verification..

 

---

Yeah, I see what you mean.   Though I suppose it could be that PayPal or whoever took the attitude that using account verification with  PayPal  as an alternative to Age Verification with Aristotle amounted to using PayPal for Age Verification and took exception to that.  

I guess it would be instructive to see what happens if you create an account that's PIOF and then try to access Adult content without first going to the age verification page and saying "Yes, that's my correct date of birth".    But I can't be bothered to set up yet another alt to test yet another mystery about Age Verification -- I'm just glad the cumbersome charade seems to be coming to an end.

[Ceka Cianci]

well i don't know what it used to be like..but my fiance just set his account up last week after deleting the other because he hit the wrong date on his  DOB LOL..omg he was my lil teen panda for a week  hehehehee

 

Anyways when he went to the viewer before doing age verifiy his permissions were only set to G and M..

i am just now remembering this  because  i was too busy giving him a hard time  again lol

 

anyways until he did the age verifiy before the change..he could not get to Adult or Adult search..

once he did the age verification his Viewer opened up  that adult rating in his viewer settings in preferences..

this was with his account already showing his correct DOB this time when he made the account..

 

in other words..being old enough with account info only gave him Moderate access untill he became age verified..

also this was only in V2 viewer..we didn't look in the V1's if it was different..but i do know his viewers were blocked  on his old account  from M and A in v1 and v2 viewers both..so i would imagine the same would be for his new one..

i really wish he would have jumped on phoenix so we could see..but he was just so glad to see anything but a G that he went right away to test that age verified worked also LOL

 

ETA: ironically this change came only a few days after he made his new account and after 7 days of riding them to fix his older one..LOL now i am gonna play with him and tell him that he scared them so much that he made them change the whole damn thing LOL

omg he'll get big headed over that one lol

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Shannon Minoptra wrote:

So, now nothing is ever going to stop minors from getting involved with sex with adults on SL?

Why do teenagers even make teen accounts these days?

---

Nothing has ever stopped minors from doing just that, ever since Linden Lab did away with account verification by credit card back in June 2006 (which I happened to be strongly opposed to, just for the record. Just look at the mess of freeloaders that this has caused, while doing very little for the economy) . There is absolutely no point in starting to worry now.

Besides, whenever "think of the childrenz!" antics interfere with the accessability and ease of use of SL, or of any other type of platform or media for that matter, it is the protection of minors that ought to take the backseat. It is the sole responsibility of the parents to protect their kids from whatever they think they ought to be protected from. Governmental babysitting cuts both ways and often interferes with parental interests more than it aids parents. Not to mention the interests of the childless part of the adult population, who never agreed to do any voluntary babysitter work for other people's wayward brats, or to have their tax money wasted on inane measures that are akin to the prohibition of steaks because infants can't chew meat.

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

"But if they lie both times, that's on them, not you."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

When this was suggested to Linden Lab four years ago, the response was:

[16:09] Tali Rosca: No. But are there plans to allow teens on the main grid? (Irrespective of keeping the teen grid alive as-is, as a protected sandbox)

[16:10] Blondin Linden: NO

[16:10] Blondin Linden: LET ME SAY THAT 2X – NO

Oops, that was Linden Lab's response to the question of whether underage players would be allowed officially into SL. Linden Lab's response to the proposal of a simple verification system (as now implemented) was that it was impossible, could not be done, was ineffective, was not legal, yadayadayada.

For a brief overview of the long, arduous, grinding, painful history of this subject, see:

http://deltango.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/linden-lab-sexual-policy/



---

Hehe If they lie 2X indeed.

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Solar Legion wrote:

@Ceka: Actually, 

Commercial

Adult content is not allowed in Mature rated sims. There's nothing preventing a user from going out and buying a sex bed, then placing it in their M rated home.

---

There is also nothing that allows people to do this, other than Blondin's (who is no longer an LL employee) words in a forum (that no longer exists). According to the SL Wiki, adult content and nudity are not permitted on M-rated land. I foresee a mass migration to Zindra.

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

"that was blondins response when it wasn't in the plans yet."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blodin's comments were in March 2009. The official announcement was in August 2010. A change as significant as merging the grids requires at least a year's planning. Moreover, a possible grid merger was a constant worry for residents. Linden Lab was long-aware of those concerns. It was a major strategy and policy issue. Residents repeatedly requested clarification. Linden Lab repeatedly said there would be no merger.

The 'adult' policy was perhaps the single most confusing, divisive and counterproductive policy Linden Lab ever devised (and LL has a long history of confusing, divisive and unproductive policies). In the midst of the uproar over the 'adult' policy, residents again asked for clarification over a potential grid merger - and Linden Lab again denied any such strategy. The brief section I quoted demonstrates absolute frustration on all sides. No doubt, Blondin is furious to have been put in such a position. I'm not surprised so many staff and resident subsequently abandoned Linden Lab and Second Life.

---

I agree. Other than existing plans of a grid merger, there was no valid reason for the adult content ghettoization.

All that rub about a more predictable user experience was mere eyewash. I believe that there was only a relatively small number of naysayers who vocally opposed adult content and called for censorship, and this would have been the first time of Linden Lab listening to their customers. LL knew full well that the majority of residents were here because of adult content rather than despite of it.

Besides, the more predictable experience could have easily been realized by enforcing the existing rules and standards for PG regions. There was no need to PG-ify mature land other than protecting curious teenagers who cam across sim borders. Which didn't change anything at all in the end, because M-rated land is still full of adult content, and LL do as little to enforce the new rules as they did the old ones. It would have been a much more sensible approach to render all PG land mature and create an entirely new PG continent for the teens.

[Ceka Cianci]

where did you see that it said nudity was not allowed on moderate?

strip clubs are allowed on moderate as well as nude beaches hehehehe

and sex beds are not adult content..not unless you have models on them going through the poses as part of your advertising..

 

can you post the link to that part of the wiki?

[Ceka Cianci]

i agree they caused a lot of turmoil when they could have just  did a new pg..i mean they brought over teen grids mainland and all their sims anyways..

all this turmoil for a few hundred residents moving in..i mean you find them a place to live..not make room ..it's not like there wasn't a big ocean out there..look where they put zindra lol

miles and miles way the hell over there off the map..

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Carole Franizzi wrote in part:

 

I totally get that you can't expect what is beyond reason. Expecting LL to somehow set up a system by which it's 100% guaranteed that adults do not inadvertently socialise with kids is unreasonable. It's been said a million times before that the ultimate responsibility for kiddies not dabbling in unsuitable practises and getting involved in unsuitable relationships must lie fundamentally on the shoulders of their parents. Having said that, I suspect few of us would stand by and watch a toddler wander onto a busy road without intervening, simply because “it's not our kid”. It's one of Nature's little tricks – we tend to end up feeling responsible for the young and vulnerable even when they're not our own.

---

 

First off, I'm not post-stalking you And I strongly agree with the first half of the above paragraph. But I think that the toddler example has little relevance in this case. Legal minors who are not only interested in Second Life, but are also prepared go lie about their age and risk their SL account in order to access adult content, are certainly not toddlers. As far as I'm concerned, if humans reach an age at which they develop a strong interest in all things adult, they no longer need to be protected from it, unless we're talking about extreme fetish content.

That being said, I'm aware that there is this kind of extreme content in SL. But I'm also aware that teenagers can easily access photos of the most strange and disturbing SL content on websites such as Something Awful, which don't have any form of age verification or adult content disclaimers. Even a toddler could accidentally run into adult content on these sites, and I can't do anything about that. Only parents can keep their kids from wandering off onto the data highways.

 

---

[...] Or say I was a creator of erotic toys or furniture – would I feel totally at ease knowing that some of my customers will be kiddies? Frankly, I wouldn't.

---

Nor would I. I've been in this exact situation ever since LL opened the floodgates back in 2006. At first, I've restricted access to my land to people with PiU (payment info on file) account status. But I had to endure a lot of verbal abuse from angry and potentially adult NPioFs over that restriction, so I eventually caved in and followed everybody else's example by opening my sim to the public.

Needless to say that the only person that I tried to protect was myself. In Germany, it is a grave offense to make digital adult content available to teenagers (whereas having sex with a 16 year old is perfectly legal, ironically). For the same reason I was violently opposed to the grid merger. I don't care much if sexually mature teenagers have access to adult content, but I do care about my own safety. Prior to the merger, adult content sellers were at least protected by Linden Lab's 18+ policy, which is now no longer the case.

This new policy doesn't change anything about this situation, but it allows legal adults to access my land and my content without any unnecessary hassle. The previous age "verification" process has never been a hurdle for minors at all, but it was a pain in the tush for international adult SL residents who tried to verify with their real ID. I'm glad that this is no longer an issue now, but I'm still against the practice of officially allowing legal minors into SL. I fear that this might come back to haunt LL at some point and could lead to a grid-wide adult content prohibition.

 

---

So what to do? I think all you can reasonably expect is that it's made as difficult as possible for them to get in. I'm not expecting the impossible. Just a compromise between the morally correct and the functionally feasible. And the new age “verification” system is most decidedly not making it difficult for them. In truth, it couldn't be made any more easy for them. And that's wrong.



---

And exactly that is not an option. It's technically impossible to make it reasonably difficult for minors to get in. The kids are tech-savvy enough to overcome any hurdles that we could put in their way, so there is no additional security to gain from more restrictive verification measures. Such measures we will only end up alienating paying customers because they can't verify with their Timbuktu passport or their Cambodian driver's license, just like Aristotle's age "verification" did.

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

I'm sorry, but I think you're over-interpreting the reasons for changing the age-verification method.   

 

---

The only interpretation I have done is saying that using credit card info as verification for age is a breach of terms of the major credit card companies. :matte-motes-wink:

We know for a fact they changed payment processor for obscure reasons, and had all kinds of issues with PayPal. Getting rid of PIOF for account verification should bring them back in the clear with the payment processors. You don't have to be CEO to understand that.

... and as usual money talks. 

---

If you say so, though I have to say it seems rather odd that,  if what you say is correct, it didn't occur to LL earlier that using PIOF as an alternative to age verification would be in conflict with PayPal's or MasterCard TOS and that it's taken so long for any objections raised by PayPal and the rest to become so serious they've had to abandon the practice.

[...]

 

---

I don't know about PayPal, but the credit card companies don't seem to make any attempts of enforcing their policies. Pretty much all commercial adult websites allow people to sign up with a credit card. Although one could argue that they only accept credit cards as a means of payment and simply don't bother to age-verify paying customers. Linden Lab could use the same argument.

[Darrius Gothly]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

I don't know about PayPal, but the credit card companies don't seem to make any attempts of enforcing their policies. Pretty much all commercial adult websites allow people to sign up with a credit card. Although one could argue that they only accept credit cards as a means of payment and simply don't bother to age-verify paying customers. Linden Lab could use the same argument.

---

Adult websites do indeed verify that their guests are Adults .. in the exact same manner as LL is now using. Before you can get to the payment pages, you must view and agree to their conditions, among which is a stipulation that you are of legal age and legally allowed to view content of an adult nature.

LL is standing behind a process that has been tested in US courts many times .. and survived. As a producer of Adult Oriented content, you should also be able to gain protection from that. (Although there may be other issues that only a lawyer can legally advise.)

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

where did you see that it said nudity was not allowed on moderate?

strip clubs are allowed on moderate as well as nude beaches hehehehe

and sex beds are not adult content..not unless you have models on them going through the poses as part of your advertising..

 

can you post the link to that part of the wiki?

---

I see that the Wiki entry has been moved to the Knowledge Base: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/English-Knowledge-Base/Maturity-ratings/ta-p/700119

Photorealistic nudity, which includes nude avatars with photorealistic skins, is only listed in the Adult section. There is nothing about nudity (or adult furniture in private homes, for that matter) under Moderate.

The Moderate section lists bars, stores that sell "sexy" clothing, and dance clubs that feature "burlesque" acts (according to Merriam-Webster, burlesque refers to "theatrical entertainment of a broadly humorous often earthy character consisting of short turns, comic skits, and sometimes striptease acts"). Since nudity is only listed under adult, I assume that these burlesque striptease acts are not supposed to go beyond the pasties and thong level.

As with adult furniture and pixel bumping in residential areas, we only have Blondin's words that nude beaches and nudity in strip clubs are allowed in moderate regions. Even depictons of illicit drug use are now only listed as adult content. Didn't this use to be moderate?

[Ishtara Rothschild]

---

Darrius Gothly wrote:

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

I don't know about PayPal, but the credit card companies don't seem to make any attempts of enforcing their policies. Pretty much all commercial adult websites allow people to sign up with a credit card. Although one could argue that they only accept credit cards as a means of payment and simply don't bother to age-verify paying customers. Linden Lab could use the same argument.

---

Adult websites do indeed verify that their guests are Adults .. in the exact same manner as LL is now using. Before you can get to the payment pages, you must view and agree to their conditions, among which is a stipulation that you are of legal age and legally allowed to view content of an adult nature.

---

I have to admit that I've never read the small print You might be right that this is part of their terms and conditions.

 

---

Darrius Gothly wrote:

LL is standing behind a process that has been tested in US courts many times .. and survived. As a producer of Adult Oriented content, you should also be able to gain protection from that. (Although there may be other issues that only a lawyer can legally advise.)

---

That is reassuring to know. And as of yet, not a single parent has sued either LL or an SL merchant for enabling access to adult content as far as I'm aware. I hope that it stays that way.

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Ishtara Rothschild wrote:

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

where did you see that it said nudity was not allowed on moderate?

strip clubs are allowed on moderate as well as nude beaches hehehehe

and sex beds are not adult content..not unless you have models on them going through the poses as part of your advertising..

 

can you post the link to that part of the wiki?

---

I see that the Wiki entry has been moved to the Knowledge Base:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/English-Knowledge-Base/Maturity-ratings/ta-p/700119

Photorealistic nudity, which includes nude avatars with photorealistic skins, is only listed in the Adult section. There is nothing about nudity (or adult furniture in private homes, for that matter) under Moderate.

---

No, I think you're misreading it.   The KB entry  helpfully defines "photorealistic" as "meaning that images either are or cannot be distinguished from a photograph."  

It's not talking about the quality of avatars' skins -- though I've never seen an unretouched image of  avatar, no matter how good the skin and shape, that I'd  have difficulty distinguishing from a photograph of an actual person --  but about what sort of images you can have on display in galleries and adverts.

And while you are correct that "There is nothing about nudity (or adult furniture in private homes, for that matter) under Moderate,"  there most certainly is something about both nudity and adult furniture in private homes in the previous section, under General:

A region designated General is not allowed to advertise or make available content or activity that is sexually explicit, violent, or depicts nudity.  Sexually-oriented objects such as "sex beds" or poseballs may not be located or sold in General regions.

Since they say, in terms, that sex beds "may not be located in General regions", when it would have been perfectly simple to say "may not be located in either General or Moderate regions" or "may only be located in Adult regions," if that's what they meant, I can only take that to mean sex beds in Moderate regions are OK so long as they're not being used in public.    

Similarly, since we know -- because we are told -- that you can't depict nudity in General regions and you may only depict nudity that's "photo-realistic" -- a form of nudity LL clearly distinguishes from other forms of nudity because they go to the trouble of defining it as "meaning that images either are or cannot be distinguished from a photograph." -- in Adult regions, I take their silence about nudity in Moderate regions to mean that it's OK so long as it's not in a sexual context.

  It would have been  simple enough to say nudity is banned in Moderate regions if that's what they mean -- they don't have any difficulty making that clear in context of how Marketplace listings are categorised,  after all.