Leaderboard

Hey there! I wanted to take a moment and chime in as the person who oversees our Governance team. I've seen some of you mention concerns over weaponizing the policy. I want to assure you that we are prepared for people who might attempt to use this policy in a less than good hearted nature. We have a lot of internal processes in place not just before we take action on an account, but also as part of our appeals process. We understand that we are human, and some times even we might make mistakes even with our own intentions in the right place. We work hard to ensure that no action is taken without full and proper evidence to support the action. In addition to that, our appeals process ensures that not only does the person who took the action is not involved in the appeal, but that the process itself includes a review from more than one agent as well.

Hi all! I'm gonna admit that I haven't read every comment on here yet but I will be doing so shortly and responding where I can. Just a few things first: The only change to the Terms and Conditions is the update to the Child Avatar Policy The FAQ is a living doc, which means we know it is in no way complete right now. As questions come up here and through Support, we'll be adding more questions and answers to hopefully help clarify some of the changes.

Good morning! You all posted quite a bit over the weekend! I just wanted to let you know that we are still working on more updates to the FAQ that will be added over the next couple of days. One of the things that we will be adding is an image to help provide clarity on the modesty layer.

Residents presenting as Child Avatars shall be prohibited from the following: Entering any Region rated Adult. Residents must change to a non-child or non-childlike avatar to visit Adult rated regions. Engaging or participating in any event or location where nudity and/or sexual activity is present, encouraged and/or expected. Wearing genital/sexual attachments including clothing, attachments or HUDs created for and/or worn by child avatars to indicate genitalia, whether visible or not. Being fully nude. Child avatar content creators are required to add a modesty layer which is baked into child avatar skins or bodies, is not transparent, does not match the skin tone, and may not be removed. Child avatars where the focal point of the body is on the breasts, pelvis, or buttocks Participation in lewd or sexual acts in which one or more of the avatars appears to represent minors (or the depiction of such acts in images, video, textures, or text).

The only part of this that surprises me is the "modesty layer" bit; that's going to break a fair amount of content, I'd have thought. Overall, this is much less Draconian than it could have been. It's going to trigger some complaints, but other than the fact that kid avatars aren't going to be able to run around at nude beaches anymore (which I think is a good thing) or be given "realistic" baths (which . . . maybe is also a good thing), I don't see how this should impede those representing as children overly much.

I'm not threatening anything or anyone. Normally we don't lock threads, but simply allow them to run their course. I'm just drawing attention to some of the circumstances in which we would lock a thread, one of which is that it goes completely off topic because people have run out of things to say. This is clearly an issue about which a lot of people have strong views and is clearly causing a good deal of concern for a particular group. Many of the people affected who aren't regular forum users may well find themselves here for the first time, because they've asked friends or inworld groups what these changes are all about and been told there's a thread about them in the forums. Please let's try to ensure that people who haven't been following this thread from the beginning don't come here to catch up, only to find it's degenerated into a load of off-topic chatter, memes and jokes.

I see there's this optional notification, at least in the Official Viewer. Or is that age-related rather than maturity-related? There's also this: So, I think, the sensible course of action would be to set your preferences to G & M only when wearing a child avatar.

I think if anyone wants to post some more pictures of avatars to discuss how old they look, it would be best so to do in a thread dedicated to that topic, possibly in the Your Avatar forum. If someone would like to start that thread, I'll port the last few pictures over, but please don't post any more of them in this thread.

If the participation of child avatars is a valued part of the social interactions in such places, then it will be worth their while to change their ratings to Moderate. Region owners are going to have a decision here: what is more important to them? Adult activities, or kiddie avatars? As Coffee and others have noted previously, the main differences between Moderate and Adult are that 1) sex can't be "public" in M-rated areas, and 2) you can only advertise Adult events for A-rated areas. And honest, sorry . . . I don't think kid avatars should be hanging around places where there is public sexuality. That would violate nearly every other part of these rules.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/191119559@N02/53697764566/in/dateposted-public/ Come on folks, post more pictures, nearly made a double post 😮

May the Fourth be with you!

That isn't a child avatar dude.

I like it. Especially the FAQ, this part: That finally puts to rest a lot of mythology about the "closed door" policy.

Ok - I keep seeing these posts insisting that people are being ejected solely based on their height. To test this, I put on my Death of Rats avatar (PTerry lives!). My shape comes in to 1.33 meters according to firestorm, and 0.9 meters by prim measurement. Avatar deformation for the win I then went into search, unticked G and M (leaving only A) and typed in SEX, and started teleporting to sims. I teleported to the top 10 of the list. Then I searched for SHOPPING, and started teleporting. I went to the top 10 of the list. Then I searched for NO KIDS ... but because no is too short and was eliminated the search ended up being KIDS and I got a whole bunch of locations that I wouldn't go to just in case, but I did look at their descriptions and most of them were there because they had "NO KIDS" in their keywords. Then I searched for ADULTS ONLY, and again hit the top 10 of the list. I won't continue with all the searches I did ... but the results were ONE. A single location which specified very clearly that you had to be 1.52 meters (apparently that's 5 feet tall). It gave me a minute to change to a taller avatar. Out of 100 hundred teleports. I encountered three which I had to leave because their rules stated "Human Avatars only". If these height ejection mechanisms are as prevalent as people would like us to believe ... I would have expected to hit more than one. I'm not saying that they aren't out there, because finding one means that they exist ... but I think one percent is a pretty low average when you consider that I purposely selected high traffic regions which were MORE likely to employ such devices. Just for the sake of completeness I'll note that several of the dancers who greeted me on arrival at some of the regions were rather amused at the 3 foot tall rat that had just arrived in their midst!

May the Fourth be with you!

I've been a parent in sl since 2016 to three daughters and I think the new rules are a good thing. My eldest two were child avis when they first joined our family and my youngest daughter is a zooby animesh baby. Our one eldest daughter who is still with our family now uses an adult avi. Before both girls joined our family, my husband and I sat down with them to have a discussion about rules and boundaries we expected them to follow. They wanted to present as a child so they were going to be treated as children. They were to dress appropriate for their age, adult sims were off limits and we were to go with them if they needed to go shopping or wanted to go somewhere. Our family home was on a moderate sim, they had their own bedroom and there was no adult furniture on the premises. Our family home has always been a safe space for our entire family. We were strict and some might even consider us prudish from what I have read through in this discussion. My normal sized avatar is what one would consider petite in height by sl standards since I am around 5'9 with heels on. My family at times will change into petite avatars, recently we have all picked up dinkie avatars due to the Fantasy Faire, and I even wander around as a cat at times. So I have a personal interest in these new rules and I think they are a good thing. I think clarification is needed from LL as has been discussed, but I still think they are a good thing. Just as I think this discussion has been a good thing because of the feedback being provided to LL. It is nice they have made it clear they are reading what is being said here. I really do feel that LL are trying to protect those who want to present as children in sl, not punishing them. I can appreciate how some feel the frustration from putting money and time into an avatar they will have to change. Staying calm and not jumping to conclusions might be the best thing to do for now. Just my point of view of course.

It's been my experience in 18 years here than many long term users end up exploring it as a form of therapy, ways to explore past trauma, live a life denied and so on. My first night in SL was spent playing gambling games with a woman and her SL husband, She was bed bound and had been for some time. This place made her final few years some of the happiest of her entire life. SL is many things to many people and we're all here for our own personal reasons. A little empathy goes a very long way. Please be kind.

Betty 2024 😚

Well, I'm back. (From the Fantasy Faire)

Quoted just cuz. Nobody is depriving anyone of anything, especially income. I mean, surely you are not suggesting that the child avatar made income doing adult things. LL simply says that child avatars cannot go to Adult land. They cannot run around nude - they will have to have a modesty layer (and that has not been fully defined). Those are the only new things really. They've never been allowed around adult / sex content. If your friend is in distress over this, then your friend might actually need more time outside of SL to work on their issues.

out of service

So, to summarize a bit. Are Child Avatars of any age still permitted? Yes. This remains unchanged. Can Child Avatars continue to interact with those representing Adults? Yes. This remains unchanged. Are there any new restrictions on the kind of RP that Child Avatars can engage in? No, although any RP must now be in Moderate- or General-rated regions. "Family" RP, for instance, is still permitted. This remains unchanged. Are there new restrictions on where Child Avatars can be? Yes. Adult-rated areas are characterized primarily by the fact that public sexuality and/or violence is permitted within them; because Child Avatars are not (and have not, for some time) been permitted near public sexuality, they are now restricted from entering Adult areas. This represents a change to old policies. Are there new restrictions on what Child Avatars can wear? Yes. Child avatars are no longer allowed to be nude, and must, beginning in July, wear skins with baked-in "modesty layers." They must also not wear clothing or attachments that represent or that accentuate the genital areas. This represents a change to old policies. Are Child Avatars allowed to be present around nudity? No. This represents a change to old policies. Have the penalties for which Child Avatars are liable should they contravene these rules changed? No. This remains unchanged, although there are a few new categories for which penalties can be assessed (see Adult regions, and nudity, above.) Has the way in which abuse reports lodged against Child Avatars are judged by LL changed? No. This remains unchanged. Has the appeal process for ARs changed? No. This remains unchanged. Has there been any change in ability of landowners to restrict the access of Child Avatars to their land changed? No. This remains unchanged. Most of this remains unchanged. Again, this all seems to me very doable, surely, although some clarifications from LL (particularly with regard to the modesty layer) would be appreciated. What have I missed?

Hello Again, I just want to let everyone know that we have been making some updates to the FAQ originally posted. In addition, please don't take the silence from us in the thread to mean we are not still reading all of the feedback. We are still listening and working to answer more questions. Quick link again to the FAQ for those who might need it (or if you are like me, to just save you the time of trying to find it in your sea of open tabs). https://lindenlab.freshdesk.com/support/solutions/articles/31000173097-child-avatar-faq

I think if you set your preferences to G and M only, you can't teleport to A land, just like you can't search A at the search engine or the marketplace then. But I'm not sure about that, it has been years ago that I made my settings. I think LL knows how to handle griefers by now, they ain't stupid. Maybe a good reason to ban Firestorm.

More Fantasy Faire lunacy

Your friend's sad story puzzles me. Are you under the impression that she can no longer engage in family roleplay in SL? If so, that is false. Unless her family roleplay involves se*ual activity as a child, she will be able to do it. If your friend's therapy does involve painful re-enactments, then her presumably accredited therapist (immersive re-enactment is a risky therapeutic mode that should not be attempted lightly) can try contacting Linden Lab and petition them for permission to conduct these sessions privately, on her own region (which the therapist would presumably pay for). In fact, this could be attempted without even consulting LL - since the therapy sessions, with their rule infractions, would not be visible to anyone who is not part of the therapy, there would be little risk that LL would ever know about it. But really, this is something that is better suited to an Open Sim environment, where the therapist could completely control the sessions. As for the legal counsel you've provided, I can only say that anyone who follows legal advice from a person who cannot spell "plaintiff" should proceed with much caution.

Not every Adult region is a 24/7 strip club or bawdy house. But in such places sex can happen literally anywhere, at any time (within whatever limitations have been set by the region or parcel owner, but even then they need to be there to enforce them). Congrats on having never tripped over sex in an A rated region, I guess? But your luck is going to run out, because sex most assuredly does happen in such places, often quite publicly, and if you suddenly appear there with a child avatar, you're running a VERY real risk of getting ARed for it. What people often don't get about ratings is that they are not "punishments." They are a tool so that we, as residents, can make informed decisions about where we want to go, and what we want to see or experience. Not using them to make intelligent decisions is just foolish. And you're going to get burned.

From Oberwolf's statement:

/me logs into second life Gah! I'm feeling a little dizzy.. /me clicks accept and goes to usual activities in SL

For what it's worth, I've always thought that if you feel you have to stress in your profile that your avatar is supposed to be 18 or more, that's probably a sign that enough people think it doesn't look like an 18 year old that it would be a good idea to tweak your appearance a bit.

@Linden Lab @Tommy Linden @Maggie Linden @Keira Linden This post is not intended to 'join in' on the arguing back and forth. This is some direct and considered feedback that I hope you will consider when updating the FAQ in the coming days. There seems to be a lot of kibitzing going on over the specific words and phrases being used in the rules, and people are poring over it for any scrap of loopholes. Some issues that need to be specifically addressed (in direct words) in the FAQ are: Regarding Modesty Panels Layers? Change uses of the word "Layer" to "Panel" or "Patch".. This is causing confusion as to whether the use of system clothing 'layers' are an acceptable alternative to having a modesty patch on the skin. Baked, they said Baked! Similarly, change usage of the phrase "Baked onto" if you do not mean to imply that Bakes-On-Mesh Layers are an acceptable solution. Perhaps a better phrase is "Rendered or painted directly on the skin's textures", if that's what you mean to imply. How much modesty, is modest enough? Are grey crotch triangles and/or nipple-cover pastie style circles acceptable, or must this be an apparent clothing item? Do 'girl presenting avatars' with fully flat chests have to have bras? Is there an apparent age point where one is and isn't required? Is a C-string style cover acceptable, or do child avatars need actual panties painted on? Are thongish panties or high-cut briefs compliant, or does everyone need knee-length boxers? What specifically must be covered? It's an uncomfortable question to ask and answer particularly from the corporate world of worries of sexual harassment, sensitivity, etc, but there must be no ambiguity here, for child avs and asset creators. Where is the line here? Regarding "Must not match the skin tone" Surprisingly there's some room for quibble here as well. "by how much" is hard to quantify.. but also 'must the patch be hard edged?" comes into play here as well. A slightly different shade of brown or tan.. technically doesn't match. Does the patch need to be hard edged like a stamp, or can it be feathered along the edges to provide a more subtle transition for situations where an edge might peek out of a swimsuit? Tintable panels? A further question is raised if the modesty panels are accomplished through use of a transparent 'hole' in the skin textures, allowing the tint-able system layer under the skin textures to show. If creators offer this on a modifiable skin, it's potentially possible for users to tint their modesty panels to match the skin. Even if not sold that way, will the creator face sanctions when a user tints their modesty panels to match their skin? Regarding "Fully Nude" This phrase in actual SL usage is extremely vague. We realize you're not regular users of the service and it's often hard to remember every way SL is used. For the pedants, "I'm wearing socks" can be interpreted by some as compliant with the idea of 'not being fully nude'. Less pedantically, there are some clear questions about the phrase. Does a worn mesh diaper comply? Does mesh panties even if the skin has genitals on it? Do BOM layer undies or a C-string comply? If an avatar strips down to nothing but a body/skin (that *IS* compliant, complete with painted-on modesty panels).. is THAT considered being nude? Do modesty panels alone constitute 'not nude? Regarding child avatar users Some folks seem to be getting the idea that this rule only applies to content creators, and that child avatar users themselves have no direct compliance requirements. I personally think it's pretty clear, but I have 18+ years of experience in reading LL's announcements. Child avatars can't be forced to personally modify their skins, because child avatars largely don't make their own skins, they buy them. The creators need to update their assets, the child avatars need to use compliant assets by June 30. This needs some clarification. Regarding "use of Moderate or Adult keywords" Will creators be notified at time of publication which keywords they've used are considered Moderate or Adult? It seems unfair to threaten content creators with expulsion from SL over keywords they may not realize are not allowed to be utilized. It may be time to put an end to the 'hidden rules' mindset. Yes, this allows certain creators to potentially abuse the situation. Those abusers can be admonished. Do not march child-avatar asset creators, trying in good faith to comply, to their doom across a hidden minefield. Example.. the word "Latex" may be understood to be one of those words. But Latex is a name for a shiny material, which may be used (for example) in the description of included material options for a diaper cover. "Cute cartoon patterned diaper cover for your Toddleedoo, available in Plastic, Rubber, and Glossy Latex finishes" .. there should be some system in place for 'you've used the wrong keyword, it's been removed' or 'you need to change that'.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/191119559@N02/53697816924/in/dateposted-public/ Bum.

I'd like to summarise as follows: No kid I know (including myself) is against the ban on kids in adult land or pretty much 99.9% of what the new policy states. Nudity beaches were always sick - those who go there, kids and adults alike, should be burned and banned. The modesty layer in of itself is a good idea (even if it makes you feel icky that you need it). Many kids already wear some form of unoffical modestly layer in the form of BOM undies - I certainly do. LL need to clarify what is acceptable and what they want content creators to make. LL needs to look into whether what they're asking content creators to create is even possible. The major issue here being that the modesty layer MUST never be able to be removed. If a solution to this can't be reached then LL has defacto banned child avis in all but name and has made years worth of content costing thousands effectively worthless.

Enjoying the new exhibits at the welcome hub 🥰 I used to check every day for them to open some more, but then gave up after a while because LL seemed to have their hands full with other things. Thankfully, after logging in I checked again today and saw a few more have been added since I last visited. It is like a mini SLB

The bit about no kids in adult regions... Thats the one thing they've done here that makes some sense.

Finally finished landscaping my parcel. I decided to be really different and original and built a beach!