LaskyaClaren

Is it too late to send you my pic? I want to go on the space shuttle! Or whatever they're using these days. ;-)

Leia36 wrote: In my opinion there is no fine line .. You either are or aren't. Ageplay has absolutely no place in SL in my opinion. Every time I have come across it, which, thankfully, hasn't been often, it has resulted in truck loads of drama and accusations. There is nothing sweet or innocent about a grown adult impersonating an 8 year old for any reason. Had a hard childhood? Well there is nothing to be gained, that I can see, from attempting to relive it inworld. You cannot unlearn what you have learned, you cannot unexperience what has happened to you, and any talk of "closure" is a poor attempt at justification. Let me ask you this, what, if any, therapeutic value does having the majority of SL thinking you are weird and degenerative have? Absolutely null... Had a hard childhood? Go see a shrink. The above may come across as harsh, but this is one subject that I don't pull the punches with. Personally, I think that this is an over-the-top response. I've not known a lot of child avatars, but the few whom I have come to know were really lovely people. One of my earliest friends, who owned a sim I occasionally hung out in, played a cussin', cigar-smoking 8 year old who had a penchant for detonating nuclear weapons. I'm not sure what sort of "therapy" she got out of it, but she was hilarious. I also don't think it's fair to be so dismissive of what other people may get out of age play. Not my thing at all, but it is obviously important to some people, and if it doesn't involve sexuality, it's innocent enough. But this, I know, is a loaded subject about which people get very emotional. Some of the biggest, longest, and messiest flame wars I've seen on SL forums were about this.

Ick. Places like this certainly exist in SL. And there are also, as even a cursory search will show, a number of groups that teeter on the edge of sexualized age play (i.e., virtual pedophilia). The language that they use in public tends to rely upon innuendo, euphemism, and suggestion, but I would imagine that, when they are sure of whom they are talking to, things get much more explicit in IM. I had a friend who documented some of this kind of thing in the "bad old days," before LL brought the hammer down on explicit sexual age play: stuff like sex balls in children's beds in rooms done up to look like they belonged to 8 year olds. As I said, ick. And ick again. Someone will possibly pop up here and point out that this is just roleplay, and that no real children are involved. That's probably true, but one way or another, there's no easier way to get yourself permabanned from SL than to be reported to be either underage in RL, or engaged in sexual age play. For whatever reason, LL lets the edgecases go, but it will move like lightning if something less shadowy is reported to them. So, the answer is: just don't go there anymore. You can report them if you wish, but I can assure you that you won't be the first to have done so, and unless there is something fairly unambiguous, LL won't move. And, of course, there is the risk, unless you have solid proof that sexualized age play is involved, that you'll be reporting someone who, like yourself, found themselves inadvertently and innocently in a place that they thought was for legitimate age play. Just stay away from the place, and places like it. You ARE running a risk by being there. As for the titler thing, you're on your own there. I hate the things. And, as you obviously know, there is nothing you can do about being banned from a sim for whatever ultimately stupid and arbitrary reason they want to ban you, so you might just as well move on and find a new place to hang out.

I finally took the time to read this through. What a really lovely thread, Medhue. I loved all the stories, less for what they say about Second Life, than for what they say about people. I was racking my brain trying to think of a story to contribute. My mind is crowded with experiences, and moments in Second Life that I frankly have a very difficult time separating from my RL experiences sometimes (an undoubted sign of a psychosis of some sort, I'm sure), but I couldn't think of a neat, tight little story like those posted here. It's not that such things haven't happened to me here, but rather that my memories and impressions are really pretty kaleidoscopic, the mostly good mixed in with the sometimes bad in a very vivid, colourful, shifting array. This is the closest thing I could think of. Once, when I was using a much older account than this one, a good friend opened a club. He had bought a giant prefab for it: a sort of North African desert thing, but he wanted it customized in all sorts of ways, and didn't have the building skills to do the modifications (which were really extensive) himself. So he asked me if I would do it for him. My building skills were/are pretty modest, but I was proficient enough to do the sorts of things he wanted me to do, so I said yes, and for the course of about a week I averaged probably a couple of hours a day shifting, resizing, and generally remaking this prefab build. It was mostly pretty relaxing work when I was by myself. My moments of meditative solitude became increasingly rare as the week progressed, however. The club was to be located on a sim called "India." The name was entirely arbitrary: there was nothing there that had even the remotest connection with the subcontinent, but inevitably, it attracted a small horde of mostly new avatars that had been created by mostly male Indians, who arrived on the sim expecting that it would be a little virtual piece of home. They were disappointed in that regard, but they were, for some reason, absolutely fascinated by me. I don't think I'm a particularlly fascinating person (at least not until you get to know me a bit), but almost all of them were apparently completely rivetted by the sight of me building and editing. They sort of popped up in regular waves: I would be quietly working, and I'd look over my shoulder and there would be yet another noobie avatar with an Indian first name watching me. More often than not, they'd start chatting with me. And in probably about 80% of those instances, they would propose to me after about 20 minutes or so. It wasn't that they were asking for the secksies. Possibly they had that in mind, um, for the "long term," but they were all enormously polite and respectful and very very interested in what I was doing, and how I had learned to do it (possibly because I was a female?), and they nearly all of them wanted to marry me. And most of them, when I politely and gently declined, were cool with that, and chatted a bit longer before going off on their way, but a few hung around, sometimes for days, and were quite persistent (but still polite and respectful about it). So, for about a week, I had a slowly growing flock of Indian men (most of whom, it turned out, were fairly youngish tech employees) shadowing me as I rebuilt this prefab. And as I'd move around from section to section of this quite enormous build, the three or four of them who might be dancing attendance upon me at any one time would follow, sweeping behind me like a bridal train. It was, of course, both maddeningly distracting and quite unreasonably flattering. It was also really very very sweet. :-)

Wooja wrote: LL needs a strategic leader, not someone who is good company at the water cooler. LL does indeed need that. And one of the best ways, sometimes, of devising strategy is to listen to those best positioned to be able to tell you somethng about the product, and something about its stengths, its problems, and its potential. I have some hope, or maybe even something that is beginning to approach belief, that Ebbe can listen. To those who have something worth saying, of course. :-)

Wooja wrote: Actually, the principal rationale for starting another thread elsewhere on this specific subject is that THIS GD subsection is not for discussing "Adult" (in the SL sense) themes, which should be confined to a dedicated GD subsection in the Adult Content subforum, which - last time I checked - is suitably ghettoised by not being available to casual bystanders, journalists, and investors who have not signed in. Wooja...believethatwasvialesidea Perhaps. But this time you can't blame me for starting it. :-)

Innula Zenovka wrote: I'm certainly not asking that LL emphasize SL sex and adult content in its marketing. I am asking, rather, that LL doesn't go out of its way to hide adult content from search and the destination guide, and that it continues to support initiatives to make adult content readily accessible to new customers who are looking for that sort of thing. If we're treated as a large special-interest group that produces content of interest to many, though by no means all, residents (akin to live music, maybe), I'm content. I agree absolutely. That's precisely why I said that adult "enriches the culture and content here," and that I "don't think that SL should "hide" its adult content;" If SL is ever Disneyfied, you probably won't find me hanging around for long either. After, all, there are GREAT games available on Club Penguin . . . ;-)

Pamela Galli wrote: How about making a thread for debating this topic? LOL Because it is important enough to merit its own thread? Or because it is boring you? :-D I've said what I wanted to say here. If Henri or someone else wants to start a thread on adult content in SL, they can certainly do so. And who knows, I might even look in. :-)

Henri Beauchamp wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: I respectfully disagree. I think we need younger people here, and more of them: they are the future. It is possible, using rating systems and, possibly, by putting back into force a more stringent age verification regime, to have both teens and adults here. <p>The former adult checking system (with Aristotle) was making it *impossible* for most EU residents to get verified (because despite their claim, Aristotle had no access whatsoever to privacy sensitive databases in EU: unlike in the US, privacy DOES matter here !). Putting it back (or something similar) in force would be extremely dangerous since it means many, many, many adult residents would suddenly loose access to Adult sims (not to mention that any US teen could perfectly (and many probably did) give the details of their parents and get their avatar "verified" as a result) !!!</p> <p>You simply have to accept that, while a company such as LL *must* try and restrict access to adults for adult stuff, there is no way to ensure that a teen will never get access to things they should not see on Internet (this is not only true in SL, but anywhere on Internet).</p> <p>I simply don't want for LL to make it feel like teens are welcome to do what Ebbe's son did, because this is putting both the teens and the adults into danger !!!</p> What we are really talking about here is what will make LL safe from legal action, right? As you note, if a teen can fake an age verification on a platform that permits teens but is segregated by content, he/she can do so just as easily in one that excludes them. So simply telling teens that they are unwelcome in SL isn't going to solve your problem either. I remember the problems with Aristotle, and agree that this is an issue: there must, presumably, be a better system that will cover LL's legal behind, while still permitting teens here. Because, again, the ones who are going to break the rules can and will do so whatever is put into place. I have no problems whatsoever with a segregated area like the teen grid. In fact, that was a pretty vibrant, if very small, community. Intelligently managed, it could serve as a way of nurturing future adult SLers by introducing them to the platform. Henri Beauchamp wrote: I also disagree with the notion of getting rid of the "adult" classification. This is sort of what I meant in the comment above about a too narrow view of the experience of SL: there is, or certainly should be, a difference between an experience of SL that falls under the "Adult" rating, and one that is "Moderate." There is an enormous difference between wandering around a sim and running across, for instance, a nude beach or artwork featuring nudity, and tripping over a Dolcet or Gor sim. And I'm pretty sure that I speak for a majority in that regard. <p>That's what PG sims (now "General") are for !!! PG sims are like the streets in real-life: you (normally, i.e. as long as no one violates the Law) see violent or sexual stuff in RL when you walk down a street... RL streets are "PG" (i.e. safe for teens and even children to roam in).</p> <p>The former "Mature" (now "Moderate") rating did correspond to what is now flagged "Adult". There's no need at all for an "Adult" rating: that one was invented to segregate "adult stuff" into the newly created Zindra, but if you do roam SL enough in search for "adult stuff", you'll find it in "Moderate" sims as well, and since teens are limited to "PG" sims it's not a problem either.</p> A very large number of residents would like to experience a grown-up environment that also doesn't mean inadvertently happening upon really explicit or ultra-violent stuff. There is a reason why, despite the slow expansion of Adult areas, "Moderate" is still by far and away the most popular rating. And even ignoring the possible presence of teens, I've no doubt that there are adults who prefer "General" even to "Moderate." Why would we not also cater to their preferences? Movies have a graduated ratings system so that I'm not forced to watch nothing but Disney films if I don't want to run the risk of inadvertently finding myself sitting through an ultra-violent or ultra-explicitly sexual movie. Again, ratings provide me with the tools I need to make intelligent choices for myself. Given that you produce adult products, I entirely understand why you don't like to have access to your content restricted by a ratings system. Please understand, however, that there are a great many of us -- perhaps a majority -- who have no problems with, and may even seek out, nudity or mild violence (for instance, a basic combat or zombie sim) but don't want to be unwillingly exposed to Dolcet or "forced sex" toys. Henri Beauchamp wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: To be honest, I'd like to see the "violence" part of the Adult rating focussed upon more than the sex side: I'm much more personally offended and disturbed by animations involving snuff and dismemberment than I am ones that represent (please note my use of this word!) consensual sexuality. <p>"Violence" is part of what I called "Immoral roleplay" in my post: I could have written "roleplay that is legal because it's pure fantasy in SL, but that would be illegal if the depicted actions were to be acted out in real life"...</p> Well, this is a personal choice, and I expressed it as such. This has nothing to do with trying to enforce morality: catering to a diverse variety of different understandings of morals or ethics is the reason we have adult-rated sims. I'm not trying to stop you from engaging in rape play: I just don't want to be exposed to it myself -- unless I choose to be. What it is about is personal choice. Ratings enable that: they allow me to customize my own experience, according to my own tastes and morals. Edited because I misunderstood something Henri said. It happens. :-)

JaedenDelanaire wrote: if someone doesn't know how to scene erotically, chances are they're too young / inexperienced to be scening adult related matters, period. . Not necessarily so. The odds are better that they are simply gawd awful writers, or that they lack any sexual imagination (the "wham-bang-thank-you-mam school of sexuality). There are enough of both in RL; it's hardly surprising to find them in SL too.

Henri Beauchamp wrote: I can only second Innula's worries and encourage Ebbe to reply to them. After reading Ebbe's first pieces of nice prose, I can only worry about how "adult stuff" (yes, do read it as "virtual sex", "weird, exotic and twisted kinks" and "immoral role-play" between avatars pertaining to consenting adults) will be dealt with in the future. I especially dread the day when teens would be allowed to interact with adults in SL. As an adult, I don't want to risk role-playing with a teen thinking they are an adult. I also hated how LL segregated us, "adult roleplayers", into Zindra, while what would have been the right thing to do would have been to create a PG continent for educational and teen use instead and let the rest of the gird as it was (there was especially no need to create an "Adult" rating: "Mature" was explicit enough and appropriate). I'd urge LL's new CEO not to make a mistake: "adult stuff" drives a very large part of the SL economy. It must be acknowledged and welcomed by LL, instead of being seen as a "dirty little secret" that should be hidden behind a pseudo Disney Land-like front window. I respectfully disagree. I think we need younger people here, and more of them: they are the future. It is possible, using rating systems and, possibly, by putting back into force a more stringent age verification regime, to have both teens and adults here. I also disagree with the notion of getting rid of the "adult" classification. This is sort of what I meant in the comment above about a too narrow view of the experience of SL: there is, or certainly should be, a difference between an experience of SL that falls under the "Adult" rating, and one that is "Moderate." There is an enormous difference between wandering around a sim and running across, for instance, a nude beach or artwork featuring nudity, and tripping over a Dolcet or Gor sim. And I'm pretty sure that I speak for a majority in that regard. To be honest, I'd like to see the "violence" part of the Adult rating focussed upon more than the sex side: I'm much more personally offended and disturbed by animations involving snuff and dismemberment than I am ones that represent (please note my use of this word!) consensual sexuality. There are times when i go to Adult sims. But I do so consciously, knowing what to expect there. That's what "empowering" the user is all about: giving us more choices.

And this guy is for hire, I think.

Marigold Devin wrote: Silvertrod wrote: Oh well now I feel silly for asking for something that already exists but can't learn if you don't ask the question I suppose. Thanks for the letting me know that its possible to do the land tier transfer Storm Clarence. Welcome to Second Life Forums, Silvertrod You have no need to feel at all silly, but the truth is you would have to abandon your Linden home before opting to purchase a parcel of land on the mainland. If it was 512m in size then you would not incur any tier fees, that would be part of your free entitlement as a premium resident. Mainland parcels can be found at very low prices currently, although they do vary, depending on location, and current ownership. Land that automatically was put up for resale after a resident abandoned it will cost 1L$ per sq m, but there are land dealers that sell for less than that. You would have to look around and get a feel for a sim. Then there is the matter of a house, of course. It would be rather fab if you could have a home like the ones you can choose from on the Linden Homes sims, and just have it appear like magic from a rez box, but currently you have the options to either build your own home, up to the maximum 117 prim allowance on a 512m parcel, or you can look around inworld for stores, or on the Second Life Marketplace website for a house that will fit on your parcel. Linden Home sims are great value, because you get 117 prims on top of what is already there on the land, but on mainland, 117 is all you have, and it can be quite a challenge to create a furnished home with such a small amount of prims. More about land ownership can be found in the official Second Life Knowledge Base. See tab above - quick link here... http://community.secondlife.com/t5/English-Knowledge-Base/Buying-land/ta-p/700043 Silver, this is what I mean. This kind of person, and this kind of answer. ^^^

Ebbe Linden wrote: Not sure it's Dunning-Kruger Effect as I have no illusion of being a good speller... Sure seems like we have some D-K customers who think they know product management though Welcome back, Ebbe. I know absolutely nothing about product management. But I do know where the comfiest couch for sitting here is. It's right over there ------> Lovely to see you here again. :-)

Silvertrod wrote: Oh well now I feel silly for asking for something that already exists but can't learn if you don't ask the question I suppose. Thanks for the letting me know that its possible to do the land tier transfer Storm Clarence. No need to feel silly, Silver. You didn't know, and as you say, if you don't ask questions . . . ! Storm's point about using SL Answers is a good one: it's a fabulous place to get quick responses to relatively small and manageable questions. There are some wonderfully knowledgeable and very friendly people there (look for Rolig Loon, who is the best, but others who respond there also post here on the forums!). They really are a wonderful community of residents who give up their own time, free of charge, to help others. SL Answers however is a bit hampered by the software, which doesn't, in my experience, seem to permit threads to respond to complicated questions or ones with multiple answers once the question has been deemed "answered," so the forums can also be a great place to ask questions if you think the answer is likely to be very involved or complicated. Hope to see you here again. :-)

Pamela Galli wrote: You can type: Red Shoes NOT Demo Pamela, you're right, of course -- although even that will only get rid of items that have "Demo" in the description rather than embedded on the image. The key point here is that using a Boolean operator is not, for most users, a very intuitive approach. It is not, in other words, very "user friendly." If Second Life is going to expand its user base, it's going to need to cater to a lot more people who wouldn't know a Boolean expression if it knocked on their door asking for a cup of sugar AND a cup of cream OR milk.

Perrie Juran wrote: Next time I will pay closer attention. The problem Perrie is of course that you aren't following me on Twitter. As world-recognized authority on EVERYTHING TO DO WITH FEMINISM AND WiMMEN (you can just ask Wooja, he'll tell you), I am the central clearing house for all that kinda stuff, not to mention an endless lumberroom full of materials for trolling posts and provocative comments. Get with the programme, please.

Wooja wrote: But isn't ALL "gender violence" "sexual violence" - according to OBR, that is? Wooja...clarifythatplease Um, no. "Sex," or "sexuality," and "gender" are two very different things. In normal usage in this context, "gender" refers to socially-constructed roles "assigned" to particular classes of people, often on the basis of biological sex, but otherwise arbitrarily determined. For instance, the stereotype that women are more emotional than men is "gendered." The notion in, some parts of the world, that women must be covered up is gendered, not "sexual." Sex can refer either to biological assignment, or, more obviously, to actions or objects that our culture has determined are somehow related to sexual intercourse and associated activities.

Wooja wrote: Perrie Juran wrote: I searched for the image Wooja posted with tinyeye and google and got no results. I did however find this. I am wondering now if the image Wooja posted came from this seperate event. Perhaps he can provide us with a link to his source. You can find the original here: https://twitter.com/OBRSA/status/434783246661193728 I found it on Laskya's Twitter account: https://twitter.com/LaskyaClaren as I pointed out on my original post of the image. Wooja...expectdillontogetitrightnotreally I was about to confirm this myself. The image is a retweet from One Billion Rising South Africa, and was in turn borrowed from another South African activist. I'm rather failing to see the point of this. A picture of a single mosque group in South Africa holding a banner against sexual violence that may (or indeed may not) have been part of the global OBR event is meant to somehow show that the entire global event was actually only about rape and sexual violence? This is supposed to reveal the "secret hidden agenda" of the entire world-wide event? Really? There are so many logical fallacies at work here that I can't begin to list them. One Billion Rising is about sexual violence, but it is not only about sexual violence: it's also about domestic abuse, abuse in the workplace, sweatshop labour, the modern slave trade, the exploitation of immigrant women, codified and systemic religious-based discrimination and violence offered against women, etc., etc., etc. And to repeat what I told a good "friend" of Wooja when he tried to make this same point on my blog posting about OBR in SL, any one visiting the in-world event, or even scanning the pics I posted on my blog, will recognize that the focus of the event was very broad indeed, and not limited to sexual violence. In fact, I don't think I saw a single exhibit or installation there that was solely about sexual violence, although Betty Tureaud's piece certainly alluded to it. (Edited for clarity and precision)

Dillon Levenque wrote: I just realized that everyone (including me) got so involved in the fact of the visit we forgot what brought it on. Well done, Dresden. A thoughtful, clear statement with the big quote so that those of us who hadn't seen it (including me) could get a better idea of who the new CEO was. Nice going. :-) What she said, Dres. :-)

Ebbe Linden wrote: thank you...and I'll be here trying to soak it up like a spunge! Grrr. This is why we need a "Like Excessively" button on this forum! >;-(

I think we all understand that you are not in the position to be here often, or to engage in much discussion here. But i also think you'd be amazed at how far the occasional sign that you, or someone else from LL, is reading what is said here, will go in building a sense of community and connection. A lot of nonsense gets posted here (she said guiltily). But there's a great deal of wisdom to be found too from some of SL's veterans and newcomers!

Ebbe Linden wrote: We can talk here! Suddenly I have this enormously strenge sense of deja-vu! Welcome to the forums, Ebbe. :-)

Dresden Ceriano wrote: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Featured-News/Hello-from-Linden-Lab-s-New-CEO/ba-p/2499503?utm_source=Blog&utm_medium=Story&utm_campaign=SocialCM Better late than never, I suppose. ...Dres Too bad they didn't enable comments. That would have been nice.

Lucretia Brandenburg wrote: Wooja wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: I have no better an idea than you what happened. But if the university's Office for Sexual Harassment Prevention DID investigate, and found that a professor engaged in " unwelcome and inappropriate sexual advances," then they at least should have acted. The "social media communications and text messages" the student allegedly sent the Professor in the days after the incident, which the university might have been provided access to and which might have indicated that advances might not only be welcomed, but encouraged, might have had something to do with the university (not) acting as they did. Wooja . . . putmoneyonwhoisgoingtowinthisone Regardless of whether the student was making advances toward the professor or not, Northwestern University's policy is clear about no romantic or sexual relationships between faculty and undergraduates. It's a convoluted policy but the relevant passage is found on page 3 in big bold letters http://policies.northwestern.edu/docs/Consensual_Relations_011314.pdf "When undergraduate students are involved, the difference in institutional power and inherent risk of coercion are so great that no faculty member or coaching staff member shall enter into a romantic, dating, or sexual relationship with a Northwestern undergraduate student, regardless of whether there is a supervisory or evaluative relationship between them." Whether she was throwing herself at him, had a crush on him or expressed her undying love and romantic/sexual desires (if she did) is immaterial. Seeing that such feelings do not lead to romantic or sexual relations is the responsibility of the faculty member, not the student. It is the school's policy, and it seems they may not be very vigilent in enforcing it. That particular policy was only added this past January. Nonetheless, you are absolutely right: the principles that it articulates apply, or should apply, to any student/instructor relationship anywhere, whether it's been codified or not.