Rathgrith027

Yeep, place your bets, place your bets, I also offer Video Poker!

I should have really used Blatant - fixed it.

I don't know what's worse, that you question a thouroughly cited chart, with ad hominem towards the source provided, with that 'Food Rationing in WW2 argument' when most people who were alive at the time those surveys were done, are likely long deceased - using a strawman, or the ̶h̶i̶d̶d̶e̶n̶ blatant racism in your post.

Well then we're in agreement on that.

Second the notion.

I don't know a single person who doesn't.

You are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine. You will not convince me otherwise, nor will I convince you. I've seen this discussion dozens of times. I'm not having it again.

Obviously the man at 9'. That bunny is looking fine

Violence isn't the problem. Neither is sex. I would rather people have an outlet for their depravities than to try and act on them in the physical. That being said, I get why the Lab bans this kind of *****. It's bad for PR, as evidenced by the events that unfolded 13 years ago, and at worst, the legality of it is murkier than Blackwater. I doubt the Lab is going to encroach on adult activity, at least to a concerning extent. As much as the Lab has historically tried to downplay it, Sex drives the SL economy to a sizable degree. Ban it, or curtail it to any sizable degree, and Second Life will begin to spiral the drain. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Second Life lives and dies by its' core value - freedom of expression.

A sizable chunk of Zindra is owned by Land Barons. I mean this in no uncertain terms - This will never happen, and if it does, I want the lab to reimburse the actual users of land on Zindra, not the comedians who price it like it's 2008 and expect us to dole out 1000 USD FOR A HALF SIM.

Yeah, we got shafted with MySL, and on a side note, we need something like Facebook for SL now more than ever what with the current Flickr mess and people being split now between Twitter and Bluesky.

Must. Chuck. Rooster. Into. Henhouse.

At this point the cat is out of the bag. The only 'factions' there are, are the accused and those investigating or are on the sidelines. People may have differing opinions like we do, internally, but I doubt there's any factionalism going on - and if there is, the lab is likely curtailing it at large to ensure a firm, cohesive response. The Lab's not the Supreme Soviet.

That has been policy, but the issue is these days, IP bans can be bypassed by a VPN, resetting your modem (sometimes) or just by letting the WAN IP DHCP lease (The lease your ISP gives your modem for an IP address) expire and trying again then. I've heard HWID (which uses something like a hash based on your HDD/SSD serials, motherboard make and model and other stuff IIRC) may have been implemented at some point, but a enterprising user like say, Mutahar from SOG, could just set up a VM, spoof that data, and then log in again. That or just replace the HDD or motherboard. Identity bans are possibly also implemented - remarking the RL name and locale of a banned user for future reference so any future accounts in their name are removed. Stolen accounts sadly are a matter of the end user. Residents and the Lab at large both should ensure that good standards on INFOSEC are disseminated to the community. There's a reason why I told people when 2FA came around that you should use it, even if you don't like it.

True, and that is done over LSL to LSL - if you have a Mama Allpa HUD, you can check for who is in range with one as well. It likely more than not does a broadcast on a certain channel, which other HUDs listen for, and then respond with. The HUD then uses that data to provide who has a hud. The issue is, the data in the post was provided using a Unauthorized TPV, which raises questions about its' legitimacy.

Then what do we do about punishing or at least, dealing with bad actors, not just those engaging in the acts implicated in the article, but all bad actors? I just want us to figure out where to go from here. Make no mistake, if people have good ideas, I'm all ears.

You make a very strong argument, and I have to agree. Question is, how do we implement a post-permanent ban governance policy - at least in depth?

And as one of those girls with a big rack and a booty made to twerk, I will defend your right to be cute.

I am not a viewer dev but have at least a face value understanding of how the server and viewer interact, with affirmations from people like Coffea, who herself is a dev on Catznip. When you connect to Second Life, the server assigns you an 'agent'. This is the server-side presence of your avatar - all LSL scripts, server-side interactions and other affairs are handled through that agent. When you are fully logged in, you connect your viewer to that agent. The agent stays active, and is handed off between simulators during each extra-regional teleport or sim crossing, until either you lose connection to the simulator and your agent is terminated, or you manually disconnect and end the session. The Second Life Server does broadcast *most* attachments to end users, as evidenced by if you use the aforementioned What Are They Wearing HUD or Firestorm's Area Search feature by filtering out all but attachments, and defining the username of the agent you wish to get the attachment data from. However, and this is a bit debated because accessing it is technically a violation of the TOS by accessing hidden data and using an unauthorized TPV, is that the SL server does keep track of HUD attachments, as well as their LSL code execution, much like any other object. However this data is obfuscated from other agents and only transmitted to the agent that is operating the HUD in question. The only legitimate way to detect a HUD someone is wearing, is to listen for any potential LSL-to-LSL communication over channels outside of the Nearby Chat channel (0) - which is the equivalent of, depending on the intensity of scripted objects in the area, the equivalent of using something like Wireshark to sniff packets at a baseball game. It's like trying to find a needle in a haystack.

I wish people would get that this is what I've been trying to say this whole time, and that all I and others want, is for them and the Lab at large to do better. It's not hard. We've been doing it since we got out of the caves millenia ago.

I've spoken about this in my video I'm working on - the average height in SL and in RL are vastly different, and are caused by what can only be described as a cacophony of small, but bad ideas made manifest across 2 decades. For years we've had the issue of avatars being exceedingly tall, and those who are not, often being labeled as children ergo, even when their behavior and appearance sans context, say otherwise. According to Wikipedia, which has a chart for all this: - The average height of an American female , acting as the standard North American Female, is 5'5". - The average height of a French woman is 5'3", acting as the standard for a European Female, at least outside of say, Eastern Europe, where women tend to be taller. - The average height of a Japanese woman is 5'2". The lowest in Asia, at least in a major country, is Thailand, at 5' 1/2". Heights also vary greatly from their average. This chart depicting the results of a 2021 CDC survey shows that males 18 and older are spread pretty far. Height alone is not a valid indicator. Same goes with one's primary sexual characteristics. The 'physical' is only one part of the story. How one acts and presents is another, as well as their intent.

Ah yes, Starman. How could we ever forget.

This is something I've been raising the alarm over for years. Hell, Anime avatars have had it just as rough, since Governance has a hard time understanding that these kinds of avatars can't be compared to children easily, especially when the two counts that come closest aren't children in the slightest for.. reasons the forum rules prevent me from elucidating on, but essentially boils down to.. the package doesn't fit. I get showing someone with a anime avatar that is unequivocally visually, and verbally, undeniably a child, doing lewd acts, the door - but with the people I've seen (and done deeds with) they veraciously deny Governance's claims they've knowingly engaged in such acts. I swear this stuff's like the Extra Credits meme that was going around years ago about playing a game making you a Nazi.

Seconded. Maturity ratings won't do ***** to stop a bad actor, and Governance historically has been overaggressive in their policies. There has to be a clear line drawn between AP and what's okay - and the big problem is - that intrinsically, it's difficult to do so, unless we look at all aspects of a particular case, and come to the agreement that, yes, this person knowingly and willingly engaged in this activity that is against the CG/TOS.

That is the easy way out of all this for them, something they'd be unwise to do. In a video I'm working on about Governance in SL and in general, I said that there is a dilemma to moderation - too loose, and your ability to govern is put into question as the platform becomes a no-man's land of toxicity and abuse. Too much, and people become paranoid and distrustful of you, questioning the legitimacy of your governance decisions and scaring users away from staying. There is a balance to these things. Linden Lab would be wise to find and adhere to it - and I know for a fact that keeping it an internal discussion (which thankfully so far, they have not), is not a bright idea. Now If you'll excuse me.. I'm off to count prims and rest on a fluffy particle cloud.