brodiac90

I'd like to get a brightly coloured one like a modern nerf gun but not been able to find one yet.

Glad you noticed 😄

Leading on from my non binary post, I thought it might be a good idea to provide a proof of concept in order to show that it is possible for the same avatar to present in lots of different ways depending on the user's choices. Here are three different images of my avatar. I did not change the body, shape or skin. I did change hair, clothing, accessories and poses.

People are surprised that LL monitors chat and IM logs? I actually think them taking proactive measures is a good thing. They have been fair too reactionary with pedofiles to date. Requiring child avatars wear modesty layers is part of the solution but it's not 'the solution,' they also need to go after the people who engage in that sort of activity.

I realised I put he/she/it when I should have typed he/she/they - apologies.

I addressed the non binary issue in the Governance thread.

I considered addressing the non binary issues raised last night in the original post, but eventually decided against it because I didn't want there to be any confusion on what the Linden statements were, and because quite frankfully filtering through all the chat messages was exhausting and I already went to bed late enough as it is (I'm UK based so SLT +8). I know, get to bed kid! Lol. Now to be serious again. I don't think the non binary issue is as serious as some people are thinking, at least not in SL. Let me explain. The majority of all child avatars (with the exception of older ones with options for breasts) come out of the box as already being non binary as they don't have any genatalia or m/f anatomy. It is the user making a combination of choices such as skin, shape, hair, makeup (if appropriate), clothing, accessories, display name (if it's not a unisex name), what they tell people they identify as, how they act, etc, which determines how they present themselves and whether they are percieved as male / female / masculine / feminine. There is no reason why people cannot respect people's choice of pronouns for he/she/they or anything else if that is what people choose to do. The policy doesn't forbid this. You can still identify however you want in regards to gender, but biology is still a thing hence why LL have specified the 'female' and 'male'. Unlike RL though, people can choose their biology very easily. RL children who are transitioning do not get to choose so easily. Those born female and wishing to transition to males would still be expected to cover up until they're fully transitioned etc. The only issue is if an avatar with very defined breasts insists they're a male and so they don't need to wear the female modesty layer. In those cirumcstances, sorry, TOS overidesd identity issues. We discussed in the modesty layer thread how this would work in practice: basically, you make your avatar, and decide whether it's presenting as 'male' or 'female' and which one it is more likely to be percieved as, and then you use the most appropriate modesty layer. If tomorrow you decide to present as something else, then make the same determination. Being able to present as different genders has always been a thing, and will continue to be a thing. I hope that covers everything, please forgive me if I've missed anything, and if any offence was caused it was not my intention.

That post was prior to the meeting.

I think the original plan was to have one that could never be removed under any circumstances, but they've kind of had to push that back when people pointed out the technical issues of this. The language very much went from 30th June is the deadline (and that is still technically true while it's in the documents) to talking about educating people and using BOM and alphas as temporary solutions and 'we don't have a concrete time line but we'll update you as soon as it's no longer an option.' I get the impression they're going to migrate everyone to using skin modesty layers while they work on something more permanent in the background. I think if LL wants that to happen then they're going to need to make their own heavily protected and coded child avatars. They could make three, one for toddlers, one for prepubescent children and one for teenagers, all with the relevant modesty layers. That would be a good idea.

That is a very big compliment. Blushes and goes all shy....

The chat was going crazy. It was nice to meet some of the people from the threads though. Me and @Madi Melodious stood together as a form of solidatiry since we've both been heavily involved in all the discussions. Saw @Coffee Pancake too.

Without question.

I too found that disturbing but didn't want to address it at the time as I wanted everyone to be quiet while the Lindens spoke.

The following statements regarding previously discussed issues RE the TOS changes to child avatars were made at the Governance meeting on 09/5/24 between 14:00 - 15:00 by Tommy Linden and Keira Linden. At no point am I attempting to pass myself off as a Linden, all of these statements were made in public chat and have been copy and pasted as they were posted. They do not necessarily appear in the order they were said and not everything that was said has been included for brevity's sake. I have tried my best to present the statements in order of the communities biggest concerns. I have consulted with Tommy Linden and asked his permission to post these statements. Please note these statments reflect what Tommy Linden and Keira Linden said on 09/05/24 and that Linden Labs reserves the right to change its TOS and child avatar policy at any time. These statments will no longer be factually correct if and when Linden Labs updates its current position. My own thoughts - It is clear the Lindens and Moles have been listening to community feedback and that they have clarified a lot of quesitons. Q: Modesty layers | What does cannot be removed mean? Keira Linden - In response to a question pointing out skins can be replaced. Keira Linden - Tommy Linden adding support - Keira Linden clarifying: Keira Linden: Tommy Linden when asked to clarify timeline of when bom underwear / alphas will be phased out for skin modesty layers. Stressing education will be offered first if that is possible. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Question: What ages does the policy apply to? Is it just for little children or anyone under 18? Keira Linden: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Question: Do furries and other child like avatars fall under the new policy? Tommy Linden - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Question: Will you consider removing the back part of the modesty layer for female presenting child avatars? Keira Linden - Keira Linden expanding: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Question: Surely requiring bras / chest modesty layers on babies / toddlers sexualises them, will you consider removing this requirement? Keria Linden: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Question: Can a child presenting avatar also have an adult presenting avatar on the same account? What happens if I'm reported for being a child avatar while presenting as an adult avatar? Keira Linden: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Question: How are falisified reports dealt with? Tommy Linden: Tommy Linden adding extra information on false reports: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Question: How will the TOS changes 'meet the road' with regard to accidental teleports? Keira Linden:

I didn't need to check, it was an experiment to see how people would react and whether they would be serious or not. Call it a litmus test.

It's reasurring that of 24 reactons so far, 22 have hit like. I'm not counting the laughing emojis since not everyone will take the thread (or my picture) seriously but at least no one has been stupid enough to hit thanks or unsure.

I posted my picture just for fun. Hopefully should only see likes. Can we put anyone who reacts any other way on a list?

So if you think the avatar looks like: a child (17 or younger) then react with a like, for an adult (18 and over) use thanks, and use confused if you can't tell based on physical appearance alone. Please don't respond to individual posts with written comments just use the reaction icons. Figured we needed a control sample 😂

Exactly, we clarified this in the main thread. Child avatars must always wear the modesty layer. If they're not wearing any mesh clothing, then the modesty layer will be visible and they won't be nude. If they're wearing mesh clothing, then the modesty layer may potentially be alpha'd out but will still be there - no one is going to know though because the kid will obviously be fully clothed and not nude. So long as child avatars wear the modesty layers and aren't nude then whether the modesty layers are visible or not is somewhat mute. LL's main message is 'don't be nude.' If no one ever sees a modesty layer but kids have clothes on then LL will see that as mission achomplished.

It's very old now and hasn't been supported for a long time but child avatar dolls do exist. It was called COCO DOLL KID AVATAR.

It isn't. I mean, if the boy was wearing a pony tail, had a female shape, was in a dress and also happened to have a unisex name then maybe people might be confused, but otherwise no. I have somewhat long and feminine hair, my display name is James. Do you think if you saw me like the picture below with the name James you'd think I was a girl?

LL really does not care about borderline cases where someone who is 16-17 could be 18-19, and if they do it's not their primary concern. Someone previously mentioned they have worked in the legal system and that prosecution only takes cases forward where a jury could look at an image of a child and go - yep no one in their right mind could think they're 18. What LL is rightfully terrified about is avatars my age appearing in images. Pictures where it is very obvious that it is a child. If I go into adult land, and or don't wear a modesty layer and or put myself in a situation where nudity is present and expected, then I'm going to get AR'ed and banned - rightfully so. Go straight to jail, do not pass go, do not collect £200. Older teens / shorter adults will not face the same sort of consequences, if they're AR'ed at all. LL have already mentioned they use a severity tree to determine what the right action should be. In those circumstances I very much suspect it would be education, not perm bans with no warning.

I have a similiar question. I have never bought land before but I'm thinking about buying some G land and making somewhere for kids to go. What is the best way to start going about doing this?

Modesty layers 😂 - please take that with the humour that it's inteded with.

12 random people whose average intelligence is already low, and half the popultion are lower than that, does not compare to an expert. In fact, decisions by committee can often be worse in a risk averse environment when sometimes you just need 1 sensibble person to go. Err no, this is obiously not a child avatar etc. In fact, if this thread and the main one have proven anything, it's that you don't want peers deciding this stuff.