Kathlen Onyx

Adding ears and a tail to a child like avatar IS a child avi. Whether someone considers them a child makes no difference. I don't consider ANY child avi to be an actual child. I assume they are all adults. If children actually were here playing I guarantee you they would be playing an adult avatar.

If there was a job advertised for that, I'd apply for sure.

Nothing gets "mistaken" for a child. If it looks like a child, it is a child. Sorry, I know you want to argue semantics here but there is no room for it.

Has LL even told the creators what the modesty panel needs to look like or are they supposed to just "wing it" It has been asked in at least 4 posts for LL to show us what it should look like. I have yet to see a response here or on the FAQ page. @Tommy Linden

Absolutely

That bad huh. Hmm looks up at the sky falling. If SL ended I guess I have other things to do on and offline that while I might get a bit peeved for a week or so, I'd shrugs my shoulders and go do something else. I actually think Opensim would be happy if SL closed as that would be a huge influx of avatars for them.

I'm not sure what you mean. The change in the TOS doesn't affect landowners at all.

LOL, every time something happens someone says "this is the end of SL" I'm wondering if people are not aware that SL will probably end at some point.

If you are talking technicalities the club could have banned the avatar based on the fact they didn't like the earrings they were wearing. Nope, don't like it. BANNED. Landowners can ban you for any reason they want.

I do, yes.

MLP is not human. Whether or not a club bans them or not has no bearing at all. I would assume if you can go shopping in a robot avatar that you can also go shopping in a MLP avatar...unless well it has the head or body of a child avi.

Be careful using the "discrimination" word. Just because something isn't allowed doesn't mean it's discrimination. That has a very distinct definition as to what it applies to. I'm not even sure a private gaming entity is even bound by any of that for their end users.

This addresses part of my question BUT what if there is a A-rated club (or M-rated for that matter) that allows child avi looking avatars to be there because they have determined that they are not a child avi. I was at a club today where clearly the avatar looked like a "teen". Their profile said otherwise but they still looked like one, wearing just a skimpy thong bikini with the "package" clearly shown. I guess this is where the 16-25 year old range might fall. Also how is a owner of a region to know if that avi is in compliance and wearing a body or skin with a modesty layer? What's to stop me (I wouldn't) from opening a M-rated region and allowing child avi's to be there and not have to be in compliance? I just see a lot of reasons for this to be hidden more now instead of the problem being dealt with.

It's comments like this that may get Child Avi's banned completely.

A BOM layer can be removed. It's if built into the body it can't be removed. A different body must be used. I would assume, based on common sense, the don't mean BOM skin layer.

I have a question that I don't think has been covered here. Are there any ramifications for region owners if they allow Child Avi's on their land. Say there is a club that is A rated and only has child avi's that are all out of compliance. Will the club/region owner also be banned for allowing this or is this simply on an avatar case by case basis? In other words, should region owners be concerned here at all about being perma banned?

She means just being in a A rated sim is now banned.

Why is everyone saying this? It's like people want it locked. It will just continue in a newly created thread with a different title.

NO, it means height is not the only factor that will determine if the avi is a child avatar or not. Maybe re-read the FAQ's.

Perhaps that is the end goal?

You don't know this. It's obviously large enough LL changed the entire TOS for it. AND one person engaging in this activity is too much.

bolded, underlined...except stuff that is ILLEGAL. Whether the community accepts it has no bearing on anything whatsoever.

I'm pretty sure that LL investigated and must have found some merit to it or they would not have taken these steps. Don't dismiss a problem just because you personally don't see it.

I'm surprised that I haven't seen an all out call for a ban on child avi's. I for one, would support this wholeheartedly. Problem solved.

I'm not going to argue sematics with you. It doesn't matter what you and I think "looks" like a Child Avi. It only matters if LL thinks there has been an infraction enough to ban someone. Take it up with them.