Since some don't like Sexy Contests, Should Sexual Content be taken out of SL?

Ooops, I didn't read that right. I don't care the the sexiest avie contests but sexual content is GREAT!!!. It is freedom to express yourselves as long as it is not put on someone who doesn't want it in a harassment form. So Blakey and everyone change my vote to no sexual content should not be taken out of SL!

I agree that it is a shame that a lot of events probably won't be continued since they won't be funded anymore. My point, though, is that this change in event funding isn't necessarily aimed at people who run events that center around "sexy [insert body part or clothing item here]," which is what Blake seems to be asserting in this thread.

All depends where his hat is

On his point!

I don't even wanna KNOW what your point is there Sio

That's not what you told me last night.

Sokie, perfectly valid Q. ;D

Just remember this is a personal observation and should not be deemed 'right' or 'wrong'... cuz it's just how I see it...

Well, as most of the world I visit is *on* the old build side... my travels mostly are between the southern sandboxes and Gray (and east to Mocha)

Honestly speaking, to me, I see more clubs and casinos in the M range of sims in the area, and I notice more lag in them. The PG sims are usually rather quiet and quaint, even when they have several stores in them.

I sort of equate PG and M to "Residential" and "Commercial" zoning in the old SimCity games. PG tends to end up as homes, small shops, minimalls and artistic builds, M appears to have a tendancy to tilt towards clubs, casinos, and megamalls. (and in Tan's case, SECOND LIFE'S BIGGEST SLOT MACHINE)

Could also call that Rural and Urban. :>

For me it's more the content buildwise than the content of the shops and such. Flying through a sim like Da Boom is like flying through coagulated gravy for me, and probably more than just me. :>

I don't assert, I speak from replies; many stated that they are tired of seeing Sexy this and that and Sexy in Red Contests and an example. This is not fiction, it is truth.

~scoots away from drama thread~

Yes, Blake; and what I'm asserting is that, since this event funding change affects more than just the "sexy" contest event holders, it's not aimed solely at them. Everybody has the right on forums to assert (or state, express, affirm, maintain, etc.) whatever he/she wishes.

Actually you did assert it with your original poll, before any replies were given.

I assert that this thread needs to be examined /120/62/32581/2.html#post342942

You ARE mistaken if you mean merchants get dwell compensation that no one else gets. Everybody who owns land gets dwell if people 'dwell' there for more than 5 minutes. Now, why don't you stop disquising your whining as forum polls.

yet one more useless poll where Blake can't seem to understand logic - at all. People continue to post sensible reasons and explanations and he pulls some twisted conclusion from them and reposts showing his ineptitude at understanding concepts above and beyond his unsubstantiated theories.

I don't like the Sexy Contests because I find them unoriginal and boring. However, if others like them, then they should attend and continue to enjoy them. I'm not an adult content creator (unless you count rude t-shirts) so it's not a financial motive that influences my opinions. I don't believe sexual content should be taken out of SL, but having other options is nice.

So I take it your meaning is because Clubs get more dwell than Merchants with landownership it is unfair. Maybe im mistaken.

I don't know where you get this stuff from, Blake. Devlin didn't say that at all - he said it is equal, regardless. IT IS NOT ABOUT CLUB OWNERS, enough already.

It really is fascinating how you can read the same post I do and draw such a completely different, often rather divergent, conclusion from it.

Of course, your conclusions tend to fit your attention getting device du jour, so I suspect I know the mechanism of meaning extraction you use.

Exactly what Pen and Cris said.

I certianly hope your 'point' in all this isn't that content creators have the same potential to earn 'traffic' as club owners, because everyone knows that. If you build it, they will come..

It wasn't dwell that was taken away from Sexy-Thong-Contest hosts... it was the extra paycheck that content creators don't get. Now, contest hosts and content creators are equal. We can all earn dwell if we create or host on our own land, and LL isn't handing extra money to one group but not the other.

I never said they get more dwell funding, Why are people bitching about Clubs getting Event Funding? Because creators do not get creation funding, therefore; they feel it is unfair possibly, otherwise there wouldn't have been the debate. Clubs cannot create drinks that people consume, however; there can be covercharge scripts possibly and then the issue is how much they bring in to pay for the maintenance as well as having extra money for giveaways. The real debate is, why certain Events are not important to the economy and will it effect those that do not want to or have time to run a business persay in SL or a certain type of business they do not care to induldge in and will it effect their decision to leave and cancel a premium account, and in doing so; how it will effect the books of Linden Labs.

At least until the end of the month my sizzlin sceners competitions will continue to run. this week coz of the lindens (thank you sponsors...**rapid footkissing ensues**) and next week due to a patron who sent me $500 to host till the end of January **rapid footkissing ensues erm... pawkissing that is**)) but the truth of the matter is that to do this event from now on I will need sponsors. Because anything that involves sex is sometimes spoken of disparagingly, I worry that the artistic / cultural content in terms of events in a new world order of private sponsorship will lack creative freedom. It is true that many events were not my bag. I am not a costumes person. But for clothing and skin designers, these were places for their work to be seen and their customers to be rewarded. Events sponsorship even of those is the equivalent of arts funding. It prompted a section of the economy that is key to the game.

Without events funding, many of us lose the freedom to hose sexy and fun events (such as the sizzlin sceners competition) without begging. I hate begging. Grants proposal writing is sooooo much more dignified (begging still, but not as whimpery). So, for those who do events, what do we do? apply to agencies to sell brillo at event breaks? And does Brillo want to be associated with sizzlin sceners preparing to do a round of "save the endangered species" mating scenarios? *doubts it.* Hey, maybe I should send my Avie to camp out at Nick Bauer's place and see if he'll sponsor me. *sighs and slides on her kneepads*

So this is going to sound really pretentious since I've posted like 4 times on the forums and am way too busy with work to do anything besides be inpired by SecondLife, however...

I tend to think banning the sexy contests is against SL principles. It is really creepy that, like one of the very first posters on this thread said, people are just dragging out "sexy" contexts in order to increase their dwell. Nevertheless, thats how the SL economy naturally works out. Its like how sex and gambling sites are more popular and more prevalent than any other site on the internet. This is what people are naturally attracted to.

So you can't really ban the contests. Mature/vs non mature servers make sense, but within the mature ones, you have to assume that if people are going to these things and getting that dwell up and not leaving when the contest holders drag it out, then those people "enjoy" those contests.

However, any contest with the word "sex" in it, is really like a kind of spam. But you can't ban use of that word in event titles because then it would be replaced by contest holders by another word that would come to mean the same thing. Its just a symbol. Really, an online world like this is either free or its not free. And if its free, there's nothing to be done about this kind of spam except to give people greater power over how they can filter what they see, greater control over their own personal experience.

Peterius,

None of this is about banning anything - it is about not subsidizing any events, including sexiest av contests. No one is asking for the removal of sexual content, except Blake's odd poll.

Start with a statement that doesn't have inherent bias. What evidence do you have to support this. What does "alot of you" mean. How does this relate in terms of inworld -- if Phillip Linden's sense that the forum reader represents 10-20% of the SL players.

Surreal