So why are kids on Zindra?

I did not suggest that laws can be passed to prohibit anyone from using a public thoroughfare. My comments concerned the use of zoning to restrict purveyors of adult content in communities. Recognizing First Amendment rights, my point is that it is still possible, via ordinance, to make it unlikely or impossible for someone to operate such an establishment in a community. Other things that have been utilized include placing onerous requirements (for instance: no alcohol liscense issued for a stripper "bar", requiring certain set backs from the street, limiting size and types of signage, proximaty to schools, etc...

Then there is harassment by law enforcement. Random raids for age check, frequent safety inspections, sting operations on patrons, over-patrolling the area with a sensitivity to issuing citations for minor traffic, vehicle, or conduct violations. All that occurs even here in supposedly liberal California, more so in many other areas of the US.

Linden Labs seems to be trying to make a red light district with Zindra, but I doubt that it will be an anything goes zone. The Lab has shown a very conservative philosophy regarding most issues. My interactions with Linden's have shown them to be a pretty PG bunch of folks. I am expecting them to try (key word, try) to further regulate adult content on the grid. Zindra is only a first step.

Even if everything works according to plan, when sims start blinking off the grid and folks find themselves logged-in to InfoHubs with maturity rating appropriate to their viewer settings, there will be occasion for embarrassment. Some naked avatars are gonna rez right next to people in posh frocks and tuxes. Maybe even a child avatar with an Adult maturity rating set in Preferences. And that will happen even if child avatars are banned from Adult land: not every child avatar wears a child avatar all the time, and there's nothing about putting on a child avatar that resets the maturity preferences. So it's gonna happen--there's not a damned thing anybody can do to prevent it.

In a world of people with some measure of common sense, this would be an occasion for mildly embarrassed humor.

In a world where people have weird agendas, this will be an occasion for ARs and recrimination.

It's going to be difficult to introduce common sense to this world. I only wish there were an NGO with that mission.

Um, well, you already CAN do that in Old Mature now, that's pretty much THE difference between New Mature and Adult: Adult is the same as Old Mature, New Mature is Old Mature without public sex. You can get your freak on in New Mature... so long as it's not in public. You can get your freak on in public in Adult.

Yes, as it stands it is a mixed message. Adult content people are told to go to Zindra and let it all hang out - we see images of Blondin Linden dancing near a penis avatar and all is good. But anyone can don a child avatar and run up to someone who is in a 'compromising' position in Zindra and take a picture with them. Then 'poof' the adult avatar is gone. As it stands - this will not end well.
.

so far the only picture snapping i am seeing is from adult avatars in open house times..
people can assume the people in child avatars might do that but we don't have to assume with the adult avatars that are doing that...

How often has that happened in SL, to date, despite the fact that it IS ALREADY TRUE that you can "let it all hang out" in public on Mature land, and there ARE ALREADY kid toons on mature land?

It's infinitely more likely that the child avatar will be the one "poof" gone, if that happens.

My understanding is that although that is what some people do, it's not what is officially allowed. I am sure I read it somewhere that on Mature land, sexual (and other adult) content is supposed to be behind a wall of some kind (e.g inside a club, not in full view of the road), however having trawled around, perhaps you are right, as all I can find is this (from the CS):



It all depends on what "contained within private land" means. Clear as mud!

Exactly.

The only current restriction on non-Linden land is on sexually explicit advertising, and that's only since the adcutter changes.

omg i had the perfect explanation over at the other forum and went to hit submit and Locked
Bleh..
don't ya just hate when that happens lol

Linden Lab published this for anyone to digest:



So outside media comes to check it out "What? Child avatars in the Linden Lab Adult Continent?!? WTF!" Blog, Blog, youtube, Video. national media scandal, General Outrage.

-Lights go out.

Brilliant.
.

Everyone agrees that it's wrong for LL to ban the person with the adult av in that situation. But no one has made any convincing explanation as to why banning child avs on Zinda would prevent that from happening.

The premise seems to be that if LL gets a snapshot from Zindra showing such a situation, and if the rule prohibits all child avs on Zindra, they'll assume that it's the child av to blame and not ban the adult av. The problem with that argument is that if all you do is look at the picture, you don't know whether it's really the child av at fault. The picture won't tell you whether the situation came about as you describe it, or if it came about because the adult av invited the child av to come join in, or even if the child av accidentally double clicked on a bad LM in inventory.

So the LL employee has to go look up and read the logs - both open chat and IMs. If the logs clearly incriminate one or the other, or both, then ban them for violating the existing rules; no new rule needed. If the logs don't clearly incriminate them, then give them a chance to explain themselves, as well as checking their past records. But frankly, if all you have to go on is a photo, with no prior record for either one, and no evidence from the log that the child av spent more then 5-10 minutes on the parcel, the most LL should do is issue a warning to all parties - even with a rule prohibiting child avs on Zindra.

This isn't about Adults playing kids in SL or minors sneaking into SL. It's about the portrayal of minors in sexual situations. Any and all portrayal of a minor in a sexual situation whether fiction or real is illegal. All that needs to happen for real world lawsuits or arrests to happen is having a picture of a child avi taken next to a naked male slave with his balls in a vise and suck slave tattooed oh his forehead while walking between two stores on an adult sim.

From my own direct and personal experience... Anyone can write any AR about any other avatar and *poof* the avatar is gone. It boils down to a believable enough story, maybe a minute amount of set up, and someone with an axe to grind and the will to rest it on the stone. (=_=)

Remember, I'm the one who got ARed and suspended for (sexual)ageplay while in a PG avatar, during a PG building event, in a PG sim, and in front of an audience of 30 or so. Did (Mature) land enter the equation? Did (Adult) land even exist at the time? Was I in any way remotely involved with, wearing, or indicating that a child avatar was present? No, to all of the above. (>_<

But, someone was able to piece together a clear enough story to claim that I was involved in (sexual)ageplay. I was not "caught in the act". There were no potential screenshots. There was a singular portion of my profile Picks tab where my little avatar was described to have the form of a 10 year old... But, I wasn't in my little avatar and my main profile was completely open-ended over what I could be besides reference to my nickname "Immy". (=_=)

So... If you think you have something to be afraid of by realizing there are kid AVs walking down unrated sidewalks and hanging out in PG guideline based infohubs in an (Adult) sim; then you're missing the real threat and you don't even know where to start. (=_=)

At the same time, people here are deciding they're going to rally against this mere presence by doling out false ARs... Basically, further perpetuating the noise in the system which is leading it to be ineffective in the first place. (=_=)

Of course, this mindset usually makes the most noise over how "bad" things are with everything around them. Never to realize that they're the perpetrators of their own pain. (=_=)

This whole "Let's AR them before they AR us" mindset is, at best, unhealthy paranoia. And that's what the fear is. What's against the rules or not. The rules haven't been clearly defined and documented yet. As far as we know, to date, Zindra is open and barren land that any and every avatar can go on because nobody who administrates to the content of the land has placed anything there that violates any wording of law, TOS, or CS. (=_=)

Once somebody buys a parcel and loads it up with Hot-XXX-Avatar-Action©®™ then they can freely and gladly close that parcel off to kid AVs and whatever. Zindra isn't an estate that restricts banlines. Feel free to close the land off. Fill that banlist with their most favorite list of least favorite people. (^_^)

Just realize... You don't own the sidewalk and waterways so you don't regulate what goes on there any more than you having a say over what I do on my own parcel. Which... happens to be on a (Mature) sim, by the way. (^_^)y

Nabokov.

well the connection people just cannot seem to make is that second life is an Adult Community..
Zindra is an Adult Continent and that Zindra is not Adult rated..
it's sims will have adult lables..but the content and activities are what rate that sim..

you still have to be on private land that had a rating of adult to use adult things..

let the media eat it up..they always do and then they will fade like always

The person taking the picture would have to be a raving numpty.

they must really be expecting a deep deep sex pit over there..you would think people thought sex was the only adult content around here..
when's it open

All I have to say to that is what Linden Lab postedThat means the sidewalks and waterways are deemed Adult. And Adult activities WILL occur on these roads and waterways.
.

Aside from the fact that was a pretty disturbing description to have on a PG-rated forum, I would ask this: what is to prevent someone from doing that today, anywhere on the grid? What could have stopped that before Zindra hit the grid, or was even announced?

you forgittid a really really lot of it

They're no-rez parcels and Linden maintained land... As is, the parcels are unrated until marked as otherwise or established by the land owner.

In reference: http://secondlife.com/corporate/cs.phpFrom the wording I see there. You can get AR'd for (Adult) content regardless of the type of avatar present. You seriously think people will waste the effort at the risk of an AR? (=_=)

It's been two years, and SL is still around. It hasn't happened to Facebook or MySpace, with far worse scandals. Even Craigslist, which arguably is guilty of breaking the law itself, is still around, albeit with changes.

You seem to be saying that SL's reputation problems are entirely due to the 2007 German incident, and if it just had adult-only exotic sex, it would all be fine. I look at articles such as http://www.businessinsider.com/2008/11/why-reuters-left-second-life-and-how-linden-lab-can-fix-it, and don't get that impression at all. Many people here, myself included, believe that at best, you're highly exaggerating the importance of that 2007 incident.

How do you suggest we figure out who's right? I'm willing to look at evidence that would support your position. Are you willing to look at evidence, such as that article about the Reuters pull-out, that weigh against your position? Do you even agree that independent articles written in the 6-12 months combined with recent LL statements are a decent way of determining the weight that the 2007 scandal plays in current policy?

Prevention begins with clear guidelines (adfarming, bots, gambling). These people are not saying that they will still go to Zindra wearing child avatars when LL explains it to them in writing they cannot. And such a distinction bans no one. Change the avatars and drop by. Like I do when I visit Gorean Sims without complaint.
Of course it would be the child AVs fault. If the rules say they cannot be there - and they are there - its a black and white issue. (and if someone says they will NEVER go anywhere without wearing their child avatar - then why would they Adult Verify and stand the chance of being thrown in an Zindra Continent infohub if some sims go down?)
The existing rules do not address the presence of child avatars in a Adult rated Continent - because this is the first Adult Rated Continent in SL. These rules need to be written - and soon.
.