So why are kids on Zindra?

*takes Immy's hand and jumps in the volcano with her.

"....Oddly enough, a drawing of the same sort of scene would most likely lead to an upheld conviction, despite the fact that no real people are depicted.

she was giving you a list of books comics and movies that show unreal characters in very adult situations. none of the characters in those stories are real.

The one in Imno's head.

Sorry, adding words to someone's post to attempt to give credence to your own ideas ... negates and nullifies your argument in its entirety.

Cease twisting the words of others AND being so obtuse on the issue.

Read the current policy, read the definitions and try to actually use logic and reason.

In case that fails, allow me to clear it up for you: Adult does not equal sex or even nudity.

Adult does equal anything extreme, which includes violent acts and extreme foul language.

WOW editing someone else's words and leaving it in a quote box attributed to them.. that's amazingly low.

Chobits and Saikano were featured in PG-fied form on Adult Swim. Most of the innuendo was intact, though. (^_^)y

is ok, her original post is still there. so the only person lias is hurting is lias.

Realistic virtual child pornography is legal in the United States unless it also judged to be "obscene".[95][96][97] It is illegal in the European Union; in Germany it is punishable by up to five years in prison.[105][106] In the Australian state of Victoria, it is illegal to publish imagery that "describes or depicts a person who is, or appears to be, a minor engaging in sexual activity or depicted in an indecent sexual manner or context".[105][106] This has been recently tested with Simpsons images.[107]

I guess it pays to be an American if you're a pervert.

hence why that miller test needs serious tweaking.

I asked her about nude child/adult dancing - she chose to edit the word nude out of her answer

The current policy is what we are discussing here. We read it. We DO NOT agree that is addresses our issues when it comes to child avatars purposely coming to Adult Parcels in Zindra. Why you feel that it's lovely to RP as a eight-year-old child alone in a area that (in your words) depicts "anything extreme, which includes violent acts and extreme foul language" is something that is incomprehensible. And since so many people have absolutely no ability to distinguish inappropriate depictions of children - we need the service provider to clear up these grey areas immediately.

I got bored with this thread, but I wanted to pop back in to giggle at this picture and its caption...Dude, that chick has an adult figure, makeup, and most importantly, boobs. NOT a child av! She's just short (and poorly dressed IMO)

Oddly enough, no. That setting is only for search.

The Region rating establishes the upper bound of what is allowed in the region. NOT the lower bound.

BUT YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Who are you trying to fool?

Sure it does. It says they're not allowed to visit areas containing adult content or activities. Better yet, they say child avatars aren't allowed to enter areas containing adult content and activities ANYWHERE in SL. Not just Zindra! SO if you're (legitimately, I might add) letting your freak out anywhere on the grid in the privacy of your home, and a child avatar shows up, you can AR them. You don't have to wait for them to show up in Zindra. Isn't that nice?

Perhaps she is 17.

Sooo, the upper bound being Adult in this region - and the actual parcel owner CHOSE to make this parcel Adult - means that adult activity happens on that parcel (stay with me) Sooo, a parcel with the upper bound of activity being Adult indicated should not be invaded by a child avatar.

Lias, your argument has already been shown to be flawed and invalidated by your twisting another person's words to suit your own purposes.

I will leave out the obvious attempt to entrap anyone, which you quoted as it does not bear repeating.

The fact of the matter is that you decided to twist a person's response to fit in with how YOU WANT the discussion to go and to try and cast said response in a negative light.

I hate to be the one to break this to you Lias, but real children are in the presence of extreme violence and language every single day of the year - some of them simply from news casts alone ...

The current policy works just fine Lias, LL cannot and will not define out any gray areas .... they cannot as there are too many variables. Not to mention that some would not want it to stop with just THIS issue.

No, that didn't happen.

And need to size those feet down, too. /me laughs.

This is now what, 1200+ posts, 20,000+ views, and 85 pages.

I had kept up through the first 28 pages, but then real life (father's day, in my case) caught up. So please forgive me if any of this is repetitive. If there's any sane way to keep up with responses, I shall endeavour to do so.

Looking at all this, as much as I very much believe that Marianne and most others are 110% harmless in their actions, the 'child avatar / extreme area' boundary isn't a good one to push.

Rights 'fought for' or to be 'gained':

~ Representing oneself as a kid in an area generally understood to be extreme. Even if that characterisation isn't entirely accurate (say it's a 'safe zone' or 'hub' or whatever, near said extreme land)

Potential consequences:

~ Incredibly bad publicity, crazed congressmen taking up causes, foreign lawsuits, blocked grid access by country, ridiculous new laws.

* * * * *

To put it in perspective, the United States can't even ratify the Equal Rights Amendment put in place to balance rights for women *to this day*, and unlike prevailing live and let live internet culture, most of the country is sternly against same sex marriage. To the point of passing Proposition 8 even in *California*. This is a country which is downright litigious and reactionary when it comes to The Family.

There's a lot to be said for rights. I get that. Society however is a balance: the ultimate expression of rights is not anarchy, or do~anything~you~want~to. That's the fastest course to have all our rights (along with whatever else neighbours can grab) be taken away from 99% of us.

So it comes down to what rights are worth fighting for, and how.

Something like gay marriage, I know many won't agree with this statement, but I think it's something worth fighting for. I'm not gay, but I know what love is. And it's not a big stretch to imagine what it's like, to not be able to marry the person you love. I think that's a battle worth fighting for, peacefully.

This child avatar and Zindra thing... it's just not worth it.

Maybe it does fall under freedom of expression, maybe some august council of people wiser than myself might draw the lines more loosely than I would.

But I'm just not seeing wisdom in pressing *this* particular boundary. The entire grid population faces the consequences of what happens on a hotbutton issue like this; it has before and there's plenty of precedent regarding how ugly it can get.

* * * * *

This kind of thing is like many societal rules, and a basic comparison might be a speed limit law.

Once upon a time, I did work on Ford and GM vehicle platforms. Ever notice how most cars suddenly lose power at 100mph and won't go faster? On just a few vehicle types, that's a feature I added and tested personally. And you better believe, it meant that I had to go 100mph to test it, under a variety of conditions. Accidentally stall an engine at 100mph and suddenly there's no power steering or power brakes ~ ridiculously high consequence especially for an inexperienced driver. Though of course, allowing them to exceed their cheap tire ratings had even higher consequence.

Needless to say, I'm professionally aware of what happens at higher speeds. But on the highway, if the speed limit is 70, I have to do 70 just like everyone else. Going faster isn't a boundary worth pushing ~ why? To get to Vegas five minutes sooner, versus horrific death on the highway? It's *just* not worth pushing it, and if I do find myself over the speed limit the responsibility is completely mine. Regardless of my intent, regardless if I am safer at 100 than the guy next to me is, while doing 65.

* * * * *

Right now, access is allowed. I can clearly see the argument: if you aren't doing anything bad, there's nothing to be said. I have nothing against kid avatars inherently ~ I used to have one myself, and I skated most of the RFL 2006 track with it. They are great for harmless pranks, goofing off or a good laugh. But I'd never appear that way on Zindra (presuming I'd ever be over there anyway).

Likewise, I've driven crazy fast professionally without trouble. But taking such risks around a 35mph zone or an extreme content zone are no longer just personal consquences; they can affect everyone.

Someday we may live in a world with personal speed limits and a way to detect intent on the internet.

But until then, this isn't a dynamite monkey worth taunting. Even if the rules say it's okay.

* * * * *

Hopefully everyone knows that I do not like to see anyone attacked or put on trial in forums or blogs. That's just plain evil, and a very common mob scene these days.

As such I'm going to largely bow out of this thread unless personally questioned about stuff. Because beyond a post or two, continued posting here has the net effect of pointlessly giving Marianne a very bad time. And that's not right.

On the other mainland before - there was never any way to indicate to a child avatar person that the content there was Adult only. Now with the parcel settings including Adult - there it is - a clear indication. So why would child avatar people knowingly go to parcels marked Adult? What is the thrill of rping as a small child in a clearly marked adult area? If these child avatar people cannot put pn an adult avatar to come to the Adult continent Zindra and they continue and continue to insist that they will come to adult parcels in Zindra if there is no adult activities or content visible - then it needs to be a clear TOS violation to wear a child avatar on any parcel marked Adult. Decency above your bizarre child avatar RPing in Adult areas.
________________________________
Others may not be saying it using the same rough language I use - but others are saying it https://www.xstreetsl.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=114271&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

It is not about the current rules and regulations - it is about what a Adult Continent stands for. And Linden Lab proudly advertised it as a Adult continent
Your work arounds, small print exploitation and personal attacks do not make it feel right that people pretending to be small children need the right to be n Adult marked parcels. None of you are doing what could obviously be the community solution (perhaps the solution LL is looking for by leaving this thread open so long) To just agree not to enter adult parcels as a child. Since it is becoming more and more obvious that this compromise will not happen on the community level. LL will need to fix the grey areas in the TOS that allow child avatars to defy all decency.

apologizes to Marianne, and for my part in this thread. bowing out.

Lias, I am only going to say this ONCE and then I myself am leaving this thread unless someone decides to be obtuse even more than they already are ... by attempting to twist MY words around.

Adult does not equate sex: Period.

An Adult marked region does not have to contain Adult marked parcels OR content: Period.

I have lost track of the number of fairly realistic games (graphics wise, for their era) featured children OR young teenagers in various violent or other settings (Resident Evil 2 anyone? How about RE4?) that, were they to be recreated here in SL, would REQUIRE them to be located on Zindra, with an Adult tagged parcel so as to cover their own arse!

If seeing Little Susie Avatar blow out the brains of the undead (or how about some trench coated stranger) is so disturbing to you .... -sighs- Then I guess we know what you consider to be real, now don't we?

I'm going to agree with Immy on this one: Fantasy | Reality
Find the Line.

No, because there wasn't any such thing as "adult content".

The pulldown you are referring to was just a checkbox that selected "Mature"

That is not "the parcel settings". That is "how this parcel shows in search".

You can not set a parcel in an adult region to any thing but "adult" in search.

Therefore this setting has no meaning in the context you are trying to force it into.

This has been pointed out to you, multiple times, so you an't pretend that you don't know what this setting is for. You can't pretend that you're doing anything but making stuff up again.


An Adult Continent stands for "you can advertise and make publicly available content that you have to put behind walls in mature regions".

That's ALL it stands for. No workarounds. No small print. That's it. End of story. Period.

There are no "adult marked parcels"

There is no "adult only continent".

Any other meaning is something you are making up.

Nobody is arguing that kid toons SHOULD enter parcels containing adult content or activities. It doesn't matter how many times you try and argue that the people who don't agree with you on this point are somehow engaged in anything unreasonable, anything unseemly, or malicious, or exploitative. They're not.

Imnotgoing agrees it is just fine for nude child avatars and nude adult avatars to dance together. Her view points have been documented in the forums

(/327/02/324131/20.html)

(/327/02/324131/12.html)


That is a lame excuse for RPing that here in Second Life.
SL is 6 years old. THIS is not the last issue that will need to be bought out into the light and dealt with by the service provider.

wow still going on?

Well here it is from someone that many of you respect (I did notice you all managed to ignore it)