Define: Broadly Offensive

IMHO broadly offensive cannot be defined by one persons opinion...
you coould say that to vegans slaughterhouses are broadly offensive.. or to homophobes male on male physical contact is broadly offensive..

i am not a native speaker but shouldnt broadly apply to a collective.. not an individual opinion..??

I can see she would be hurt; she's a very classy lady, and many, many of us owe a great deal to her generous contributions to educating new residents. It would be a big loss to our virtual world were she to leave. I hope she knows she has many fans and kindred spirits who would miss her dearly, and hope that this knowledge might help her past this.

Ok, then... looks like we need to highlight the absurd by being absurd ourselves.

Personally, I'm offended by seeing homosexual acts. Currently, I move either my camera or my av elsewhere. Considering that Proposition 8 in California (note: this is basically a conservative issue that passed in one of the most liberal states in the country) passed last month, though, who would be with me in forming up a group to start ARing people doing such things under the 'Broadly Offensive' label?

Clearly a majority of the population would find things like this offensive and distasteful.


What about the goreans? Slavery has been outlawed in every civilized country on the planet. Shouldn't depictions of that be considered 'Broadly Offensive'? Hell, I'll AR the piss out of any group most would disagree with, just to show LL how completely STUPID they've been with their policies.

All I need are a few volunteers... >:3

OP says: "In my point of view, "Broadly Offensive" would mean that more than half of the visitors to a location have complained about the content in that location. That way it could be said that the broad opinion of the people attending have been offended. Thus... "Broadly Offensive". So, for something to be acted upon by governance under the term broadly offensive, it would take a stream of Abuse Reports to truly justify the action."

Sounds like a good definition to me. Individuals report what they find offensive, and a stream of such individual reports indicates that the reaction is broadly experienced. It is not a perfect system, but since LL has to negotiate among a wide spectrum of different cultural assumptions, it makes sense to me that they wait to see what causes complaint rather than set down specific rules. Perhaps when SL has a track record of a couple of decades (should it be around that long), and LL has an opportunity to learn what does and does not cause a stream of complaint from its global population of residents, then its guidlines about what constitutes "broadly offensive" can become more defined.

For what it's worth, I hope the designers in the case described by the OP win their appeal.

Yes. If you were here a year and a half ago, when Daniel and Robin put out those asinine blog postings about "Developing Trust" you would have seen the logic, in essence, "Broadly Offensive behavior is forbidden, and WE (LL) want YOU to seek it out and report it. But...WE won't tell YOU WHAT is Broadly Offensive, as that would entail US taking on responsibility".

question?

is the GTeam newly hired personnel? or are they volunteers from in world?

this sounds very much like a witch hunt, as in "if we can't get rid of child avas one way, we will make it difficult for them to stay" type thing.

I always liked "Pogrom" myself.

Just another small step in making SL safe for the Buttoned Down White Bread set.

I can't help but suspect that this is a case of one skin maker trying to put another out of business. Worse even than an overzealous Abuse staff person responding to a prudish nutcase, I would expect it's an abuse staffer responding unwittingly to a liar.

Who is still and idiot for seeing the pictures and then following through with the disciplinary action.

1 user agrees


ahh so eventually we will all be assimilated?

Personally I think I am missing something so is there new definition for LL that
isn't included in the TOS for broadly offensive?
Skins and Child Avatars aren't against the TOS, sexual conduct as or with a Child
avatar is.
Sex and BDSM with consenting adult avatars on Mature property that you own or renting
that permit this is allowed, even Gay, BDSM or Gor sex.
You can avoid those places if you find it offensive usually there is some type of clue or
warning before you go to those places that the place is geared towards that.
Usually though if you're exploring a a park or nature area that is suppose to be Kid friendly you don't expect obvious sex poses.

yes FD(Howdy neighbor btw), it's called CYA. by not making any clear definition of what is B.O, LL can avoid things like, truth and facts.

Since when?

This is only a black-and-white issue to those who see the world in a highly myopic fashion. On any issue, there are always differing views. It pays to at least consider them.

I wish someone would tell those guys you don't wear ties with short sleeved shirts. It's as big a fauz pas as black stockings with white shoes.

Umm, my posting about that wasn't about having said content deemed offensive and starting a new witchhunt. It was meant to highlight the absolute absurdity of things as they stand now, and possibly make these 'moral activists' out to be blatant hypocrites.

That's hard for a lot of people it seems, they are strictly Binary thinkers

Hi there, like our cloudy weather?
I like it when it is gray and foggy myself.
I hope there is something more too this that I am missing and it isn't the case.
I have been known to have very naughty sense of humor, even dark personality but its purely meant to be platonic majority of the time I am not here for sex 99% of the time but even so I am no longer comfortable rezzing my child avatar out of my inventory nor feel safe being short elf any more. I am afraid if I wore my child avatar someone might AR me just for wearing it and definitely if they over heard me joking around like sometimes I do with friends.

i actually miss the sun but its good nappin in class weather when it gets borin .

until LL gives a clear cut, no exceptions definition of what constitutes "broadly offensive", things like this will keep happening.

Clearly there is a need for a path of appeal to G-Team decisions when the G-team itself refuses to reconsider an action that would be deemed insane by any rational person.

I can't speak for the newer vendor's images, but the images on the second merchant's vendors would have been right at home in any Sears catalog. Heck, the pics my Grandmother happily used to show at church of me and my sister, as two topless kids in their diapers, were potentially more "offensive", because there were adults in the same images!

The vendor pics showed a child avvie, in her can't-be-removed kid's cotton underpants, in a completely innocent and non-suggestive pose. Anyone who saw that pic as being in any way "a lewd or sexual act" needs to be seeing a psychiatrist. Because they are VERY sick.

The only potentially "offensive" factor was that the avatar, who was portrayed as too young to have the slightest need of a bra, (as flat-chested as any boy), did have childlike nipples. Same as the boy skin vendors from the same merchant, which were NOT removed! Putting a bra on a child that young would be overtly sexualizing the avatar, and completely inappropriate.

The G-Team needs a reality check, and an administrative review by their superiors. Disney has more lax standards than what the G-team is trying to force on us.

I thought they made certain things clear that nothing wrong with child avatars or skins and
they don't want to get involved in Resident disputes, rarely seem interested in doing anything about Griefers unless it shuts down several sims.
I didn't report this last incident I encounter because it felt like a assault, I am on pose ball with someone and he is going on about sexual ageplay, I froze mentally and was shocked,
some how I felt I was being punished for sexually exploring with strangers when I shouldn't have and how I personally decided to deal with it was never again have sex with anyone in SL and moved to pg land where I will only exhibit pg art and content.
When I encounter something obvious against TOS it was too traumatizing for me to say anything.
It felt too much like being re-abused in my mind so I now I just avoid any place those things can occur and felt very foolish in the first place for being in situation like that.
But I had a adult avatar on so did the guy too.
It just was creepy and I don't know if the guy would have been banned for just saying he liked doing sexual ageplay.

There are 10 types of people in the world...

Now THIS is a great idea!

WTF is SL turning into?

Where are we going and why are we in this handbasket?

Think of Teh Chidrenz!