Estate owners who Rent to others, what will your policy be for Verification?

Oh I completely agree that the blog post was absolute spin bullshit. That's why I wrote the sarcastic reference to 1984. My point wasn't that SL is becoming a socialist police state, but that blog was as full of as much bullshit as Orwells "MiniTruth" could have cooked up any day.

The Lindens have already said what they will do under such circumstances, they will force people to verify.

This issue is nothing at all to do with protecting children or enriching trust, it's about LL passing the buck for minors getting on the grid to a third party.

I may be dating myself with this, but wasn't the animated flick Heavy Metal rated R? Graphic violence and sexuality. It doesn't matter that it's animated, what matters is the content.

Isn't that the entire issue? How can someone's attitude be annoying? Is that any different then finding someone's skin color annoying? Why do people care what other people do.... or think.... or read.... or look at? If you choose not to go into the BDSM dungeon then good for you, but why do people care what goes on there? I choose to choose my own morality and would never begin to impose my morality on others. As long as you aren't injuring someone else, I couldn't care less if you were creating pose ball sex donkeys in festive easter colors.

Great movie. Also the setting for my first acid trip. We could not find our car after the movie and I was convinced someone knew we were tripping and stole the car just to mess with us.

That was language related. It also was before cable TV and the internet when most of the stuff on HBO would have been R/X rated.

Back in the "good old days", on the original Dick Van Dyke show, Rob and Laura had to have 2 seperate single beds in their bedroom and both had to have at least one foot on the floor at all times. That to avoid the "CENSORS"

Times change....... and the world has moved on .

That was a publicly released motion picture, subject to the MPAA guidelines. no such guidelines exist for SL think, which I guess is part of the problem.

And Figgie, next time don't leave the keys in the car. I couldn't resist.

And "Fritz The Cat" was rated solidly XXX. Yes, the MPAA certainly can and will consider animated content as being R or X rated. Just depends on what is being depicted.

Perhaps the better example, from a historic perspective, is that Lucy and Ricky had one large bed (queen size, I think) their very first season of I Love Lucy, but were forced to replace it with twin beds. And in that case, they were married to each other in real life.

Your logic is flawed. It's perfectly possible for search to have two possibilities while parcels have three. In other words, you can have three types of parcels: PG, Mature-unrestricted, Mature-restricted, but the search option either shows you just the PG or the PG and both types of Mature.

Keep in mind that just because a parcel requires adult verification doesn't mean that the ad page for that parcel must also require adult verification. Just like all the twelve year olds in line are allowed to look at the poster for the R rated movie playing in the same cineplex.


Did he say that? Or is that your conclusion? Because it doesn't follow just from the merger.

By the way, safe for Ages 14+ is PG-13, not PG.

No my logic isnt flawed - you arent following me.

It is not possible if the mature flag and the adult flag are one in the same.

Becuase the current Use of the Mature flag - IS .. if you uncheck it you show up on PG place searches even on Mature Parcels.

Do you have a store/venue on a Mature Parcel now? Becuase if you uncheck your mature flag you show up on PG searches and thus are PG.

IF ITS THE SAME FLAG - and I couldnt get a straight answer on this - Unchecking the box means you are PG , checking the box means you are Adult/mature. How do you achieve a third condition?

The only way to get to the third condition is not to list on places.

Becuase if you list you will have to follow 2 rules, not one.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



He very expressly stated that during the hour long interview (its on google video somewhere still I think)

He wants to get rid of Mature and PG ratings anyway, he considers them a flawed legacy system.

What he really wants is an "All Ages grid" and then an area of the grid that is "Adult space only" But becuase of laws abotu email and chat rooms it is limited to those over the age of 14.

I dont have all the links to all the various corespondence and videos availble now. Its kind of the background material on this subject.


-----------------------------------

Reguardless if you merge the grids then the rules you have to follow become stricter - becuase whats "safe" for Unverified adults (nudity is often presented) may not be for Unverified teens.

It helps to remember LL's eventual goal is to start the 3D internet. They dont just want to be a virtual world. Some of the things that make sense for a Virtual world are purposely being sidestepped in this interest.

There really isn't all that much content that would qualify as "non-adult mature", it's just "PG land on a mature sim" aka "regular PG".

i still say "screw it"

they want to keep teens off the grid? go visit random ppl at their home as their billing info is used and disable the remote cam abouve restricted parcels

otherwise it`s all BS with capitals

I'm following you fine. But why are you assuming there won't be any more technical changes to the software?


I remember that video. My take on that is that he was speaking philosophically, not in terms of what Linden will actually do.


Again, this assumes there won't be any avatar distinctions between teens and unverified adults.

Becuase they never make mention of the current "mature" flag ever as seperate from an "Adult" flag.

And becuase when this situation started I directly asked Robin and she completly ignored that direct question for the lesser aspects of my posts. Twice.

If it was as simple as they knew there would be two flags it would have been a simple thing to answer.

She either didnt know - or didnt realize they had already assigned a recent use to the current flag. Or just likes ignoring the main points of my posts for the obviously less important stuff.


----------------
And I very clearly said "IF" they are the same flag. In fact the whole post where you question my logic all my statements are conditional on that. Hence the way the post was constructed.
------------------




He very specifically states that PG/Mature will be going away.

And he specifically states that Second Life will become ages 14+.

On an earlier thread I gave the exact minutes he said it. Im not going to do the research again. Ive had my fill of listening to Dan Linden for one lifetime.



Well yes, it does. If you make your world 14+ then why would you have distinctions for unverified adults?

Basically all youd be saying is "If you click this over 18 box you become and unverified adult. Instead of an unverified teen"

Once the world is 14+ they wont need to verify that teens are teens anymore.

As Dan suggested - Just like WoW.

Actually . . no, I'll pass

[snip]
The burden of responsibility lies with the parcel and estate owner for the content displayed and activities offered on their land. The identity verification system provides those owners with the means to protect themselves, their customers and visitors."
[/snip]

Interesting, as in their case with Bragg LL are claiming that Bragg does NOT own the land he has purchased, that the term ówn´is an analogy, or a metaphor, and that LL really are the owners. So, does this mean that the ball is back with LL on this then?

Rock

There are a load of problems with the above statement apart from the one Rock points out.

The burden of responsibility for content cannot lie with the 'Land Owner' since they currently have no way to control it without policing their land 24/7. They can control what content they provide but if anyone else has access to the land (as would obviously be the case with rental land) then SL provides no method to control what content they bring on to the land.

Even if the land is locked down as tightly as possible while still allowing 'Public' access, off the top of my head, anyone can run about naked (which may or may not be construed as adult content), wear a billboard showing pornographic images, or use a worn particle generator to do the same thing.

We know that people will do these sorts of things - it's called 'griefing'. And since the responsibility lies with the land owner for anything displayed on their land, the griefer cannot be held responsible! Note the wording there - not the content that the landowner PROVIDES but the content DISPLAYED or OFFERED.

As far as the original topic goes, if the burden of responsibility lies with the land owner, all land owners, including LL, will be forced to register their land as adult in order to cover themselves. This will have serious implications for anyone who runs a sim to which the public has access.

The claim that the ID verification system provides protection to the land owner is invalid - as has been shown in various other threads it is completely ineffective, relying on public domain information.

If LL were serious at all about providing a solution then they would use a more effective method of age verification, it would be mandatory for all users and the current PG/Mature status flags would be all that is needed.

Oh wait - Isn't that just enforcing the current TOS rather than embarking on a purely cosmetic PR exercise ? And hey, it might lead to LL's membership figures going down!

So much for that idea.

Max

I've been told we'll be getting new tools to deal with this. My cynical side suspects this tool will be only allowing verified people onto the land. So shops will not want to be there and renters can't invite their unverified mates over.

This whole identity verification should be challenged via the trades description act, it's a charade of the highest order and a little bit of honest speaking from LL wouldn't go amiss here.

Hey its totally consistant.

They want it to be their land when it helps THEM out, and they want it to be your land when it helps THEM out.

I think my point is that it's a mistake to read things into this.

The people handling the PR are not the people doing the coding. They're not supposed to comment on technical futures until they're quite definite, otherwise the engineering managers get on their case. At most software companies, there's a huge tension between the development teams and the sales/marketing/pr people.


If it were as simple as they knew there would only be one flag, it also would have been a simple thing to answer.


Bingo, she probably didn't know, and she reacted the way PR people usually do. Any conclusion about what the flags will or won't be based on the lack of an answer is just an unfounded speculation.


Unfortunately, it was someone else who originally assumed that the current state of the software is the only option, and proceeded to make assertions about how people needed to rate land based on that. Continuing to push the line of reasoning in this direction just fans the flames.

Instead of having the main point be "if such and such stays the same, then the ratings will have to be done this way", the point should be "They clearly said that the intent is to have three categories, and therefore they must make additional changes." Logically equivalent, but politically quite the opposite.



For the simple reason that there's a demand for it. Just like theaters might choose to card for NC-17 movies but not R movies. Or producers create PG-13 or R movies for the theaters, and then produce unrated versions on DVD that anyone can buy in a video store.

Remember that the purpose of the current Mature flag is NOT to keep kids from seeing stuff they shouldn't. (That's what the "you must be over 18 to be on the grid" rule is for.) The purpose of the curernt Mature flag is so that adults who don't want to deal with these things can avoid them easily.

Im very aware of this. I had a job where I had to work with Technical people daily. In this case however the PR people Robin and Daniel are the ones who need the new feature. IF they are unable to communicate clearly what will be happening to us, its very possible they cant clearly communicate things directly to the Developers either.

In fact the worse the tension is if any / the more likely there is to be a disconnect between intent and implimentation.



Well thats the thing -

Looking at it dispassionately -

You DO get three levels of content with just one flag and 2 parcel settings.

You just dont get 3 levels of content if your trying to sell something.

So its not impossible that we will get only one flag.

Its also not impossible that we will get two. But no one said we are getting two. Thats my point.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Both Robin and Daniel are guilty of using the same words to mean different things to the point they conflict themselves.

Most notably "Mature" / "Adult" , and "Broadly Offensive"

They also seem to like words which do not have any specific meaning tied to them like "Explicit" or "granular".

You are often left wondering "What is explicit in this sense? how explicit is explicit" or "How granular is granular?"