Can we get some clarification here?

Last week, the LL edict came down that groups can't refer to age play.

Last night, groups that have a three-letter word referring to a male bodily fluid and rape were changed by LL.

But groups like the one for the French nationalists and white-supremacist 14 Words are allowed to go exist, apparently.

I can't honestly tell where the line between what is acceptable and what is not, but you better guess right, because apparently if you are the founder of a group on the verboten list, you can be banned.

Is it too much to ask to have LL spell out exactly what they will and will not tolerate?

I'd like some clarification too, considering that I'm not exactly Miss Nun, and would prefer to know what to avoid in my business rather than run afoul of some unspoken-yet-deadly ban.

And group owners may want to be a little more creative in their group titles. A little discretion can go a long way. I'm in the "Live and let live" camp but some of the titles I've seen are a bit hard on the eyes. But I think some prefer the shock value.

Thing is, Brenda, these were fine until yesterday; and no one knows what is on the List to be Purged.

I think this is one of the big issues many users have with LL in the last year or so perhaps. Clarification and advance notice. It doesnt really take all that much to figure out "what" they want or dont want us to do and then to give us notice so that things can be changed to fit into their rules. How are we supposed to follow the rules or go on with changes well prepared if we arent given a bit more than 5 seconds warning?

A lot of people would be less frustrated with just a little bit of detailed communication. When we get informed of changes or future possible changes through press releases, online interviews in articles that arent associated with the game etc, instead of from LL themselves....its a clear sign that the lines of communication are certainly broken.

I think what is happening is that enforcement of the existing rule are coming into play. The same sets of rules have been in play for as long as I have been a member. Now, with this age play situation, they are going to enforce the existing rules so it doesn't seem to be that they are just picking on the age play groups.

Actually, they weren't "fine until yesterday". They've been against ToS/CS all along. Linden Lab doesn't go out policing the grid for this stuff - most of the time, action is taken based on an AR, or maybe a Linden happened to spot it on the off chance. I suspect that if someone ARd the other groups mentioned in this thread, those would eventually be dealt with as well.

As for "the list".. you can imagine it would be quite impractical to make a list of things you can't do in Second Life. It would be endless. That's why the Terms of Service and Community Standards exist. Most reasonably thinking individuals should have no problem measuring their behavior against these documents, and figuring out if a given thing would be allowed under them.

That sounds so reasonable, and yet it's been my experience on this forum alone that there are always SL residents who choose to flagrantly violate both the spirit and the letter of the rules. And it's precisely that kind of action that helps undermine any degree of trust and a flexible enforcement of TOS.

It really shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that "C*mrags" is not an appropriate group name (and then become belligerent when it's disallowed). After seeing the many ways in which residents abuse SL and LL, I'm far less inclined to be indignant when Lindens react with a heavy hand.

Their judgment may be flawed -- whose isn't at some time or other? -- but it's their game and their right to regulate that game, and they've showed more restraint and fairness than I would have done under similar provocations.

Here's the deal, as I see it:

1. Businesses are interested in SL.

2. Public sexuality is not good for business. Especially the SL-variety freaky stuff.

3. LL PR wants to sweep it under the rug, BUT...

4. Doing so openly (ToS change, blog post) would cause massive outcry from the community. Can't have that, because that would be bad for business.

5. So it's being swept under the rug quietly.

Now, for the time being, I don't really think LL cares what you do in game, as long as you're not violating the ToS, and as long as you're not embarrassing them. Now, this may change if external pressures make banning sexuality good for business.

The ageplayers were first, because they received public attention. The minute the mass media figures out what furries are up to, and that Goreans aren't just playing Dungeons and Dragons, they'll be next.

Also note that is is probably the REAL reason they got rid of the General forums. People starting and discussing drama on SL's own website scares away potential clients.

LL is in a precarious scenario. They're trying to strike a fine balance between hosting a virtual world where people can freely express themselves (I know, a crazy idea), and catering to the conservative mainstream.

To paraphrase Robin Linden at the ageplay meeting, this is a business decision.

Businesses want to be here because potential customers are here. And a looooooooot of their potential customers also like to get their freak on. So, less freak = fewer people = worse for business. You could as easily argue it that way.

Has anyone ever sat and read a TOS and seen it as clear easy reading? I wasnt stating that they need to allow things that violate TOS to remian, but it would still be nice to have more clarification.

For those that say LL doesnt police them but respond to ARs. Seriously. Im sure there have been MANY ARs done about age play, goreans, furries, the other offensive groups that have been mentioned in this thread alone...and yet nothing is done about them. Can you say for sure that these changes are because of AR reports? No.

So in the end, the sweeping under the rug hasta stop, people want to know whats going to happen before it happens. Im sure there are those that are in Gorean groups see nothing wrong with it, while others are ARing them left and right and find them totally offensive. Same with many of these other groups...but a lot of them have been around for so stinking long that just deleting them without warning seems really crappy to those involved.

Again, this isnt me saying Hey leave them alone...there are plenty of groups that I would like to see changed. However, one of the reason people whine and fuss is if they arent given any notice. Maybe a 'Your group is violating TOS *insert where here*. Please either make the appropriate changes by *insert time* or we will do it for you.

I know, its a crazy notion, communication...Im sorry, ignore all I have said previously

There is a difference between "public sexuality" and extremely blatant, crude, vulgar expressions of commercial sex. I don't need to be a corporation to be grossed out and offended by some of the activities that intrude into my SL life.

Some people seem to interpret "mature" as a license to put up outrageously explicit photos in public or to commercially promote taboo or extremely vulgar material in their group names, profiles or their marketing. I interpret "mature" to mean that adult activities can be conducted in a *reasonable* fashion. Feel free to skinny dip in your pool or hot tub, but for god's sake put on some clothes (and take off the erect penis) when you're out shopping in public, regardless of whether or not it's a "mature" sim.

I don't find nudity in and of itself to be offensive -- but I do find the assumption that I am not worth consideration to be offensive. Stop treating my SL life like some garbage dump.

Sick of typing long posts...so I will just use headings - you all know my arguments well enough by now to fill them in for yourselves.

1. LL think sex is bad
2. LL think violence and hate is fine.
3. Slippery slope.

ITYS.

I still think even it it IS allowable, use some taste, creativity. While the subject matter of a group may be of interest to me, I am not going to walk around with the title ***Rag over my head (figuratively, of course I know it can be turned off) or in my Profile. As far as Sex goes, it can be dirty but doesn't have to be Vulgar.

Are you ok with other people telling you how to enjoy your sex life, too, or is that something only you are entitled to do? I'm trying not to be snide, but really, who are you to tell people how to express their sexuality?

How many of these people PMed you to try to get you to participate in their vulgarity?

I think one of the problems these days is that people are just too darn sensitive. Then, when they are offended by someone else's actions, even if they aren't directed at them personally, they feel that action should be taken on their behalf.

But that's not to say that people shouldn't have a right to not see that stuff if they don't want. Hey, this is a computer program, there are better solutions. Here's one:

Create a filtering system for the viewer. This will work on two fronts. First, the user be able to create a list of words he doesn't want to see. For instance, let's say you don't like the word "steamy." You put that in the filter, and that word will be filtered out of searches, display names, chat, and IM.

The second would be physical. If you don't like an avatar's appearance, then right click on it and select "Filter." That avatar will then appear to you as a generic placeholder. This could also be done with attachments, and made so that if you block one Xcite, you won't see anything else with Xcite in the name.

Let me know what you think. If this gets good feedback, I'll post it under feature suggestions.

In truth, though, I think people who are offended all the time actually enjoy feeling offended.

You miss the point Brenda. There is a world of difference between saying "it doesn't have to be vulgar" and "it must NOT be vulgar". If you don't like the group name, you don't join. That's your CHOICE and no one wants to take it away. For those who WANT to be vulgar, the current rules are restricting their choice.

As I said before - "Your World, Your Imagination"? - don't make me laugh.

In my imagination, we are all white fluffy bunnies.

Having an orgy.

Not at all. I am in total support of expressing yourself however you wish. Just don't be shocked when some people have a negative reaction to it.
PS , no worry about being snide there. you are far from it on that post.

There have been a lot of suggestions to help filter out the issues. Make profiles that are adult (XXX) be marked AS adult (XXX). Have adult (XXX) rated sims, areas, etc...so that someone who doesnt want to live next to a brothel doesnt have to. Though, far too few people USE PG sims for escape from Mature content. So make PG, R and X rated. I dont think the solution is 'try and make it go away' because all of it isnt going to. They dont have enough on staff...will be interesting to see how far the new changes go and where the lines are actually drawn.

wonder if doing so openly would be to admit they allowed freedom and now dont?

Instead they doing it hush hush and claim - "well this was always the rules we just didnt know all this was going on/didnt have enough people to clean it up"

Agreed, but IF those are the rules and thay are clearly defined, end of argument for me. I will grant you that the Creators don't seem to communicate anything particularly effectively, there most certainly can be confusuion. And maybe I am missing that,

I feel like all the talk of the last week has been overly reactionary. We are still allowed to have our freedom in SL. Ageplayers weren't banned. There is still no one policing us or interfering with our private actions.

They are just trying to put a coat of whitewash over things to appease politicians, corporations and whatever company that is eventually going to buy them out.

Go about your business. Just don't shout it from the mountaintops.