New Policy Blog Post

http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/11/13/clarification-of-policy-disallowing-ageplay/

It looks as if the road to extreme censorship has started...

I guess the goreans are next.


Nice of them to bury this along with a couple worthless fluff pieces and close comments.

Nothing new here. Just saying that Kiddie sex would not be tolerated. What is there to comment on?

Tune in tomorrow when this thread is 40 pages long to find out.

Why did it take so long to define this - seems like common sense, not censorship.

Ok Ray, I will start it.


DOOOOOMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Doesn't seem like censorship to me. Sounds more like "we're closing exploits and 'lukewarm loose ends' to something that's already been in effect for months" to me.

Nowhere does it say that simply owning a child avatar is punishable by death, dismemberment, being drawn and quartered, etc...

it's only 'censorship' if said people actually do things that violate the three things in that post, and the CS. In which case, I hope they spend lots of time surrounded by big eager men in a nice shiny steel cage...

My turn: ICKY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought they covered it before they just are clarify I guess they don't want sexual ageplay that is all. So Your Gor Pixel Sex is Safe.
Being small, child like is okay but sex where one is a child is a no no.

Seems to me nothing new is being said at all, it seems to me just a "reminder" of policy that was established back when... It may be worded more clearly, but nothing new in it that I see.

Sorry, just can't resist the temptation

So the following is from the post:

"We understand that in some cases there may be an element of subjectivity as to whether an avatar (or other image) appears to be a minor. Objective factors which will be used to decide include whether an avatar has child-like facial features, is sized as a child, has clothing or accessories generally associated with children, and whether, based on the circumstances, an avatar is speaking or acting like a child"

Would that part about clothing apply to my cute school-girl outfit?

I would think they would use more than one to determine, if it was borderline. But knowing LL, every person responding to AR's will use different standards.

Not if I have anything to say about it. If they want to ban this completely because it 'promotes an illegal activity', I -will- be starting the campaign to ban goreans because they ALSO promote an activity that's just as illegal and reviled in all of the civilized world:

SLAVERY.


And since 'Master' or 'Mistress' will no longer be allowed to be used in a sexual context, by association, the ENTIRE BDSM community will be banned.

Start actually thinking for once.

There's a problem with your slippery slope; Master and Mistress are used outside of slavery contexts. Even owner is used outside of slave contexts.

Visual depictions of slavery are not illegal. Visual depictions of kiddie sex, in large areas of the world are. Big difference

I thought kiddie sex was already not tolerated so I guess they feel a need to repeat themselves

oh well once controversial issue that cannot be changed by 20 threads on an issue is reborn.

I request we have a new one because i'm tired of agelplay, gambling and uh Adult verification. Did i miss any if so which ones?

While that may be the case, it still glorifies and endorses a clearly ILLEGAL activity... thus, the banhammer for it!

Considering this is Resident Answers . I don't see a question ..

Just one of the pathetic .. "I read the blog . Guess you don't posts"


So what's your RA question?.

I suppose my question is: Who's gonna just sit and watch SL turn into a vast virtual wasteland?

Clearly if one illegal thing is purged, all the others must be, too.

Sorry kiddo, if LL worked like that then they'd have banned a whole buncha stuff a long time ago.

The whole "there's a chance they may possibly sometime in the future do something illegal" argument has been shot down so many times. Again, your slippery slope fails. The sky is not falling, that was just an acorn that hit you in the head.

'Cept, SL isn't based on illegal things.

Casinos were banned, SL survived. Ageplay was banned, SL survived. Gor won't be banned, because they're not doing anything remotely illegal.

Actually, slavery isn't illegal in the US, just certain forms of it.

The 13th Amendment
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.


So, if the SL slave is a convicted criminal, then their slavery isn't illegal.

Unless I missed them saying it before, they did add the word "proximity" to the rules.



My understanding of the previous blogs was that it was a violation for under-18's to 'engage' but not a violation to just be nearby.

Ain't complaining as this matches the rules in places I own. Just saying that it seems to be a new bit.

Not to mention that SL slavery is entirely consensual and that the "slave" may leave at any time they choose, are under no legal obligations to continue their role, and are not under threat of physical violence if they do choose to leave.

Not quite. What do you think a forced collaring is?

If it's common sense, why was it necessary to define at all? *reads the rest of this thread*