New controversial kid-avs-in-Zindra thread!

Lindens visited Kids5B and complimented the kids community on it. Kids5B even was featured on the official SL5B event pages. SL5B was not at all destroyed. It almost *was* destroyed because of some individual Lindens in an effort of blind activism singled out a big community - and they got a response from a wide range of totally different communities. In the end the higher levels stepped in and revoked a stupid decision.



Child avatars are nowhere mentioned in the Community Standards (not in the TOS, either). However, adult content providers are. Oh, and Intolerance is mentioned, too. Hm. I doubt it will make *you* start thinking, though.

funny thing is there are lindens running around as child avatar, guess they will be fired next week if you believe Lias

LL began their campaign to eliminate adult content on the grid with the creation of Zindra - and no amount of protest from adult content providers could get LL to back down.

One foot in front of the other...

The head organizers stepped down and it was chaos. All the Kid Avs and the child AV apologists were concerned about was themselves - not the rest of the thousands of community members attempting to have an successful event. They celebrated when the organizers boycotted and the entire event had a cloud over it and was complete chaos - but you see it differently. We can agree to disagree.
Yes the child avatar is not allowed to engage in sex in Second Life. It will not be tolerated. Nor will any other broadly offensive behaviors from that group.

they started at sl5b banning adult content and no protest made them back down

Adult content providers made allowances - and took losses and were assigned a community organizer (Blondin Linden - who is a officer in two of the Zindra community groups) to help make the move successful.

When Adult content providers were excluded from the SLB events - They did not call for boycotts and destroy any Linden sponsored events.

Child avatars refuse to make any concessions.

The head organizers - as of your definition - were child AV apologists, too. Actually, the supporters saw what some individual Lindens tried as a dangerous precedent. First they came for... You know how that goes on I guess.



SL5B was very successful. Actually, from my very personal point of view, it was more interesting than SL6B, which was kinda limited because of the general theme.



There was no celebration. However, we were happy to see this gridwide support by a giant majority of people from all cultures and communities, most of them having no relation to kid avatars at all but being very concerened about the dangerous censorship precedent.



And this is hidden in an old blog entry, while the adult content policy is widely published via blog, Community Standards and even individual mails to all residents. Tells something about where the real big problem and danger for the companies business and image lies, doesn't it?

Sorry, just read the TOS/CS pages again. No such statements are made. You're referring to the blog. (^_^)y

They are individuals, not a group. That's like saying all blonde people or all ferrets are refusing to make concessions. And what concessions and to whom? They don't have to make *any* to anyone unless it's in TOS.

Of course not, since by concessions you mean leave Second Life.

Of course, you can show where the kid avatar community called for a boycot? And where we walked up to the event organizers and asked them to step down from their positions? No? What a surprise...

you are confused with the general broadly offencive rule that is not alowed by any avatar type, the mentioning of child avatars is done in a blog entry to explain what is not alowed and what still is alowed.
the whole ban on sexual ageplay is bassed on the general broadly offencive rule that applies to you as wel Lias, you too can not do things like displaying pictures of actual murders and rl necrophilia

Because almost everywhere in the world public display of SEX is considered broadly offensive not child avatars.
Child avatars are not offensive, it is only when the act of sex does it become offensive.


All this talk about how rampant the age play issues is. I have been a child avatar for over a year now and I have never once been asked for sex, I have never seen it. I have never even heard it discussed expect by those that think its all over the grid like you Lisa.

Well the thread started out about getting sent to Adult places when the sim crashed. I suggested that they make an alt and do not adult verify it and use that alt only for the child play thing. They refuse any concessions at all. Not one child AV user has even suggested that something like this would be a good solution. Would actually show the community they are aware of the concerns and want to REALLY Role Play as a child and ONLY be where children should be.

I see adults wearing human child avatars as internet predators. And that is offensive to me. Many adults do not understand why any adult would pretend to be a child on the internet - and then insist upon going into areas that are clearly marked adult. They say I am a RP child. then they say hey I am an adult behind the avatar and I can go where I want. Mixed signal causing distrust and suspicion.
Fancy that.

Well, it's in the KB too . . .

I and others have asked the Documentation group to consolidate the stuff in the blog, the CS and ToS, and the KB into a single source; Jon Linden told me he'd take that question to the LL lawyers . . .

Really Milla?

you still have to tell us how to transfer our no transfer inventory.
and by places child avatars should not be you include any sim that has a sex bed in it or is bordering a sim that has one. and right now you moved it up to the same grid by calling for a blanket ban on child avatars

Adult content providers fought tooth and nail over Zindra. They're still fighting over it, albeit passive-aggressively. The allowances weren't freely given - they were forced by LL, plan and simple.



They certainly did. Mingled with the uproar over the banning of child av builds was an uproar over the banning of Gorean and BDSM-themed builds. LL backed down over child avs; but not the adult content. What does that say?



Damn skippy. We bow to no one!

You have repeatedly called to have them banned.

Linden Lab did not tell us how to save our custom builds - some people willingly take a loss - some people refuse to do so.
Abi these sims are clearly marked ADULT. If you did not adult verify you would not even know they existed.

We would also never be able to own (PG) land or file support tickets, etc...

From the SL5B debacle to these lengthy conversations - you prove that child AVs would never make concessions with LL. So what is their logical next move?
No, the child AVs made the uproar. And LL refused to partner with child AVs but has assigned a Linden to work with the Adult Content providers.

I agree with Lias there. If you don't want to be accidentally transferred to an adult sim or infohub, just go into preferences and set you don't want to access adult content.

You think your special overseer Linden is there as a "partner"? Prison wardens are often on friendly terms with some of their charges - but that doesn't make the place not a prison anymore.

But you are quite correct - LL has never felt the need to appoint a representative to supervise and keep child avatars in line.