"Guess what will get you banned ?"

That does add difficulty. IMHO it doesn't clear away suspicion, especially when the word "pre-teen" is added. It's conceivable that the resident's vendors innocently advertised fashions for toddler-to-teenage AVs in that style. That seems doubtful to me, but there's not much point in investing too much in it.

(politely points to his original smiley '' and calmly walks away)

oh, agreed totally. The term "pre-teen" caught my eye more than the other two.

Mari

Amen, brother.

When I first read this, I would have bet that I could have spotted the trouble at the parcel in question within a few minutes. Seeing the semi-quotes from the Linden later in this thread made me think that I should have bet on that and bet a lot.

It's not in fashion to talk like that here, though. Much more popular to bitch about Lindens and spend lots of energy coming up with creative ways to misunderstand them then spending a little on figuring it out.

Anyone thats been involved with the writer knows she is kneon for trying to start issues with people and subjects matter. Again I am not wrong because i had occurances with said writer. Its not a general remark. Its just facts from what i personally been involved with with said writer. thats why i say the said writer has no real source vaule here.

The question here is not really whether the Resident was guilty of anything or not - who the hell knows? The question is, do Lindens indeed tell you you are in violation but won't tell you what your violation is? That's Kafka country, if true, whether the Resident is guilty or innocent.

You think so? LOL. Nothing new 'round here. The Linden bashers love to twist and misconstrue and manipulate every situation to be able to point fingers at the evil LL. It's ridiculous when you consider how much there is legitimately to bitch about. The fact that they so quickly support such a ridiculous, unsubstantiated article only shows their absurdity.

I've enjoyed Second Life Insider in the past. Seeing that they'll print this trash tells me not to waste my time anymore. I'd have a hard time trusting anything they'd print.

I actualy got spam the other day for porn (well my alt did) from a guy selling what would fall in their "broadly offensive" class it had words like preteen in it. I actualy reported it .. but it was pretty obvious what it was.

I dunno I have a hard time believing that someone can't figure out what falls into the child pron category especialy if the word pre-teen is theer among other things.

I have no idea what that coment about one item being right beside the other one means? I would assume he is talking about um those xxx positions?

Anyhow my questions would be was the resident being purposely dense to avoid removing something that was probably in kiddy pron category?

I can't judge based on half a conversation lol so I wont try. I would suggest he just remove anything he thinks meets the category or send a notecard to a higher up linden and ask for their assistance on the matter? Saying they got a report and need help on it. In all honesty though most is pretty obvious it sounds like this guy is walking the line and trying to step over it. This would be my guess. Its common for people to try to push the boundaries of the line and put their big toe over it just cause they can get away with it and then claim innocence.

Anyhow this article has no fact in it so really no one can tell its just a story the sample notecard was kinda funny too but the spaces leave me wondering why.

Im not jaded enough to believe that the guy posting the bits and pieces had edited the actual sentancing, but i AM jaded enough to think that the person beind asked to remove stuff is walking the line

It just made me laugh that the writer of the piece once again stuck her ugly little head out to AGAIN start problems. Why Second Life Insider even posted such junk! is unknown. But they should have known better ( they did no doubt ) but still post the laughable source writting. What strange is what she wrote so tacky typical in her way of treating others. This is not new about her. Any story the she writes produces lacks the repect it desires. Nothing should be trusted she write, because at the end its about about using us as "HEY LOOK AT WHAT LINDEN LABS DID BLA BLA BLA" just to get us all excited and emotion. ITS a FAKE as some FEMALE Breast size on SL. At the end we are the fools to believe such fiction writing.

Usagi

I've also found "the notecard" a sense of frustration - I remember, not fondly, the day people first started to get them.

If, however, the establishment in question *is* catering to sexual ageplay... well, SL has made their policies mostly clear on dis nowadays, an while I would argue it needs to be clearer as far as the CS is concerned, it still is known.

Mari

If said person has stuff regarding "Pre-teens" and child porn then they should be grateful Linden Labs doesn't report them to the appropriate authorities.

Let's please not go there in this thread. Different countries have different laws.

Just say "LL has declared it illegal" and let it go at that.

shakeshead............

yah im shaking my head too in disgust not at anything related to ageplay but at the attitudes of usagi and others here who spread lies with their self serving agendas not caring about anything fair or reasonable, just making up false scenerios trying to paint things differently then how they really are. i have zero respect for this.

There was nothing sexual related to children in terms of objects or textures. Nothing at all. There we some childrens shapes on the walls for sale but there was no sexual content on the parcel anywhere around that. i swear i didnt see any at all. i love how people make up lies about something when they werent even there and dont even know what they are talking about. Thats exactly how much intergrity you have. And i shouldnt have to tell you that im not gonna continue defending a resident who was victimized by Linden Labs and now being disrespected on the forums as well. You should be ashamed of yourselves. But you wont be. Hafta have a conscious for that.

editing to add this:

the one forum poster who said the resident was walking the line was probably right but then soooooooo what? if there isnt any offense material to remove then what difference does THAT make? im sure youll say it does make a difference but i say no it doesnt and stop harrassing residents in sl.

I don`t like age play nor does many people that have replied here. But that doesnt not give any more credit to the writer of this trashy piece.

Hard to feel conscious over a situation that is clearly one sided (the only "proof" we have is clips from a notecard that don't show the whole conversation and can be manipulated), with no names, no place to go look for ourselves, and no two sides, and no witnesses.

Defenders are "indirectly" involved, which tells me they heard from either the person in question or a friend of that person, but were not there.

Am I supposed to feel conscious over thin air?

Personally, I have zero respect for someone who wants to create drama, just for the sake of causing drama, and going. "Pssst. Guess what I heard? *tells a story which omits place, time, date, names, items, and even any details* Now ISN'T THAT AWFUL?????" Anyone with a grain of sense will know they were just told a story about what "could" have happened, but with ZERO NOUNS. No nouns does not a story make. All it makes is gossip, rumors, hysteria, and frankly, absolutely nothing.

I've ALWAYS called out LL when I think it's appropriate. Sorry, but a random person typing up a random story with no facts inside is no appropriate.

Hell, we don't even have the way the resident acted. For all we know, s/he deserved it for being an ass. Saying that is just as credible as this story.

And WTF,



If they WERE walking the line and you SAY that's right, then how is there no offensive material? You're directly contradicting yourself. Yeah... there's some things that probably shouldn't be there, but no, there wasn't. Makes no difference....

What??!??

"Yes, it is.
No, it isn't
Yes, it is.
Stop arguing with me!
No, I won't.
Yes, you will."

*others stare on as this person continues to talk to their shoulder......*

Perhaps everyone would be less confused by or suspect of the original article if Linden Labs didn't set policy by sending out notecards itself to certain individuals instead of making policy transparently available anywhere on it's website or outlined specifically in its TOS.

I find it amusing that everyone is disputing the creedence of the original article because it is only available as a notecard when apparently that medium is Linden Labs first choosen method of communicating with it's customers regarding changes in policy.

See Amiee Webers cute little AV up there in the right hand corner of the Forum graphic... you know, the child-like one sticking her tongue out. She apparently had a simliar incident (according to her post on Second Life Insider). Maybe she's lying too, huh?

I have no idea if the original article bears any truth to it, but I do know the article wouldn't have exsisted if Linden Labs knew how to communicate with its customers regarding it's policies of what was limited within "Your World, Your Imagination"

I understand perfectly well that there will never be a specific definition given by Linden Labs for the very specifically vague term "Broadly Offensive".

I also understand that because they refuse to give a definition, the orginal article won't be the last incident of it's kind, whether real or manufactured.

Hmmm... I think the fault in this is the assumption that LL has an actual "policy". This is a bit hilarious as the whole reason they got burned in the media was that when contacted, Robin couldn't point at their policy that customers were violating. If she had been able to do that, it would have effectively shifted culpability from LL to their customers.

This is also the driving reason behind the "Might Get Deployed Someday" IDV system.

I think there is an cognitive rift between concept "we should get a policy in place to ward off bad PR" and execution "why are we supposed to get a policy in place? dunno, I think policy was supposed to be good or sumptin".