age verification

Yes. Very true. It's, to me though, a really irresponsible step to encourage a lot more kids in with this possibility looming. The fact that kids are allowed into PG, Mature and Adult zones seems almost a mockery of making the ratings in the first place. On the newspapers it's touted as they big SL clean up, and yet it seems the opposite.

If someone is a real life adult playing a child, isn't it their adult responsibility to keep the child av out of sex (mature and adult) related places?

Wouldn't be the right thing to do for the other avs to tell the child av to leave?

maybe in your mind but not according to the current LL thinking.


again only in your mind but not according to LL.


again you limit adult behavior to sex where LL makes it wider and includes violence, right now you would be entitled to have public sex in a combat zone but nobody in his right mind would do it, especialy when there are child avatars present.


In the exsamples I gave there will be no fair warning, especialy in the case of entrapment the damage will be done before the childav has a change to rez, sure if someone with a child av ends up in a sex club because of a blind tp or other reason there should be a fair warning but with the shoot first don't ask questions mentalety often displayed I highly doubt there will be a fair warning and your case where you plan to use sex as a way to drive child avs away it is simple harrasment.

As soon as LL redefines adult as meaning sexual then you have a point untill then blame LL for any confusion caused by including both sex and violence in the adult defination.

Abi (who thinks pixle slapping is highly overated)

[/i]
If it is a sex related place yes, but if it is a violence related place then the other avs have no rights to tell the child av to leave for whatever reason, child avs have been ordered to leave and threatend with ARs simply for being in a mature sim used for residential purpose. There are even enough a**h*les who will AR a child av simply for being a child av, either because they are confused about the rules or because they are narrowminded dipsticks.

I wouldn't call people names for not liking child avs, each to their own, eh?

I understand, like most of us, you're concerned for your avs rights to do what is your right to do. Still I wonder though, why should others hold off on having sex in a residential mature or adult zone cuz a child av is there, surely your av would have to leave then?

It's a double catch, an adult playing a child is an adult concept, so no PG for you either I guess... Odd all you are probably allowed with no Linden legals is the adult violent zone or your own land or "agreed" mature land.

Nothing adds up in SL for me.

Sorry honeybunch, if you are inhabiting a kid avatar the only places that you are going to be welcomed in Ursula are those places that want kid avatars for nefarious reasons, including those places that kid avatars own. If LL don't work that out before the Ursula plan is implemented then all the rest of the sim owners will. If formal ARs don't work, then requests to the sim owners to exclude those that inhabit kid avatars will doubtless be expedited on an immediate basis. By default, a kid avatar on Ursula will be considered a potential griefer.

Pep (Now don't go crying to Mummy about it; life's not fair you know)

You realy are funny pep

the new adult continent is mainland, LL is the sim owner and this is what LL sees as what should be located there:



please try to get your mind out the gutter and realise adult content is NOT just about sex as LL designates it, if you want a sex only region, get your own private island, just like I did when I wanted a place free of porn and child hating people, or get together with others and ask LL to leave intensely violent acts out of the adult definition.

You are far closer to the core then you realise,
the current problems serounding child avs come from the media and because of that LL seeing child avs as children and not as adults playing children.
if child avs are seen by everyone as an adult concept then the whole ageplay rules would not be needed and a child av not wanting to be around sexual acts will just leave if it would happen in a place where sex is alowed just like it happens in RL ageplay clubs.

Maybe the problems of SL would show up in RL too if the subcultures are as big RL as they are in SL, afterall how often do you see a furry gorean or ageplayer on the streets or in a bar in RL.

Abuse-reporting someone for just having a child avatar goes beyond "not liking", and into "griefing".

I see it a lot, with people aspiring to these fantasies in dress and manner.

But still, the real life adult should take their online child avi away from online sex if asked.

I'm meaning while I see aspirations to the gor look or the funky furry boots and hats & tatts I don't see aspirations of sex in front of children or really hear of kids having a right to choose or not to watch adults have sex. I don't know of any real life adutl clubs where it is a childs choice to stay or go either.

On saying this, my personal POV is, if your an adult and doing this safely with other consenting adults it is totally your business, so long as no non consenting beings are affected. ("no means no" goes for all, including adults).

I you need an SL an "adult only PG zone".

I don't think AR's are necessary for being a child avi, I do how ever think people have a right to their own feelings on it and a dislike of it is not a problem at all.

Like I said, I think an "Adult only PG" zone would solve it for everyone.

Firstly, can I ask why anyone roleplaying a small child would even want that child character to be involved in the worst types of "extreme violence" in the first place? Sorry, but I don't get that.

Secondly, if I saw a child av on Pornsylvania, *meme increases strength one point*, I think I'd be inclined to suspect it was someone using the av to annoy, grief or entrap other people.

It may be true that all the hysterical media hoohah over ageplay has unfairly warped many people's view of those who like to play at being childran again, but IMO kid avs are definitely going to be suspect if they are on Ursula (or whatever they're calling it this week).

--
Aes

Abigail wasn't calling people names for "dislike", she was calling people names for "griefing":
"There are even enough a**h*les who will AR a child av simply for being a child av, either because they are confused about the rules or because they are narrowminded dipsticks.".

also I know a couple that just got back on after being ar'd for having avatars that looked smaller than the basketball coach's dream that seems to be the norm for sl

I don't think it'd be narrow mindedness or arsehole-ish intentions behind a lot of those AR's. I mean sometimes, but not usually.

SL has been always 18 yo and over. If anything, I'd think it's more likely not expecting to see a child. Assuming an adult enviroment, and not wanting child avi's around for what ever reason doesn't warrent being called an arsehole.

Not that this helps consenting adults who get into this. Again it's not a crime, no ones sexuality is, from the most abstract to missionary style once a month, provided they don't force anything with out anothers consent.

It's more so just a very thin line here.

Then they're assholes for filing an AR without a good reason. As far as I'm concerned they lose either way.

Fuck it, I can't be bothered with this, obviously text is to lacking in expression to convey complete meanings, sorry for any offence, miswordings etc folks. I am going to bow out of this convo.

Is there an example of extreme violence content that Blondin has confirmed would be designated Adult Content? I don't recall seeing any.

Decapitation, I believe. Though I think he needs to sit on an unlucky chair before he sets that in stone.

He hasn't said if my skinned fox avatar counts.

those explodiong av attachments might count too if decapitation counts.
At least it goes way beyond decapitation incloding bouning eyeballs and splattered brains.

Setting up a system where content providers only deal with those that are age verified is not enough. Many adults in SL seek out partners for adult activities everywhere. They met, they dance, they get intimate and they have virtual sex. This does not always happen at a club or a specified place. So there needs to be a way where adults can choose to make their age verified status public in the profile. Its very simple. I have verified my age. I would like people who check my profile to see that I in fact am an adult. By the same token, if I see someone I like and want to consider pursuing a relationship, I should be able to know for sure that that person is in fact an adult and not a kid posing as one.

We're already presumed to be "Adults", and if a kids is posing as an adult, chances are you are not going to find out and age verification is not going to stop them when all they need is the last 4 digits of mom/dads SS# or a drivers license.

You can't tell for sure. Any kid can easily verify with bogus info. The only way is for everyone to put their RL picture, address birthdate and phone number on their profile.

Which some people would love to see become the norm I'm sure.

Sure people want that to become the norm....mainly so they can make a quicker connection to your bank account.

- Real Identities to help stop content theft and griefing
- Restricted content creation by means of a content submission process
- Approved Professional Content makers only

etc...

Wear it to his office hours today.

Child avatars would probably be a little out of place in many areas where decapitation is featured. Stepford or New Desperation probably aren't the best places to RP a child avatar.

While there may be a few exceptions, as a rule, if a resident playing a child avatar finds themselves on Ursula by some accident, it's probably going to be best for them to leave.