Feeling Betrayed by the Lindens

this was discussed in the 'open letter' town hall meeting. there are transcripts for it somewhere.
this is one of millions of internet bbs' on the web. it is widely understood how they function, what expectations are, etc. you cannot compare social norms of something as standard as a forum with SL. and in any case i expect this optional verification would possibly show up the the forum postbit anyway, so we may find out how that effects the sl bbs users afterall.
while it may be accepted to optout of verification and voice for star trek rp and whatnot, i am not so optimistic about that being the case on sl overall.

Actually, there's a whole load of people on this very forum who are saying just that.

Not yet. There are a couple of quadruped avatars out there, as well as other non-anthropomorphic AVs.
This may sound like a plug, but my partner and I will be launching a line of non-anthro avatars within the next few weeks and I know someone else is launching a line of non-anthro horses.
It's not my intention to plug, but to ask: If someone made sexual poses for these AVs, both with a human partner and another non-anthro one, would you or others consider this bannable? Disgusting? Should be made illegal, etc, etc.

Will we be hearing cries of "Think of the puppies and kitties"?
Will my partner and I have to worry about being banned?

Where's the line?

Mickey, be careful. I hear there is a film crew from "Animal Cops" wandering about.
Make sure they verify they aren't reporters.

ROFL! Luckily I didn't have coffee in my mouth!

Mandy C

I'm actually going to go buy a cup of coffee, just so I can spit take on that! *heehee*

Based on some of the emails my evil and twisted friends send me, most of the pig porking (HA!) videos actually come from Germany, so I have a feeling that there's nothing to worry about on that front *grin*

Although, the story would read the same...

"We sat there as the poor puppy was used, carnally, over and over again, for hours."

(I'm still in shock no one called them on that!)

It's no joke. You and your furry friends *will* suffer at the hands of outsiders who do not share your values.

Once you let First Life dictate what's allowed in a virtual world, you have no virtual world. You can't draw a line in the sand. There is absolutely no stopping them.

Actually, I can already point to an instance of this.
The Isle of Wyrms dragon (fully functional feral (quadrupedal)) avatars do have the assosiated animation poseball sets.
I should know, I own the BVHs (I didn't make them, but I do own full perm copies and aquired full rights to the BVHs from the person who did make them) so that I could complete the set of animations and sell them jointly with another person.
I also make and sell the nessessary attachments for full viewing pleasure.
I also own screenshots of each pose in action.
[/shameless plug]

Therefore it's not a "what if" but a "when."

Draco... we probably shouldn't be talking about this! I just realized!
Some of these "OMG! IF YOU DEFEND AGEPLAY IN ANY WAY YUR A PEDDLE-FILE AND SHOULD BE CASTORATED" folks is prolly gonna jump on the bandwagon and try to kick us off.

So... um... yeah...

Ferals? Quadrupeds? Avatars that look like animals and move realistically?

Never heard of 'em.

HOLY CARP! I'd better move!
Feral? Quad? Penises? Never heard of them.
By the way, vist my store at Brandy Shatner's Mall
(And that line would be so much better if only BBC worked. Sigh)
And I don't support peodofilia, I support people being allowed to do what they choose to do.

My own objection - I can't speak for others - isn't based on the illegality of the activity, but on the illegality of the data sent over the internet.

I, and others, do not want to have to walk around Second Life in terrified fear that at any turn we might accidentally see a child avatar engaged in sex and then have to potentially face the RL consequences of having downloaded child pornography. Yes, we might or might not get caught and it might or might not be illegal in different countries, but some of us don't want to take the risk. We know it's illegal in Germany; it might be illegal in the US. (As has been mentioned before; although a relevant law was overturned by Congress, it was replaced by a new one which expressly stated it covered only obscene material - obscene material is not protected by the Bill of Rights.) The UK is, as we speak, considering several highly ambiguous laws regarding online pornography.

In fact, we wouldn't even have to see them - SL downloads all activity taking place in the sim, so the data would still have crossed the internet connection, and nobody has ever gotten let off a charge of downloading illegal pornography by saying in court "But you can't prove I looked at it, your honour".

So LL, and others, have decided that the right to engage in *one* specific form of roleplaying, which has an *easy* substitute (play an developed adult avatar in costume instead of a childlike avatar), is not too much to ask people to give up for the security of a large number of the SL population. Yes, there's some other losses, like the "gothic lolita" fashion style - although, isn't that also called "gothic maid"?

Bear in mind, the alternate risk and danger is that a court in Germany or somewhere makes a similar decision. Seeing it from a mainstream, they'll argue that the ability to play *one* particular online world on your computer is minor compared to the risks that the mainstream sees in child pornography - and effectively outlaws Second Life, or makes it absolutely clear that you're gambling with your freedom by logging on. That would be devastating to LL's customer base and ruin their publicity.

And yes, I know that many people here are discussing moral objections - but those don't really matter. On a matter like this, we *have* to side with the mainstream morality, because the mainstream morality can send the police around to our houses, and our opinions offer no defence against that.

Amen to that, amigo.

Yooms, I'm with you on this.

What gets me fired up is, as mentioned, the "OMG! Yu R all a buncha pedafiles and shuddint be alowd on SL 'cuz ur peedalfoles and want to raping teh childrenses" folks.

I do, however, support LL in their decision on this.

That post really belongs on a sheet of paper , made form letters cut from assorted magazines and pasted haphazardly. " We seen ur Avitor DoING bAd tinGS. SEnd US One millon LindANs in small BiLLs. Or we will Kall HeralDO RivieRa."

I have reread the townhall transcript on the official blog (1) and can see no mention of identity verification being included on your profile in world. As with age play, which I have seen no evidence that suggests LL have banned it, I do not see this as being an actual "planned" future SL development.

If you are bringing your own opinion as to what you think will happen, then I am happy to discuss that, but when you present your argument as fact, therefore undebatable, it distorts the discussion.

(1) http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/05/03/transcript-cory-linden-town-hall/

Wow..................................

Daniel Linden: "Residents, if they should so choose, to share verified aspects of their identity with others in Second Life — ie, not an exact date of birth, but an age (over 30) and not a specific address, but a city and country. Such sharing will, of course, be completely voluntary"

It's there Bodger, voluntary of course.

http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/05/07/more-on-identity-verification/

pretentious and condescending people really annoy me, so i will refrain from posting to this thread any more.

I already do this voluntary, in my 1st life profile, also a blouse I wear has a patch on the arm saying which region and area I am from.

But I am thinking this LL "voluntary" verified thing, is different from my voluntary thing. in I say I am from Northern Germany,but LL will have my profile say. Hamburg (Mönkebergstr #) . plus no more avatars you will walk around with your drivers liscence photo on an image plane for your avatars face. Maybe you even need to have your avatars key tattooed on your forehead and a scanner checks it before you are allowed to even log in.

Thanks Ciaran, though I had read that post a couple of times that bit hadn't jumped out at me before. I will therefore need to reconsider some of the points I have made in light of this



That is rather harsh Nina as I was being neither of these attributes. I was not claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified (1) nor do I believe I was displaying a patronizingly superior attitude(2).

These forums are full of threads and posts composed mainly of emotion and unfounded beliefs. This thread had managed to bring evidence based discussion on to what had, up until now, been a subject which could not be debated because of peoples reactive nature. Indeed this thread has, on occasion, almost went in that direction. I do hope that you will continue to contribute as your points have added to the discussion and debate.

(1)http://www.answers.com/pretentious&r=67
(2)http://www.answers.com/condescending

So, in a nutshell:

Age verification is completely voluntary. You don't need to do it, you don't need to pay for it.

Sharing the information is completely voluntary. You don't need to do it.

So if you don't want to, no sense in complaining, leave it. Or are people simply worried because of being locked out of their favourite sims? Anyone may think about the implications of this.

I'm already in a group for Houstonians.

But Houston is a huge place and it's no risk to me to tell you that, and even less risk when it's unverified. Plus, I am in a position to be somewhat open with my RL info online, which many people should not do.

If, however, I lived in East Nowhere, Vermont, population 1000, you can be very sure it would be foolish for me to verify that and put it out in front of the public, when there would be only two Second Life users in East Nowhere to begin with.

I went over and took a look at Kaneva and was alarmed. The last thing I would ever what to do is encourage a large number of naive young people to expose too many facts about their RL to total strangers online.

http://gameinvasion.comcast.net/gameinvasion/news/article/1178902200155_germany_investigating_second_life_porn

If you wish to read this article written by someone not working for LL and is written for the Associated Press, it explains that the woman was using SL to traffic in real child porn. She was not banned because she was one of two consenting adults. She was banned because she has knowingly done harm of some form, mental or physical, to a minor. The following is the first 2 paragraphs of the article. Stop crying foul cause two consenting AVs were banned and REALLY look into the matter:

German authorities are trying to uncover the identity of a person who's offering child pornography in the virtual world of 'Second Life.'

A German, whose avatar _ or online character _ is a 13-year-old girl, has been offering to provide real photos that contain child pornography to other denizens of the online service, prosecutor Peter Vogt said Thursday.

i say use the ageplay stuff to monitor the rl people behind it.in other words, if some guy is doing age play here, then send Chris hansen after him irl... or worse... to watch him. The truth of humanity is found in the secrecy of our lives, not the public eye. I say gather the data and make it public!

umm.... NO!!! im sorry but no. theres a reason why every human on earth has a private life. we ALL have things that we dont want others to know about. every last human on earth has a skelleton in they're closet. if you want to rip open everyones closets and expose them then YOU my friend, i find extremely offensive and inappropirate. i dont care what you do in your own private life, its yours, you keep it. but DONT YOU DARE PRY INTO MINE!

we might not have the right to privacy written on paper, but every single human being understands this unwritten right. whether or not our governments wish to follow this law of human nature, we still guard it as our first and most valuable possesion. no ammount of money can open my closets, no ammount of wealth, bandwidth or anything. its mine, and its something YOU cant take away.

i believe this is what the thread starter was getting to when they made the thread. They felt betrayed by LL for invadeing into the privacy of some of they're residents and then takeing that information and threatening the rest of us for doing something that atleast one of the Lindens didnt agree with.


im sorry but if you dont like something, theres nothing stopping you from looking or moving away from it.

EVERYONE MUST REMEMBER THAT THEY'RE NOT THE ONLY HUMAN ON EARTH AND THAT EVERYONE HAS A DIFFERENT THOUGHT PROCESS THAN YOU.

(http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/05/31/keeping-second-life-safe-together/)


Unfortunately - due to the new 100 post limit on the blog I'm unable to respond there so I'm doing it here. It seems to cover the topic of this thread.

Despite your personal opinion about what is sick or normal, there is always such a thing as "freedom" to take into account. Freedom to walk around and RP in SL as the avatar of your choice, be it male, female, adult, child, human, dragon, furry, cartoon character, etc.

I don't believe that SL users that play out adult/child sex in SL will be more likely to have sex with RL children too. I actually believe that someone who is able to get their kicks in SL won't look for them RL.

As long as we can be sure that both avatars are controlled by adults, no RL children will be harmed. Ofcourse this doesn't apply to RL childpornography pictures being used in SL.

I've seen rape poses in SL and allthough you won't find me using them, I can't object to someone wanting to RP it. Remember that all parties are consenting and always able to stand up, TP away or log out.

The same goes for viewers by the way. If you find something offensive, don't stand and stare but walk away. I don't like all the crap we see on TV these days and if I am offended, I zap to another channel.

Going thru the comments in that blog post, it appears to me that "our community" (as LL puts it) seems more open to freedom than restrictions then LL let us believe.

I fear the "law" in SL... Child pornography is first to be banned from SL, what's next? Bestiality? Gay marriage? Outdoor sex? Walking around naked? Flying without a pilot's license? Speeding? Running in the hallways? Etnic minorities?

You may be laughing at this, but it is the start of a witch hunt, and they're hunting pretend-witches. Trust me that some day... you are next!

LL, please listen to "our community" instead of joining the media hype.

Lyn