Upcoming Changes for Adult Content: Answers to Questions

Mathew, read carefully in what Blondin had said in her explicit description of what it will be like when this policy is implemented.

How do you resolve the inconsistency between what Blondin said and done on the same day with less than 12 hr apart?

Yesterday at 01:54 AM

Yesterday at 12:26 PM

Read carefully: There are 3 check-boxes in the above gates.

If you check the bottom check-box ---[ ] Age-Verified Adults (meaning ONLY the Aristotle check), you will be blocked from accessing either at the Estate level or at the Parcel level, even if you are "Residents with Payment info on file".

May I ask, can you get into these estates or parcels if the bottom check-box ---[ ] Residents who are not Age-Verified Adults. (meaning ONLY the Aristotle check) is enabled, even if you are only PIU/PIOF verified?

This is the implementation that Blondin stated yesterday, and 12 hr later, she said PIOF will be enough, which is opposite of what she stated in LL's implementation.

The only way it could be consistent is to remove the bottom check-box ---[ ] Residents who are not Age-Verified Adults. (meaning ONLY the Aristotle check).

Simply put, if Age-verified = PIU/PIOF verified, why are there 2 boxes? Wouldn't one box be enough?

I agree with your points as we have reckoned based on my wifes sales that about 60% will be able to access and maybe a few more percent of NPIOF that have used Aristotle instead especially based on Tateru's blog which showed that if people wanted most could verify using information that wasn't theirs, but true information

The rest well all we can do is see what happens, but until i have definite and firm guidelines etc. from LL i will leave the assuming to others.

Bambi, right now virtually no one uses that bottom checkbox, to insist on the Aristotle age check as sole criteria, because it DOES NOT WORK. Too many false positives and flase negatives, and too many people who can't or won't use it.

What you are likely to find is that with the Adult continent and Adult-Content rated regions, the vast majority will continue to refuse to use the buggy Aristotle-only option, and will use only the Region-level flagging. Which will allow either payment info or a positive Aristotle check as a gating factor.

There will be some still whose content is clearly extreme, like the areas that portray fatal or maiming gory graphic effects as part of the "experience", which will still want to be able to flag their "use her while she's dying" parcel as requiring the Aristotle check as sole criteria for access. But those will be in the severe minority.

I'm trying to understand why we have to check any box's once we are in Ursula?
Isn't it server side to be age verified to even get in?

I think everyone and both sides of the argument have as much right to heard by all as anyone. I just hate the mis information that people are spreading and badly thought out posts because they haven't taken the time to read even LL posts beforehand both here and in world. I have seen some very good debates from both sides of the fence, that is until the trolls get started.

I have a Sims worth of adult content and will be forced to move. I agree with an adult continent and i agree that ALL accounts should be verified before they can play for accountability of their actions, just like it was before throwaway accounts started. What i disagree with is the way that LL are going about it at this time. However i am prepared to wait until LL brings out its guidelines and not assume to much at this point in time as many here are doing.

PIOF is all that is required to access "Adult" regions. Estate and parcel owners have the option of additionally requiring age verification. They can do that now.

From what i gathered from the last meeting was that LL will be doing what they can to help landowners, this is why I want to see firm definitions and how it will all happen first and not just from Blondin, who I would imagine is bound not to tell us a lot at the moment.

Time will tell i am sure and assuming is so not a good idea, i prefer cold hard facts first

Has Blondin had a sex change?

From what was said only verified accounts will be allowed to access the Ursula continent, no further verifying land will be needed by the landowners.

Mountains and Molehills spring to mind

You are probably right. My thinking was a way to keep the land speculators from buying crummy land and porning it up, in order to get their hands on what would be a sweatheart deal.

This would need to be thought out. Perhaps a cut off date, where land bought before that date would be allowed to relocate free and get access to a nice deal in the process.

Either way, its better then what these poor people are getting now, which even most supports of controls would agree ... is the back of a hand.

No. Ursula will require *either* payment info or Aristotle verification. Technically parcels with "extreme" content in Ursula will still need to flag their parcels to allow ONLY the Aristotle verified people, and for those parcels payment info will not be sufficent as an access gating. But we are talking about the far edge with that, not the strip clubs and BDSM merchants and the like.

I suggest you carefully re-read Blondin's post.

There are three gates:

I) Estate level gate where there are seperate checkboxes to limit access to PIU/PIOF accounts and Aristotle verified accounts

II) Region level gate where if the maturity level of the region is set to Adult rather than mature, access is limited to those who EITHER are PIU/PIOF OR Aristotle verified AND have indicated in the view they wish to access Adult content

III) Parcel level gate where there are seperate checkboxes to limit access to PIU/PIOF accounts and Aristotle verified accounts.

The controls for gates I and III were introduced in 2007 and predate the new proposed policy. The controls for gate II will be introduced this summer, but are not yet in the viewer (and in the process of being rolled out into the server code).

Under the new policy, access to Ursula will be controlled by gate II. Gate I will not apply. However, land owners could use Gate III if they choose to but are not required to.

Under the new policy, if a private region contains adult content, the island owner must limit access using gate II. The estate owner could also choose to use gate I, but is not required to. Landowners on that island, could also choose to use gate III but are not required to.

As such Blondin's statement are not contradictory in that PIOF is sufficient to access Ursula or an Adult themed private island. However, a resident may choose to impose further restrictions on accessing their land (such as Aristotle verfied only) in the same way that they might limit access to designated accounts or groups - however this is entirely voluntary and not mandated by the new policy regardless of the land content.

My own view is that when gate II is introduced, gates I and III are superfluous and really should be removed to avoid precisely the sort of confusion which is behind your posts.

Matthew

So now more of the Ursula sims are online.....

Any one else notice that?

When i say verified i meant by PIU, PIOF or Aristotle, as far as further verification I didn't think that had been written firm in stone yet as Ursula is for that content anyway the extreme end.

Will they? - I don't think that has been stated by LL. My understanding was that the new region Adult maturity level effectively superceded the current parcel and estate controls as regards LL mandated access restrictions based on the land's content! (not least of all, as at least one Linden thought that the Adult rating only applied to that "extreme" content).

Matthew

I have to disagree with that...the whole idea of Ursula was for "extreme content" =adult!
one step above mature which includes extreme.
As I understand it so far, matureland can have sex beds and the like they just cant be public or advertised. Ursula is rated "adult" I have to go with Lord's explanation

Stats from http://obijan.com/slstats/index.php

Payment status Count
Verified 171753
Freebie 3364091
Payment used 277040
Lifetime account 97681

so that adds up to 3,910,565 accounts

Verified = 4.39% of all accounts
Freebie = 86.03% of all accounts
Payment used or Lifetime account 9.58% of all accounts

Of course, the above numbers don't take into account the millions who tried once, left, and never came back, most of whom would be feebie accounts...

Those 40 new sims are gone now....major crash?
SL has never made a one shot continent this large before......thinking June is turning into August maybe for the swap

Sorry I didn't have the time to fully respond the other day. The delay has also allowed me to do some further research. Here is a list of links to help contact the proper authorities to pursue the possible criminal actions of Linden Labs.

eConsumer.gov, international database to file a complaint, maintained by FTC. Also contains links to participating countries consumer protection authorities.
http://www.econsumer.gov/

Internet Crime Complaint Center
http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx

Federal Trade Commission, U.S.A.,
International agencies with cooperations agreements with the FTC.
http://www.ftc.gov/oia/agreements.shtm

ICPN, International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network
http://www.icpen.org/about.htm
http://www.icpen.org/news.htm

As far as means that Linden Labs could communicate such things, I see several ways.;

1) Put a disclaimer on the before you buy page that tells you how much land you currently have and can purchase before moving up in tier.

2) Place disclaimers on the Auction pages.

3) Post on the log in screen a notice of major policy change, just as they did the last time they had a mandatory viewer update. Use the old news of the day that was removed a few months back.

I personally have not seen any attempt on Linden Labs part to directly inform their consumers, other than the forums or blogs, of vital information. They seem to be relying on residents word of mouth, and the ever vigilant residents that monitor the forums and blogs. To these residents, I thank you. I am left to wonder why they are relying on the residents to spread the word.

Yes typically LL's does not sell mainland plots directly. But they do profit from the sale of that “land”, they do not loose tier fees. In fact as I pointed out in an earlier post they can collect double tier for the same “land”. Personally my finger hovers over the abandon land button almost every day now, as I await their judgment. Abandoning the “land” will remove my funds and my replacement buyers funds from their collected tiers until they manage to re-auction it, in what surely will be soon a overly depressed “land” market. Happy to do my part. : ) I would rather be homeless in SL than give up the freedoms I thought I was buying. I unfortunatly just payed for a years membership.

Trolls, Misinformation, and badly thought out posts are all in the eye of the beholder. I have noticed that those who have made the mistake of investing a huge amount of time and money into SL seem to slap down quick anyone who disagrees with or makes any comment against the changes. The bottom line is that anything LL proposes they will support. They view anyone who disagrees as a threat that needs to be dealt with.

But Aristotle has some serious problems and using PIU/PIOF as 'verification' makes the word almost meaningless.

They say they're doing this forced move for my own good. So that I can feel all warm and fuzzy that RL kids won't have access to my adult stuff. Then they turn around and turn 'verified' into a total joke.

We're talking about kids who are already breaking the rules by being on the main grid. As long as any one of them can get a prepaid credit card and get 'verified' as easily as an actual adult can, LL has accomplished nothing vs this goal.

edit: if they had just said that they want to clean up the club scene on the mainland and left the whole 'verification' thing out of it, this whole project would annoy me far less than it does. They're really trying to make it into something it's not, though. And they absolutely know it, too.

Unfortunately I don't think there is an easy way of preventing the speculators which wouldn't also impact those with a legitimate request for the free move.

A cut off date might work if

a) LL make a proper announcement of the changes (e.g. not just by the blogs and forums which only a small proportion read but also in a MOTD etc.) before the cut off date

b) any MOTD etc. is kept live for at least a month (to allow for people on holiday etc. to see it)

Matthew

Blondin previously said that they will add additional sims to Ursula to accommodate everyone who has to move.

That has already been brought up in previous posts and Blondin Linden said he/she would talk with the powers that be. That was weeks ago in the earlier blogs and nothing yet. LL has known they would make these changes for weeks/months but no info to the SL public at large. How many people have bought mature mainland in the past few weeks so they can use it for adult activities. They are in for a very rude awakening.