Upcoming Changes for Adult Content: Answers to Questions

I've spent some time on reading the transcripts of the brown bag meetings (I have no idea if they are accurate representations of the meetings themselves, some other residents claim this isn't the case) and what strikes me as odd is the following.

Many questions have been asked in those meetings, some really good questions, but they get answered vaguely or not at all. Concerns are not adressed, or minimized. And most of all: every single answer begins with "I think...", "It might...", and more of those vague terms.

It looks like the Lindens in the brown bag meetings didn't know what is happening themselves and started giving personal interpretations of what is happening. I have the same feeling with Blondin. It is still impossible for me to know how many of the answers are based on personal opinion and how many are based on finalized policy.

The sense of personal opinions gets strengthened not only by using the "I think..." but even more by the inconsistencies that exist between Brown Bag and Blondin answers. A small example: BDSM is a banned word and can't be advertised. But I recall reading in one of the transcripts that it wouldn't be a banned word.

In fact I should make a cross check between Blondin's and Brown Bag answers, but I don't have the courage to do so ^^ I fear it will turn out that either the ones at the Brown Bag will have to swallow their answers, or Blondin.

In the transcripts I can't find the agreement of store owners and others that LL claims is there. I recall only one - unsupported by statistics - mention of support for the changes.

I don't really know what to think of this all, but it shows me more and more that the basics of finding support for policy changes aren't known to LL. At the same time laying smokescreens seems to be a core-ability of some...

Aen

So make a second business division that does not sell "smut". Some people in SL have as many as 4 high profile businesses under 4 separate accounts.

Wow! sums up the current status beautifully - thank you for doing this

^L^

I already do that and was in the process of amalgamating them into the one brand.

My response is why should I split them? Running a business in here is a time consuming activity anyway and to add to it by having to replicate the same business marketing strategy, having multiple sites which don't drive traffic to each other is just plain ridiculous as I've found out.

and I don't see why I should be forced onto the pg mainland when the majority of my customers are able to enter ursula anyway.

What? What the hell is that supposed to mean? I think I know, but I'll draw my conclusions further down this list.



These all seem fine and reasonable. (If a bit contradictory in regards to buying land)



This *would* be fine, if only they'd tell us what bloody terms to *avoid*! I can envision someone taking over an hour to create an ad that could be seen by all with this "hit & miss" method.



Okay - here is where I chime in about this: all this seems geared toward *hiding* what LL deems adult content. They don't care that it's there, only that no one can *know* it's there - even to the extent that the search categories won't even let you suspect it's there by having it *as* a category. "Other" indeed! The keyword filter seems geared the same way. It *could* be inferred by this that LL's *real* policy change is: "Hi! We don't care how smutty you folks want to be - hump like bunnies! But we don't want any new customers seeing you perverts, okay? Thanks!"

I do *not* see why the new resident-side maturity rating under preferences wouldn't just fix all of this. Let those who wish not to see even a jot of sexuality choose to block it client side and stop inconveniencing everyone else. *IF* LL's goals were as they stated, this would be sufficient.

But that's not the *real* goal. The REAL goal is to shuttle off anything that might mar the clean image they now want. And like all groups throughout history who wanted to be seen as clean and pristine, draconian law must be enforced to see that *anything* that might besmirch that image is forced "underground" (as it were). It's not about making the experience more "predictable". It's about whitewashing everything.



These are also fine, as far as controls go. With the exception of those who are NPIOF and aren't able to change that (for one reason or another). They won't like this one bit, and I don't blame them. But I'm also uncertain how to fix their issues - LL has said they don't *need* to verify with Aristotle, but credit cards are much more difficult to acquire in Europe than the US. And though Paypal doesn't require a credit card (only a bank issued card), I can see why some people might not want to release their bank account info to *anyone*.




While as an Estate Manager this would make my job easier, I *dread* what griefers and irresponsible folk will do will this nifty new feature. I think I'd rather fill out my own forms than make it ridiculously easy for people to casually AR others. [EDIT: The only change I really want to see on the AR form is more space to actually give that "detailed description" of the violation they insist on. Or allow notecard attachments. As it stands now, you have barely a paragraph to describe the problem, and often that's inadequate to cover *why* you are sending in the AR in the first place. But - since many people generally send them for frivolous reasons, I suppose my concern in this regard is the minority.]



Brilliant. So I can kiss any private time I get goodbye and look forward to constant interruptions even on my personal non-working time. Oh joy. [EDIT: Not to mention the loverly stalker potential.]

So who here would be interested in getting together to file for an injunction on the grounds of lost business, discrimination, and unfair business practices?

What I was HOPING was that having the skeptics (us) look at it we can help them spot the inconsistencies - kind of like the supposedly inadvertent change to the definition of PG that Blondin says will get taken down....

They have asked for our opinions and help and I see this as one way that all interested parties can help to get as consistent a set of documentation that will help us all going forward.

Absolutely - and if you took what I said as meaning that we shouldn't be doing that, well, I definitely didn't mean it. I think having this reference to "here's what has been said" is excellent, and gives us a way to co-ordinate and call out the inconsistencies.

According to the release notes posted here so far, once 1.23 goes into effect, it will not be POSSIBLE for a store located in the Adult rated sims to place an ad that is not rated Adult. So if a clothing store only wants the freedom to sell all types of clothing, from ballroom gowns to Gorean silks, they wll have to move to Adult sims and thereby limit their customer base to ONLY those customers capable fo accessing Adult sims; or they will have to remain in a Mature sim but be unable to advertise the full range of wha they offer, still maiking it impossible for a potential customer seeking Gorean silks to know that they are available at that store. The merchant is screwed either way.

The only viable option for most merchants selling mixed goods will be to have a PG/Mature-rated store on the mainland, and a seperate Adult-rated annex on an Adult sim just for the questionable stuff.

Hmm, a German throwing stones at other nations for starting wars?

Unless the land swap policy has changed recently, private residences are not eligible. If you own Mature rated land and don't have an adult business, no land swap for you!

Doesn't do much good to advertise your business if you can't mention the business name or show it does it.

Can you prove any of that has taken place?

Considering what they've just done to Prilis Boa, I don't think the message is getting through to them. *sigh*

i was sure that sometime down the last week he said the swap was available for all those who wanted it.. but do you think I can find the post now?? grrrr

update the blog post to reflect the old/current (?) position.

Yes any business that has Gorean or Bdsm merchandise or any other kind of arbitrarily decided "adult" merchandise is now being filtered through the new search system in 1.23. That means LL is allowing free and open advertisement to some businesses but restricting others. That reeks of discrimination, it interferes with free commerce since obviously the filtered businesses cannot get their adds across to all users the way others can, and thus by interfering with commerce, and disrupting trade of some businesses and not others, as well as arbitrarily redoing the tos without customer consent (which is in violation of a court order made against SL in another famous case that SL lost btw), that is the very definition of unfair business practices.

Also a summary posted here:

http://www.slapt.me/wiki/index.php/Summary_of_Adult_Content_Changes

and I linked the Satiated Desires page from the SLapt page

They are a list of questions and answers that were asked during the Brown Bag meetings. They are not even close to being verbatim transcripts transcripts of the meetings.

They're the Cliff's Notes versions of the meetings.

When I initially read this page, I chuckled at this one...how would a PG resident be in a position to even attempt to purchase Adult land... I can see their possibly being able to right-click on a Mature parcel that's adjacent to a PG parcel...but how would they even be able to be anyplace NEAR Adult land?

I originally said:
There is no reason you have to connect your outside website to your avatar name or real name on file with Linden Labs. You can, if you want to, but you don't have to.



My point was that Linden Labs cant tell the difference between Me putting my own listing on a third party website, or someone else doing it. If I am banned from SL because *someone else* made a website listing "Cool Bondage Shops to visit in SL" and listed my store there with a SLurl, thats unfair and unreasonable.

But unless I make it known that "BondagevendorXXX" on the third party site and "DanielRavenNest Noe" are the same real life person, how will Linden Labs know if I did it or someone else did?

Oh! And how cool is that! It will make my stalkers' jobs soooooo much easier, especially since they know my usual haunts! [I'm being intentionally facetious...they are "stalking" me with my consent ]

/me blinks in disbelief..

What is it about LL that they have an absolute abhorrence of the concept of privacy??

In light of the above quoted section of the official Second Life wiki, I would like to ask Blondin Linden (or any other Linden appropriate to clarify policy issues) the following questions:

1. What 60-day transition period?

2. From what state to what state will the afore-mentioned transition occur? (Or from "what policy" to "what policy" if that is the more relevant term?)

3. Will there be further related state-changes that will occur after the aforementioned 60 days? (In other words, will there be a forth-coming transition period AFTER the one mentioned in the quoted wiki above?)

4. Will the "Other" category mention in the quoted wiki be visible in search after the afore-mentioned 60-day transition period? Related to that broad question, will the "Other" category's visibility in search be restricted via the maturity rating of avatars only? Or will it take into account settings in Preferences? Will an avatar who is cleared to view Adult Content be able to see places in the "Other" category in Places search after the 60-day transition period mentioned? What about in All search? What about in Classifieds search?

I and others would like to know more about this and clarification would be appreciated.


Persephone

By being on a private Estate. It's still apparently going to be possible for private sims to have an Adult-rated region adjacent to a Mature or even PG-rated region.

You would do better with breach of contract and some form of discrimination/deprivation of civil rights argument (as in you pay your money like everyone else but you're getting treated differently because of your lifestyle)

Breach of contract would be the one I'd think would work the best- you bought something and they are going to change it into something else, and *maybe* give you a shot a retaining something *similar* to what you bought.

^V^

OK i will trust you on your word and Bad Barney