Upcoming Changes for Adult Content: Answers to Questions

See that's where I see things a little differently- SL is *still* in the crib. it's dressed in pretty clothes, and mummy has put some pretty ribbons in its hair, but it hasn't learned to do much more than crawl and poop itself yet, and it can't say much more than "Ga-ga, Goo-goo, Gorean master"

And LL *is* strangling it in its crib.


-V-

True. The Lindens try to make kind of culture-politcs with heavy armed instructions and poisoned advices. 8 a day...provided by B. Linden, driven by the management...

In fact they try to establish a culture-revolution in Mao-style.

They act here with different social biotopes and a globewide community.

This can only happen, if necessary, but it is not necessary, but if it would be necessary, in a non-reactionary and in a non-repressive way.

To do so they avoid strict and with no mercy. They act strict reactionary and strict repressive. Unfortunately.

Because we tried to help them to fix that in a non-reactionary and in a non-repressive way, with the hint from the customer base, that they can do a PG area for the strict prudish ones and ready - and in worst case they can give them a separate enter zone at the viewer UI, like they do it with the aditi and agni grid.

No changes on other islands, mainland, regions, lots, nor in the viewer.

Just the move, to give this Ursula thing to the so called PG people.

No additional ratings, no try to limitate our Second Life, wich is adult, wich is self-responsible since we are 18+ and grown up under modern constitutions and since we manage the peaceful neighborship between all possible lifestyles by ourselfs and with success since long, since 6 years and longer!

This way to do a second life is waterproofed and successful like no other model on earth.

Ceera said QUANTITY not Quality as you quoted

But, and this is the point, it's that "unrealistic" stuff that people seem to be most passionate about.

I was trying to diferrentiate between the actual advocates and those who just use it as a convenient excuse not to be considerate of others.

BTW, that's spelled "Jinnan Tonix", and if you're ever been to a sci-fi con, you'd *know* that, bub!

-V-

Really? Most of the discussion seems to be about the more realistic stuff (human avatars) rather than furries or inanimate objects.

If realism is not an issue, why do people care about their avatars' appearances? Why do people want avatars at all? Why not be content with stick men or blocks? This whole 'these are too cartoony to be real' arguements seem much more like rationalizations than as fact.

At science fiction conventions? Most of the discussion is about Borg Cubes vs. Death Stars vs Skylark of Valeron, and whether Lando Calrissian is a better shot than Marc DuQuesne.

Now *there's* an Idea! I'm sure a *lot* more people are upset over that than "adult content". And BTW blondin, Bloodlines Mosquitos are *not* adult content. they need their own island, k?
-V-

But LL says rules for 'private' residences are not changing...

I'd agree that this is really all about Lawyer Linden being able to sleep better at night but if they don't touch private places (which are not at all actually private), I don't see what it really buys them.

Or it could be all about PR but they must know that some RL reporters 6 year old kid is going to get 'verified' using Aristotle and this will explode in their faces more than usual because it'll happen AFTER they told us they had made SL safe against kids..

/me continues to not get why LL is so keen on this project. It just doesn't make sense to me..

Agree. Most science fiction is about aliens with antlers.

Fandom isn't SF. http://bp3.blogger.com/_4OYGjUrdllo/SI_Yjea9bNI/AAAAAAAAFrY/xON8cYJzKyw/s1600-h/homeless_klingon_is_lol_lg.jpg

Hey, go get your own thread!

Blood and Shale!

REDACTED

Fault in Clumsyuser.dll

Since Argent and I are both Furries...

And anyone mistaking furries for being real either needs a better video card, better glasses, or a psych ward.

I do find myself suddenly wondering about how this whole thing can possibly be successful. Afterall, the blog post in the SL Blog announcing this issue and discussion has suddenly turned into a pornographic link festival -
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/community/blog/2009/03/12/upcoming-changes-for-adult-content

Scroll down to the bottom and check the trackbacks. lol If they can't even keep porn out of their blog posts (one of them has been there for three days now) I can't see how they can hope to keep it off the main continent. But oh well.

I'm an anthropomorphic manifestation of primal chaos.

OK, a *cute* anthropomorphic manifestation of primal chaos. Whatever.

There's no rationalization to it. The fact is, SL avatars do not look realistic enough to be mistaken for real people. Whether or not people *want* them to look realistic as possible is irrelevant. They simply do not look that realistic. Saying so is not rationalizing anything.

Mmm, I love watching artists whip together a good Crow Sandwich in a rich, creamy Irony sauce. Sadly, the people who should eat crow, never seem to have the stomach for it.

And you would *know* that it is spelled differently on different worlds. I just choose not to use its 'proper' name. And since you *knew* what I was refering to, I put it to you that I conveyed my meaning perfectly.

(not to mention since the last time I went to a science fiction convention or read the Hithchikers 5 book trilogy was years ago, I think I am not sure how much I can be reasonably faulted for not remembering the 'proper' spelling of the name of a specific fictional drink (or series of drinks.. it can hardly be considered one drink), especially when I was correct in conveying my knowledge of its nature and existance).

ARGGGGH! But *WHY* do people want them to look more realistic, especially in the context of this discussion?

Why is that not relevant other than your not wanting a law to apply to you? It is not 'merely a depiction' when there is someone choosing its movements in an interactive fashion either.

The *intent* is for them to look real and they look as real as people have been able to get them. *And* the intent to make them look as real as possible is to engender a greater emotional tie to the interaction. It is not merely out of boredom or some academic intellectual challenge.

Saying they do not look real is just a rationalization to bypass those other facts.

Lol, you know I am talking about the discussion here, not at science fiction conventions. You are better than that and should not need to try to bait me like that.

I was trying to say that though.. I can see how I might have been misunderstood, but I my intent was not to suggest that furries should be discussed more here as adult content.

To the contrary, I was trying to say that the 'cartoon' defence has a much stronger case where furries are concerned, since none of us are anthropomorphic non-human animals in RL.

More realistic, or less stupid? In modifying avatars for SL, they are the same thing. I would not want my avatar to appear perfectly accurate and photorealistic, even if that was possible in SL (it isn't). But I don't like it to look like I'm a refugee from a SuperNintendo, either. MORE detailed does not equal realistic looking; forget about real itself.