Upcoming Changes for Adult Content: Answers to Questions

I went over to have a look at the shop and it will be very interesting to see whether he's forced to move.

apart from a play area his shop is far less descriptive than mine - although it is a little more hard core in the items for sale (go and check out the hamster wheel, I loved it. Was going to buy one and send it to the lindens lol)

but tbh I doubt there are many lindens who would even begin to be able to work out just what the toys are for. There's literally no product descriptions of any kind. Someone would actually have to grab a demo, take it home and try and work out how to use it to even begin to work out if they're offended.

I don't think that just having toys that have a male appendage as part of the build would qualify, since your discretion on their use is almost absolute. although anything is possible I suppose.

I'm beginning to suspect this is now boiling down to advertising. If you chose to advertise your wares and use the forbidden terms then you become adult. If you don't advertise then you're fine.

bah. If I could I'd bill LL for the amount of time they've wasted of mine trying to work out what to do. It looks like I'm in a holding pattern for the next couple of months as they bumble and stumble their way to a conclusion.

Interesting thought. I figure the average billing rate for the regular contributors to this blog is US$500 a day. Linden Lab gets all this brainpower for free. Adding it all up, I reckon LL has tossed about $100,000 worth of consulting services in the trash bin.

It already is...nearly half of us are bots. So put any thoughts of individuality or freedom out of your mind. Be a mindless drone. Do only what you're allowed.

This is fun! Of course it is. Read the sign. It says this is a fun place, so of course it must be so.

Let's take a look at what's going to happen to the SL economy under the new policy...and let's just look at merchants and services. That is to say, stores and clubs. We won't even begin to talk about the land business. Under the new policy:

No Payment Info on File customers will not be able to buy from businesses flagged Adult.

NPIOF employees won't be able to get to work at the Adult businesses that employ them.

Adult customers will not patronize M or PG businesses (for example, Masters/Mistresses will no longer be able to bring a leashed slave to these areas without risking an AR).

Businesses that sell PG and Mature items (sexy clothes, for example) will see an additional drop in business as the REASON for wearing sexy clothes goes away.

Customers who aren't age verified won't patronize age-flagged parcels (and that's about half of everybody, according to a current poll in the Resident Answers forum).

Unless LL fixes the verification software, age-flagged parcels will continue to exclude, more or less at random, even those residents who ARE verified.

In short, the SL economy will be devastated.

But that's OK...the grid will be safe for everyone. We will all have a "predictable" SL experience. I predict that we will all go broke.

from one of those locked threads post number 5 i think it was.

it's a month later and tbh I don't think anything has changed.

In Canada, you can't work, breathe or eat without a SIN (Social Insurance Number). It's used for everything; you can't buy a can of dogfood without it. No SIN and you are a non-person.

Blondin et al:

I entreat you to read this and CAREFULLY consider what it says:

Hello folks, I'm relatively new to SL (started in January) and have been following this topic pretty closely. I'm part of "*I* Am Adult Content," and due to being in the right place at the right time, I am co-owner of an adult nightclub. It's on a Private Estate, so we're not in danger of being re-zoned, but what starts on the mainland can easily spread to other areas, so this is an important topic for me.

This reminds me of one of the most glaring problems that I see facing businesses in RL. Namely, useless building security. I live in NYC, which understandably means that most businesses here take building security extremely seriously. Never mind that not one criminal act has ever been thwarted by it, or that - paradoxically - the biggest crimes of this new century have been pulled by people with corporate ID cards. Since real-estate attorneys figured out that building management could get sued by tenants if a "crook" got in and did something, everyone must now show a company-issued ID card or else present government ID to get into any building. I work in sales in RL, so you can imagine what a headache this is. From time to time I sign my name Benjamin Franklin for grins and giggles - and to date I've never been questioned on it. (If you’re wondering why I use Mr. Franklin’s name, it’s because of his well-known stance on surrender of liberties.)

But, let us wave all that away and work under the theory that building security works. Even if this shielded the building from some measure of crime, this would not stop someone from bringing a weapon into the building. Ever. Not once. I can walk into the Pentagon carrying a weapon, and not one person would stop me. Don't believe me? Read on.

Anyone who's had a leg injury or other problem with their ambulatory organs can attest to the fact - not the conjecture but the fact - that you can waltz right into the office of the President of Ford or the White House Lobby with a cane, crutch or other aid. You are not asked if you have a disability or injury. You are not asked to prove that you need such a device. I can tell you from firsthand experience that using such a device as a weapon is actually a pretty easy thing to accomplish. So, the best building security in the world cannot keep out someone who's determined to do something stupid, dangerous and illegal.

I tell that story to point out that, in much the same way, the best age verification system can be countermanded by a 10 year old with access to his father's driver's license. Nothing the Lindens implement is going to stop that kid from walking into the Mature or Adult areas of SL. It's useless, fruitless and pointless to think that it will help with that problem one bit.

So, why am I posting here? Well that is a simpler answer. I want LL to be honest about what is going on. To tell us who is suing them (or threatening to do so). To tell us what form of government or private organization is forcing their hand. The one thing that is painfully obvious is that the Lindens know this will be a gesture and nothing more. They understand that this system will not work for anyone even slightly determined not to play by the rules. So why do they insist on treating us *all* like underage residents and not tell us the real reasons for this policy change?

Why, in short, are they inflicting the facade of security onto a world that knows that *they* know it will be a phantom object blocking the door; but not trusting us by telling us why they are doing it?

As I say, I am new here. I do not purport to have any authority holding up this soapbox I'm standing on. But I am not new to online communities - not by a long shot. Implementation of odd policies to appease those who can damage a company is not new, and doesn't need to lead to the downfall of an online community. Failure to continue to build trust between the owners of a virtual community and the citizens of it will always lead to failure of the community. It has been proven time and time again, I can only hope that it will not come to pass here.

well there ARE product descriptions, but you have to click the vendors on the ground floor to be handed the notecard... mostly copies of the items "help" card so quite specific about what they do...

In my opinion that I'm going to have to move I am basically running on the old adult media definition.. "exposed flesh, top shelf and possibly with a screening wrapper. Visible penetration, hardcore and only in adult stores."

Get on any poseball on my demo floor and the latter is almost inevitable.

Therefore I'm planning future biz strategy on having to move. If I dont "have" to I'm in an evil situation of facing the choice between spending money to buy on Ursula or just tier down and sell the mainland plot, because I'd be too much of an AR magnet for the prudes. Risking a suspension because somebody doesnt like my products is too much of a risk. Cant run a biz when suspended.

My prediction too...shame M.Linden can't see it. He was in typical PR mode when tackling questions regarding his Economy Blog a few days ago......to his credit he did answer more frequenly than Blondin has done across any of these threads.

Interesting stuff. Unfortunately, it doesn't say or do anything about the people who simply *don't want to see* explicit content, even by accident, and since they consider themselves the "normal" ones, *obviously* it's those perverts who have to move.

You're also swimming against the tide with regards to empirical proof or *anything*. the prejudice that we're dealing with is *faith-based*.
Some People have *faith* that whatever their mores happen to be, they are *right*, and other mores are *wrong*. I have actually seen, for example someone make the argument that if two people of the same sex can marry, then it changes the whole nature of their *own* marriage (only if you wanted to marry someone of the same sex in the first place, sez I ) or childless-by-choice couples who are against same-sex marriage because "Marriage is for procreation! No procreation, no marriage!" (Really? what about *you*? sez I)

All of these arguments are variations on a theme. "Your definition of "normal" is different from mine, and *I'M RIGHT*!"

Everything else is a smoke screen to prop them up when someone questions them.

The healthiest people, IMHO are the ones who say "Yes, there is such a thing as right and wrong, but 90% of life doesn't fall under either category. MOst of human behavior is local variations without much moral weight."

Showing these findings to someone witha fundamentally *healthy* outlook on morality will do some good. Unfortunately, they are in the minority and tend not to shout a lot

-V-

This whole mess brings me to the conclusion, that the most harmful and inappropriate experience that minors can have here is that they will be fooled, betrayed and getting lies around the clock, like they're getting it from every other company, organisation, institution and political/economical system from A to Z, but stop: back to start: they are kids. If we needed years....to learn that..., how long will they need? Maybe some billion dollars longer and some mountains of trampled nervs higher than we...

How moralic that is...

Not that a poseball or a nipple would be the truth...but it is somehow no lie...it is just what it is.

Daisy and Donald Duck are a lie...any brown lemonade is a lie...botox and silicon is a lie...plus any advertising and product, idol and idea.

While establishing that, LL lies to us, to be able to lie more comfortable to the kids, than we would allow LL lying to us.

With their "Tao", wich is a complete lie from A to Z too.

A very expensive lie, if one believed...

These PG people...they are very easy to manipulate, no matter wich age, 0 - 99.

They are configurated and formatted to buy lies without questions.

Lol.

Funny.

Or sad.

in the last week have noticed, some not too subtle changes:

1) private island sim's, now marked (Mature)!

2) clubs/groups moving to private island sim's marked (Mature)!

3) the once touted, safety from mis-treatment/abuse by private landlords,
is topped by LL, and private island sim's are the preference for Mature activities!

4) Will consider a NPIOF to be a Under Age SL avitar,
hense, NPIOF == under 18!

5) Will see if being PIU, continues to allow access to Mature area's,
Mainland, ursala or private island sim?

TBD!

Another poster wrote it:



Now then...

Nemo Zsun makes two very interesting points:

1) Age verification is "expensive" for the community in that they have to jump though hoops.

2) As a practical matter, age verification and adult segregation won't work -- kids can easily get into any place where information is examined by remote control
instead of, for instance, a person being examined at the door to a nightclub.

In the RL case, yes, a few almost-old-enough kids will slip by with fake IDs, but clever 12 year-olds will NEVER be allowed in. This is not true online.

3) Linden Labs knows all this, yet they are doing it anyway, and they will not say why.

4) LL is cutting it's own throat because they're pissing all their customers off. Perhaps they see themselves as a monopoly and they're being arrogant, like Microsoft.

But I don;t think so.

So why is this happening?

Either they're being threatened by the same kind of assholes we just threw out on Nov 4th, or or it's about money.

If they were being threatened, it would be in their interest to tell everyone who is doing it, and at very least, not in their interest to hide their tormentor's' identity.

It's about money.

I heard that LL is selling SL, and that the new buyer is the same people who own fox news-- the 'uglicans.

Since we users can't outbid fox, and since any (American) corporation will do ANYTHING horrible to their customers if it thinks they will make more money, we the users have no "pull" at all as long as we patronize SL.

In other words, the party's over.

I just read about something called OpenSim, which I am going to invistigate after I hit "submit reply".

If it is any good, I shall go there exclusively, modulo coming back here once to tell you all to go there too.

-- faye kane, homeless brain
http://tinyurl.com/fayescave

before I go sleeping herein early morning in Europe, thingy fits somehow to the theme, hehehe

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28GaKoCuobU&feature=related

g'night

make it loud, do the big screen and think on the Lab.

Key: "You've sensed that somethings watching you..."

It is my opinion that Aristotle is on a witch hunt to document registered sex offenders and keep track of what they are doing in order to claim that the data the are collecting is important and to push a change of privacy laws. Playing the Hero to justify their intrusion on privacy so to speak. Read their summarizations at the end of the Berkman Convention. Almost every company that took part advised that they believed educating parents and children about the Internet was the key and most agreed that Identity Verfication and Age Verfication could not be implemented in a way that would protect minors, or anyone else's rights. Yet Aristotle went on about how they were going to continue to press Myspace for information on all of the RSO's it had in their database, claiming Myspace is protecting the RSO's by not reliquishing the data. Myspace is simply trying to follow through with protecting rights to privacy for everyone, not just RSO's. So why would Aristotle need that information from Myspace if they could simply get it from Linden Labs? If Aristotle is willing to assume liability from Linden Labs, and make assurances against children getting Age-Verfied, then they must be documenting that information. What do they tell the law when it comes knocking on their door?

Anyway, this is just my theory, but I found Aristotle's comments pretty telling about their integrity (pun intended).

It doesn't need to. Those people already have the same level of control *NOW* that they will when this Adult Continent stupidity has gone full swing. There still will be Adult content on the mainland, and it is more likely that they will "happen" across it than now. At least now, when they see an escort club BUILDING across the street, they know they can avoid it. Now, it will be all be driven to "private residences", so these people who don't want to see it won't have any warning that when they are camming around looking at the wonderful PRIVATE residence build, turn a corner and.. OH MY GOD THERE IS PIXEL SEX GOING ON!!!! As for people bringing it to THEM, NOTHING proposed will address that. NADA.

The proper approach is what WE ALREADY EFFING HAVE. Label it properly and profusely, keep it indoors (or at least out of cam range outdoors), and don't force it on anyone. That's what the CURRENT ToS says. We don't need ANY of this new BS that Blondin, et al is spearheading. NONE of it. It is nothing more than pandering to the least common denominator, forcing the expense on those who least deserve to have to pay for it.



I'm well aware of the major sources of the idiocy, and I realize it is a torrent. I don't care. I'll fight it, even change the course of the damn river if I have to, because it is a campaign of inanity, proffered by morons who have no better purpose in life than to create solutions in search of problems.

I am printing this out and hanging it on the wall, where I will refer to eat every Election Day.

*The rest of your post wasn't too shabby either.

I wonder....

Is all this being done to coerce more people into paying to play?

Looks like it to me.


Muirdris

I am almost afraid to answer as any response I give seems to offend. We may just have to agree to disagree. If at any point in this my opinions offend, take the path you are advocating and stop reading. Fair game to say at what point you stopped reading and to discuss what you feel comfortable discussing, but I am not saying any of this to offend nor am I argueing for the sake of arguing. That said, I am not going to apologize for having an opinion, or for disagreeing with you or anyone else.

My primary concern is that if there is no viable means of confiming age, then society's usual answer is more often 'shut it down' than 'oh, ok then.' And as for bottom lines, concerned parents do not care, and can even turn that around in their minds and think of it as 'those profiting off such activites.' Rationalization happens on all sides of issues and can be very strong. Loss of perspective can be easy, especially when someone feels they have a personal stake and maternal instints are among the strongest we humans have.

And to me, the reactions of society are not all overreactions. I do feel (partly based on personal experiences) that placing all the onus on parents is not sufficient. I know you and others here disagree.. we may just have to leave it at that though since every time I try to explain myself, the very act of defending my opinion seems to offend. I do feel that parents do have responsibility, but that society has some responsibility too, that if we do not take some of the responsibility, it makes it much harder for the parents to live up to theirs.



Often they are in denial, but even when they are not, even when they are trying their best, it is easier for kids to take it seriously when a parent says 'no' when society is not saying 'who cares' or 'its all the parents responsibility.'



The goal is to slow down youngsters and to deter those we can. 100% prevention of anything is an impossible goal. If you set an impossible goal then of course it will be impossible, but that does not mean there are not plausable goals. The courts know this and do not strike down laws simply because they will not be 100% effective. If that was the criteria, we would have no laws at all. The courts also strike down laws that try to be too reaching for similar reasons. The Adam Walsh Act may yet prove one of those laws that is considered too reaching, in full or in part.



The porn industry is bound by the existing law, which requires id checks to confirm age of all participants and record keeping to confirm those checks have been done. The only question is whether the requirements extend to virtual sex performances or not and that is in the courts. Whether it should be or not is a separate question, but the fact is that the intent of the law and its amendment is primarily to keep kids from being performers in anything considered pornographic regardless of medium.



The 18+ rule is the rule for viewing. The rule for participation is age verification and proof thereof is neccessary and is intended to ensure that the material *is* legal. To the best of my knowledge, that act is not under challenge, merely the amendment which extends the original act to additional mediums. Note that I do not know that those aspects of the act should definately be upheld or struck down. I can understand reasons for them being there, and can make a case in favour of upholding them, but am not a lawyer, am not well versed in the relevant precidents and am not going to second guess the outcome either way.



Actually in SL, much of the content seems to be participatory. In fact, most bdsm or 'forced' related sims I have looked at quite reasonably discourage people from observing too much as it can break the RP aspects and/or result in non-consentual situations (a couple wanting a private whatever will usually not want an audience, and if they do want one it would presumably be an event where spectators are encouraged. And for anything to be observed, unless the performers are bots, there are still performers.



Appearances are important as (besides pacifying the masses), they can have a deterence effect in and of themselves... what less draconian means do you favour though?



Again, I agree that this has been handled very poorly, and it may not be easy for LL to salvage. The fact that the core may be good or even neccessary does not change the fact that the body is currently likely too rotten to bear.

Actually IIRC, there are clauses regarding checking for registered sex offenders in the existing legislation, but I cannot remember the details as I was not looking at those sections of the act at the time.

That is sort of why I asked earlier in the thread exactly what Blondin's position and role in this is. I was not aware (or had forgotten) about the Phillip quote, but Jack's version backed up Phillip. This makes me wonder if Blondin's is really the intended 'official' position, or if he is just gone maverick on this.



One thing I have learned is that it is less often too late to get a train back on the rails than people figure. It usually just takes the will and strength of purpose to do so.



Lol, that is actually a pretty safe list (sadly).



Lol

The code already supports greying someone out when they are muted. And there's code to make things disappear. People could just have a setting saying "i don't want to see it" and all that stuff would just turn grey or clear. Problem solved.

If the Lindens intent on cramming all the "Adult" things pertaining to sex and violence in one area, will there be another one for the different religions as well? Seems fair to me. Oh, sorry. I said "fair". How foolish of me.

Muirdris

No my 2 questions from the start involved the use of a private residence with BDSM toys on Mature mainland which originally was listed in Search, open to visitors and where I hosted a party once a month which was listed in Events. I never considered it a "public" venue which I equate with malls, clubs and so on...places intended for commercial purposes.

Once Blondin clarified that ANY parcel listed in Search is basically "public" and subject to the changes if it has adult content such as BDSM toys I moved on to the question of whether a private residence not listed in Search or Events which contains "adult" content in open areas such as gardens would still be allowed. Blondin's response was it would be considered an "adult build".

Morganna

I loved reading this, specifically the conclusion. Thank you.

((("In the final analysis, affirmative educational approaches are more likely to be effective than technological "fixes." )))