RC Questions

The anime 'Legend of the Overfiend' (Chôjin densetsu Urotsukidôji ) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108461/ is rated NC-17, and fully animated. I am sure I could find other examples if you really insist.



A standard for which there are many exceptions, and many sites that simply have been shut down by their ISPs or other agencies. Use of caps does not change that. Why do you think the sites that *do* use more than just 'are you 18?' do so? Many use third party screening. LL are not the only ones concerned, and those sites that do use third party screening still exist, still have customers.

For that matter, even the majority of ones that use 'are you 18?' are pay sites... yet those sites exist and presumably make enough money to continue to do so. And credit card or paypal information on file is currently planned as a flagging option for LL. How is the current plan the end of SL, exactly?

The current plan eliminates 59 years progress in the western world. The plan is the end of SL 2009 and starts SL 1950.

But based on year 2009 high tech equipment...

For you it will feel like Canada or USA 1950 and for me it will feel like Germany or Austria 1950.

There is basicly no difference. Establishment and Philistines were the same on both sides of the ocean in the last century 50's.

If you login in end of June it will feel like jumping into an empty pool. It will be a hard, dry landing..., ouch...

I've been engaged in brutal hand-to-microchip combat- generic, non-specific BSOD errors for no particular reason. The kind that the microsoft KB says "run a virus scan"

Until I figure out what is wrong, I'll be stuck on my laptop- which only handles SL if my av stands completely still

Anyway, hopefully I'll get things squared away soon

^V^

interesting note on the crosses

I had a plot of land i was gathering up micro-parcels together to build a shop.
I usually landscape with trees and things, until it is big enough to rez my 25x15 shop on.
Some of the things I decorate with are a pentagram, columns, statues etc. tasteful goth.
I also usually leave the land for sale while I pull together micros.

One of the plots I am working on was purchased and now has a cross on it.

I'm not sure you can usefully compare the business model of a pay site, which has, as its potential customer base, everyone who has a credit card and internet access, with that of an sl business, which has a somewhat smaller potential market.

A better comparison might be Google taking it into its head that the best way to ensure a "predicatable user experience" for people was to require them to age-verify (rather than just select a preferred filtering level) with Google before allowing them to find certain types of content.

While I have no idea what effect such a bold decision on Google's part would have on various types of website, I am pretty sure it would not be in the best long-term business interests of Mssrs Google.

The only Birds I like are the non feathered variety lol

A completely different situation. The internet gambling legislation was aimed primarily at fraud and crime prevention, and many of the betting venues were overseas- the only way to regulate the trade and protect consumers was to do it at the source. Not to mention that heavy backing of the legislation by casinos that the interests that own many of them.



It is not impossible to censor/block internet access. but in order to do so, you have to be willing to behave like China does,and criminalize certain content and restrict overseas connections. That sort of thing won't fly in the US if people know about it. more and more, democratic governments are learning that if they want to restrict certain things, like the internet, they have to behave in a somewhat less than democtatic fashion. And frankly, I'm one of those folks that thinks that if you had to burn down the villiage to save it, maybe you should have gone in with a better plan.



first of all, the restriction of certain forms of entertainment only works as well as it does because they are willing to let a certain amount slip through the cracks. same as Automobile safety- there is a point where it simply isn't efficient to protect people from themselves past a certain point. It is either too expensive, too restrictive on others, or too difficult logistically.

Second, with the exception of ISPs refusing adult material, your examples are all instances of criminal activity. Criminal activity isn't protected, in any situation. one's only option is to go someplace where your activity isn't illegal (which is why there are so many internet businesses located on pacific island of Vanuatu- Hint to LL- you'd have fewer troubles if you bought servers *there* than in DC )

Needless to say, those examples have limited application to this argument as does the whole "it's not impossible to censor the internet" line of argument.

^V^

Cool thread thanks for pointing it out here, I love a good debate

Then those things are available to people one year under the age of 18 aren't they? SL however, is *not*. that makes it a basically an "x" rated concern from the "who is allowed to play" point of view.
Not everyone in SL has to wallow in x-rated material, but it is a requirement that one at least be *allowed* to do so in the state of california.

This is a fundamental aspect of SL- No kids allowed- never. not even for a field trip.



Excuse me, but the fact that some sites choose not to host such material, or that some sites step over the line into providing *illegal* material and are punished for it, has no bearing on what the *legal requirements are*. They are not what you *wish* them to be, nor are they what is convenient for your argument. They are, what they are. The exceptions are *local* laws known as "community standards" statutes, which govern zoning restrictions and the like. In the *real* world, that is. Online content isn't covered by these for the most part, being electrons in a box in an unmarked building, and all.

Your arguments that because government *can* pass laws, that it is just dandy for LL to do so is weak at best. Of course LL can do what they like, but they must face the consequences of their actions, whether it be legal action, or simple loss of market share.



Have I Not said all along that getting rid of the free, unverified account is the only way to keep out the children? My point to you is that LL is under no legal obligation to do any more than require that all residents opt-in and avow that they are over the age of 18. I do not object to LL doing more than that to keep out children. what I object to is them adding all kinds of layers of dubious "security" to babyproof SL when children shouldn't be here in the first place. and I object to your line of reasoning, which seems to be that the more LL does to "childproof" content for people who are already residents, the better for everyone.

I think that LL is concentrating on the wrong part of the equation- and your defense of it seems just as wrongheaded to me. Keeping children out of SL, yes. Making Sl Safer for kids, no.

^V^

Pedantic statistics discussion:

In a voting or preference poll, the usual standard measure of "too close to call", or "variation in poll results from total population opinion" is the one divided by the square root of the total votes cast. In the case of the two top JIRA issues, total votes are 8,200. Therefore the "standard error", as that number is referred to, is now 1.1%.

1.1% x 4130 votes =45 votes, and MISC-2727 is 47 votes behind at the moment.

By late today or early tomorrow I expect it to be first in absolute vote count, but it to be Sunday before you can state fairly it is the "top issue" rather than "tied for first place". To be clearly ahead would require it to pass 4175 votes.

SL's business model is probably closer to an internet pay site than to Google. Google does have a search engine, but that is because it is a search engine. Google's revenue base is entirely based on advertising, whereas SL's seems mostly based on entertainment.

It is possible that SL are trying to court more advertizing revenues by way of bringing in more corporate clients, and change to a more 'google-like' structure, but that will only work if the entertainment side remains solid. For that to work, there still needs to be a reason for people to come here to see ads (something LL need to remember).

There are two one significant advantages SL has over an adult internet pay site, though. First, that SL is interactive. Consider.. would *any* of SL's many RP sims (adult or not) exist if they were were not interactive? SL offers phone sex with visuals, and has no real competition in that, and tops that off with social scenes such that the interaction does not have to be solely about sex.

You are responding out of context. I was pointing out that some sites have been shut down in response to your trying to say that it is impossible to regualte the internet. The fact that sites have been shut down proves that such regulation is indeed possible. The circumstances of why any given site is shut down are irrelevant to that point.



Yes they can, but I was also pointing out that sites that do so restrict access still survive and have continued to do so for years.



I agree that will do a better job than partial screening, and have not opposed that suggestion. I have expressed concerns that it would be even more restrictive on adults than the current plan too (at least in terms of verification). Since we seem to agree on that point, though, why keep bringing it up?



They are not *currently* under any legal obligation. There are advantages to adopting stronger measures in advance of legislation, especially if you are worried about how strong the legislation may end up. It means you do not risk having to shut down while implementing any changes needed and shows 'good faith' which may result in weaker legislation or may simply forstall legislation.

I think we are at cross-purposes. I was thinking of the immediate effect of all this on SL's content creators, who are pretty much dependent on the SL search engine, with LL in the role of Google, providing the means to find this content.

As you say, LL need to remember that there has to be a reason for people to come to SL. I would put it more strongly than that; the stroke of brilliance behind the concept of SL was to let people enjoy themselves creating their own content (and pay LL for the facilities), exploring and playing with content others have created, and collaborating with yet more people in creating other things.

This is completely unlike an internet pay site, where the owner of the site charges people to access material he's created or for which he's paying a royalty to exhibit. In the pay site analogy, Linden Labs are behaving more like hosting company who took it into their heads to insist people verified their ages before being able to get anywhere some of the sites hosted on their servers and then made them jump through a few more -- very confusing -- hoops in order to find stuff.

This isn't just a problem for creators of "adult" content. I was talking the other day to a friend of mine who makes a wide variety of furniture and animations; her main concern isn't what she will need to do about the adult stuff but, rather, what's going to be PG and what's going to be Mature, since if she keeps the PG and Mature stuff together on a Mature sim, people won't see the PG stuff advertised unless they've got the Mature flag on in search. She's worried she's going to end up needing three shops on different sims, in order to make sure her adverts reach everyone, when she's been doing perfectly well with one up to now.

I agree strongly, though that LL need to ensure that there are workable, practical means for people to advertize within SL.

I also agree that there will be short term disruption and feel that LL should be doing a lot more to mitigate and/or compensate for that.

Which is why every man, woman and child on the planet should be fighting tooth and nail, day and night to prevent governments interfering with global communication systems.

Yes, I too am baffled as to why you keep portraying Second Life as "Little House on the Prairie". Many people have repeatedly sought to explain the nature of Second Life to you.

Every courtesy was extended to you when you first joined this blog. You were invited to read coherent articles by people who have been involved with SL for a long time. Yet, you just can't seem to grasp what is going on here. This is why you appear to be trolling.

I challenge you to sit down and present your analysis and arguments concerning LL's policy on 'adult' content/behavior/access. You should be able to do it in 1000 words or less. It's no good twisting and turning like a weasel at every sentence someone writes - unless it is your deliberate intention to obfuscate.

I think we had better stop making arguments like "Everyone in SL is supposed to be over 18, we are all adults, so there should be no further restrictions on adult content."

All that is perfectly true, but it is irrelevant.

There are hundreds of thousands of web sites which adults visit every day, and on which they do not find, or expect to find, sexual content. Dell, Amazon, corporate sites, educational sites...the majority of the internet, really.

Do we really want to argue that these sites should have pictures of naked people copulating on them? Or that we wouldn't find such material jarring, or offensive even, in such a context? Even those of us who enjoy SL's "adult content" don't spend all our time wallowing in porn.

SL is GOING to be more mainstream. We can't stop that, LL wants to move in that direction, and the Gods have spoken.

The important thing is that, if SL is going to be "the virtual world for the masses" that choice is preserved. If I *want* to find hardcore porn on the web, I can. I should be able to do so in my virtual world as well. Similarly, if I don't want to be bombarded by sex, I should be able to have that choice. I live in the world, and it has porn shops and strip clubs and beds where people couple...but they aren't EVERYWHERE, now, are they?

So, I'm not arguing that SL should not have some sort of additional zoning and content filtering.

But, Blondin, Jack, Jeska, M: You're going about it wrong. We've said that from Day One, and we're going to keep right on saying it. You are making at least four grave mistakes.

1. You're NOT LISTENING. People have been using every possible way to communicate our concerns to you. JIRA, these forums, your office hours, your brownbags, third party blogs. For gods' sake, listen to your customers. Not your hypothetical potential customers, but US, the people who love SL and pay our tier every month.

2. You're TAKING AWAY CHOICES, not enhancing them. You are doing this on every square meter of Mature land (and maybe on PG land too, depending on how your definitions finally are worded). People paid for their land with certain expectations of what they could do there. You're changing that, and only offering a land swap to a subset of the affected customers. You're being unfair and arbitrary.

3. You're HINDERING BUSINESSES. Search, using the 1.23 RC, is terribly messed up. You're making it impossible for people and businesses to find each other. The moves to Ursula will be horribly disruptive to those businesses that are affected. People who buy stuff in SL drive the economy. Eventually, the money they spend winds up (most of it) in YOUR pocket, as tier...so why aren't you concerned about this?

4. You're creating a situation that will SET RESIDENT AGAINST RESIDENT. By applying the new restrictions to "businesses and services", but not to "private residences", and by using vague definitions, you are making it easy for people to AR others for "inappropriate content". We have no faith in the fairness of the G-Team as a police/court system, based on their past performance. This is NOT the way to build a sense of community!

Most of us aren't unreasonable. As you yourselves have said, even some major adult content providers are in favor of better zoning, and a more...dare I say it..."predictable" SL experience. For the ten thousandth time: LET US HELP YOU make SL a better place for everyone.

Maybe you think you have. At Blondin's Office Hour on Wednesday, he said something about "look at all the changes we've made to the plan based on your suggestions." I gotta tell you: We're not seeing that at ALL. The only change I can think of is a minor one, taking "ponygirl" off the filtered words list.

KB6010 is still up in the air. The "adult word search" is a failure (as we told you that it would be). 40% of your residents either refuse to use your third party verification provider, or have tried and failed. There is nothing in any *official* statement or policy which clearly defines who and what is affected by the changes. There are still no details on how the land swap will be handled...who can qualify, what criteria you'll use, how the moves will be handled. No one has said anything about how, or if, LL will manage the land market to prevent price gouging on Adult land by speculators. Nobody has said anything about how, or if, "porn griefers" such as the nuts that mob the Welcome Areas will be addressed.

Not only are you driving down a road that leads over a cliff, it now appears that there is nobody at the wheel. Is it any wonder that the kids in the bus are screaming?

Well said. I vote you write this up on a texture and make it a billboard with notecard giving ability containing the links to the various infosources. Put one up by Blondin's office hours

/me agrees with it all except your use of the word 'kids' in this last bit.

Well said.

As i said a few posts back the words and definition "agent provocateur" spring to mind but as always I may be wrong

In Jack's office hours last week he said that we were not communicating with them. After explaining we had used the official forums, blogs (both official and external), JIRA, email to the relevant lindens, going to office hours, and so on I asked for how we should communicate. I asked him if we should use snail mail (someone modified that to 'registered mail').



They have already done that. One of the first protest things I came across pitted PG against adult. Rather than any sane people against this policy.

Look, if you are going to post garbage like this, please just go back to ignoring me. When in blazes have I done any such thing? If I thought SL was 'little house on the prairie', why would I think any part of it would need to be 18+?

And please do not talk about how civily I have been treated. Yes, some have been willing to discuss these issues rationally (and that does not mean to agree with me, but to at least consider what I am saying and to respond rationally), but most are not. I have been doing my best not to respond to the more provocative statements and to remain civil.

I probably shouldn't be responding to this post of yours... but I get frustrated too.

/me evily notes that the plot next to Blondin has object creation on and Blondin's has autoreturn turned off (and object entry on) ....

[just don't go overboard and get ARed/cause him to close that loophole!]

Personally I thought I have been making my own views pretty clear, including the degree to which I am critical of aspects of their plan.

If I write something like that, are you willing to read it, take a real amount of time to think about it and discuss it meaningfully?

O.O

How could he possibly say we weren't communicating?? I talked to him in IMs myself and sent him the same notecard I sent M and Blondin, and I saw Jack accept it.

Jack is using this AGAIN? Geez, the last time he said, "no one's complained to me about it", he got a storm of IMs.

/me shakes her head in disbelief.