Tolerance & Morality - what what what?

From the page on community standards:

All Second Life Community Standards apply to all areas of Second Life, the Second Life Forums, and the Second Life Website.

1. Intolerance
Combating intolerance is a cornerstone of Second Life's Community Standards. Actions that marginalize, belittle, or defame individuals or groups inhibit the satisfying exchange of ideas and diminish the Second Life community as whole. The use of derogatory or demeaning language or images in reference to another Resident's race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation is never allowed in Second Life.

From Robin Linden's post at /120/d3/33941/9.html#post360087

Jessica - we're not at all condoning the behavior. Please do not misunderstand us as making a moral judgment. We are not because we are not in the business of legislating morality. Nor in this environment, would we be able to, even if we thought it was a good idea.

Second Life, in many ways does mirror the first, in terms of range, diversity and interests of residents. We very much value your perspective, and your opinion is extremely important in the formation and evolution of this Second Life. But at the same time we value diversity and tolerance as building blocks for the world. This value sometimes translates to accepting the behavior of others, not dictating how they should behave, even if we disagree with their choice.

Wait, what?

"We are not because we are not in the business of legislating morality. Nor in this environment, would we be able to, even if we thought it was a good idea."

"The use of derogatory or demeaning language or images in reference to another Resident's race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation is never allowed in Second Life."

So you are or you are not in the business of legislating morality?

When I read the topic, I swore I wouldn't touch it, but ima try to help here.

LL is taking a position of anthropological morality instead of sociological morality.

That is to say, LL is taking something that we know is detrimental to any community, Descrimination, and saying it is inappropriate and intolerable.

LL is also stating that it will not police the individual morality of its customers.

It is taking a position of defense of the community, and leaving the subject of what is personally offensible to the individual, where it belongs. It's a very wise standpoint.

So I can't put up an antisemetic poster on my wall but I can put up a picture of a baby avatar being sodomized as long as the person sodomizing it is the same color and doesn't hate it?

I just want to know the boundaries here.

Can I start a Saturday night racist lynching party where a few friends get together and role play the lynching of a racist?

You're being intentionally inflammatory, but I'll answer anyway.


The propaganda piece descriminates against a group.

The questionable screenshot on a prim does not.

The propaganda can cause serious harm to SL's populace.

The questionable screenshot on a prim cannot.

However, if you display a huge 6-fullsquare-wide monster collage of a child av getting pounded up the snooch on a billboard at the edge of your property, you're obviously trying to get someone's goat, which would technically be griefing.

That a little more clear?

The propaganda might not even ahve been as much an issue if kept privately, but a few months back someone abused the system and everyone had White Power objects everywhere. So that got ruined cuz someone was a douche and abused our liberties a bit too far.

Along the same vein, I always wondered how the Gorean slave community manages to fly under the radar. If the slaves appeared to be African American, would it be considered racism, and therefore against the TOS.

Could whipping pixel females regardless of perceived race be considered mysogenistic?

I'd say the reason that it's not is because the females themselves would speak up and say they preferred it. I suppose these days forced slavery and consensual slavery would be more appropriate definitions.

However, if the Gorean islands suddenly had cotton fields and you had scantily clad slaves picking the cotton, then I think there'd be a serious descrimination issue.

Isn't the point of a thread to come up with provocative questions for the group?

What about a picture of a black baby being sodomized with a burning cross in the background and a caption that said, "ban bi-racial baby rape?"

I think you're a troll with way too much time on your hands.

I'm simply pointing out bias and hypocrisy in the stated policy of Second Life.

You either legislate morality, ie a ban on racism and intollerance or you don't. It would be extremely damaging to the community as a whole if there were lynching parties and one could argue just as easy that there will be damage to the community if I create a gallery of avitar child pornography for sale.

What am I missing?

You're missing the difference between morals and mores.

To crash course it for you, where your rights end is where someone else's begin. That's how a society such as this survives.

So you could coat your home interior in the avvie porn, sell it, whatever, people don't HAVE to come to your property and buy it, or even see it. If they live near it and dont want to, they can move.

However, posting political statements that convey a message of hate or general lewdness is against Community Standards. What you do on your time is all yours, but the moment someone else is forcibly exposed to see it in order to function in the game, you're causing a problem for other people.

From what I gather, if you ad sex to the mix all bets are off in terms of SL morality legislation. Whipping a black female slave is okay as long as you make her perform fellatio after the whipping.

Consider it more as a difference between playing music loud in your bedroom, versus causing a public disturbance in a library.

That's what it's really about. Edit: Thus, no morality is involved, just strictly business.

Whipping a black female slave would be fine, i see it happen regularly. Edit: Just don't use racial epithets. Slavery in SL is a weeeeeee bit different than on a plantation so the comparison is really bad.

I'm not talking about enforcement, I'm talking about the official language of acceptable use. According official policy, I can't even do anything hateful or racist or sexist if no one is looking--of course I could, but I would be breaking the rules. At the same time, they are saying there are no rules governing morality. Racial slurs are a moral issue, the slurs hurt no actual human beings physically.

Actually, thanks to the wonders of psychology and the human response, you can indeed harm someone physically with words. Hell, it's the foundation of 90% of harassment law in the states.

That notwithstanding, they aren't a moral issue to SL. They're a "will this fuck with our business and make customers leave" issue, and since the answer is yes, they ban it. Like I said, strictly business.

Ageplay and furries and such just aren't as widely offensive to people as, say, propaganda.

If I open an avitar child porn store, it will not be as offensive to people as a white power store?

That is what I want to hear the Linden's admit to. We are on the same page, I just want them to admit the hypocrisy of their high and mighty stand. The truth is they are afraid to screw with the sex based clientel here because it is a gravy train.

I should know, I've been photographing naked ADULT ladies for years.

Forbidding language or images in order to combat intolerance is a mistake. I understand the practical need to prevent a smaller world from being overwhelmed by the sort of people that would tarnish its reputation with the public at large and thus stunt its growth but I hope Linden Labs eventually does away with this portion of the TOS. Pretty much because of exactly the confusion in this thread.

No central body should ever be charged with vetting mores or morals.

I disagree that no central body should ever be charged with vetting mores and morals, after all, almost all laws stem from a sense of morality. Killing is immoral and illegal and so is rape and stealing.

But what I do agree with is being consistent. Either fess up that you are legislating morality when it comes to intolerance of minorities but not legislating anything remotely sexual in nature, even if it has racial overtones such as slaves because of the effect of such legislation on the bottom line, OR don't legislate anything and let the marketplace decide.

This is silly.

Rape and murder are detrimental to the society in which they take place, just as certain images and public acts are detrimental to the business of Linden Labs.

There doesn't need to be any level of moral standpoint to forbid these activities. That's like saying the only reason you take medication for an illness is because you have a moral obligation to keep your body functional, not because you simply plan to live.

THere's nothing for LL to "come out and say". They're a business, and a business protects itself. Don't delude yourself into thinking that any moral concepts are involved.

Edit: That said, in order to legislate morality, you must have a defined moral position. LL is not taking one, instead colorfully stating that if you screw up the game, you're going to pay for it.

Come now dear sir, "1. Intolerance
Combating intolerance is a cornerstone of Second Life's Community Standards."

That isn't professing to some high moral grounds?

Again, I agree with you in principle, but I think the company is being disingenious and hypocritical.

Just admit that it is in vogue to pass judgement regarding racial issues and intolerance but it is taboo to pass judgement on sexual issues.

It's George the Third, what what?

Tolerance is a crucial part of my morality.

Mine too... and so is not raping babies.

They've removed material that was outwardly sexual in nature, even in Mature Sims.

Just because it isn't written out in perfect clarity doesn't mean they haven't and won't take action.