Compile and Publish, on the public Internet, an "Age Play" list of AVs!

In the end though I think this will be more of a PR nightmare for SL (and the rest of us) than a question of virtual privacy.

I think it would be more interesting to simply say a list of who's having cybersex with whom.

And screenshots!

I have removed the off-topic image and an inflammatory remark from this thread. Please remember that the purpose of the Second Life Forums is to promote discussion and education about Second Life. We believe in an honest and open free exchange of ideas, and in always maintaining a respect for the opinions and positions of other people.

actually blaze I think the US government might have handled it already. If the list is made without the person opting in to be palced on it then it cannot be done. Wasn't this already done with some sort of criminal group before?

I think it came down to was not so much the list but it's intent, loose definition, and pretty much anyone could add anyone to the list.

I'm not sure that privacy rights necessarily extend to anonymous entities. At least legally speaking.

True the whole your avatar = not you the real you arguement might make it null and void. In the end I think LL would just have to step in and say "enough" or "play ball".

agreed, the practical conclusion will be different from the theoretical conclusion.

However, the theoretical conclusion can go along way into helping shape the practical one, even if it looks completely different.

Hmm, when the map gets super high resolution and real time and viewable from any angle, wonder what that will do for privacy?

Is it ok to zoom the camera around and post screen shots with avs names outside of SL?

Tcoz! How'd you find out about the list?!?!?

While your zeal is admirable for the great nation of Second Life, I must confide in you and note that this list already exists, and is being investigated by the House Un-SecondLifean Activities Committee.

I was TP'd to the HUSLAC headquarters the other day. Here's a bit of the transcript:

McCarthy: "Captain Barmy, Have you ever been a member of an ageplay group?"
CB: No sir!
McCarthy: "Have you ever been an ageplay sympathizer?"
CB: I believe that everyone has the right to the freedom of speech, especially those I disagree with.
McCarthy: "And did you ever attend any ageplay meetings?"
CB: Nope.
McCarthy: "Did you ever attend any meeting in which the majority of those involved were ageplayers?"
CB: It's hard to say. Some seemingly normal people have some strange kinks, you know?
McCarthy: "Were you ever solicited to join in any ageplay activities?"
CB: I don't think so, but the solicitation may have just flown clear over my head.
McCarthy: "Did anyone ever discuss with you the possibility of your joining an ageplay group?"
CB: I may have got an invite once, but I do enjoy keeping my group slots open.
McCarthy: "What if we told you we had a list of ageplayers, and that you were on that list?"
CB: I'd tell you that your list was wrong.
McCarthy: "And what if we brought forth witnesses that testified to you being an ageplayer."
CB: I'd tell you that they were lying.
McCarthy: "And what if we told you we had pictures of you involved in ageplay?"
CB: I'd tell you that you're damn good with Photoshop.
McCarthy: "You bet I am. And I'm also damn good at adding people I don't like to lists!"

What exactly is Age Play?

When an AV plays an Underage child of somesorts

The wiki is your friend: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_play

Which is apparently exactly the same as paedophilia irl, btw.

ooh, can we start that thread again? it was fun!

Yus. As we well know, correlation implies causation.

That word reminds me of CORAL

Thank you Willow and Eggy.

English isnt my native

think some people are forum obsessed like ME lol

you trying to kill Jeska?

I guess I hadn't realized there was such thing as privacy in SL, implied or otherwise. In fact, everything I've seen and read kind of implies the opposite. However, the ToS does make specific mentions of Harassment and Stalking.

I guess the only real question is where the line is between those two things, privacy, and harassment. Does the ToS distinguish between harassing a group of people, and an individual? Would it matter in such a scenario as the original poster outlines?

And what color hearts on the map are we talking about? Hopefully something snazzy. Or maybe color coding to to indicate in what stage of intimacy we are at? So that our friends would know when we are about done, and prepare to come over to visit? Maybe little particle fireworks when it peaks?

Heh, it's ok, English isn't my native language either...
<-- Lisbon, Portugal

I considered naming a name in my orioginal post.. I considered the ban.. I say flog the filthy perverts.

Richie, I really don't want to bring the subject up here again because it was closed last time and people seem to find the mere discussion of the topic distasteful... but I really am bursting with questions and comments for you. If you feel inclined, take it over to SLUniverse?

You can start by letting me know just what makes these consenting adults engaging in virtual practices such filthy perverts, if you like

I'm interested to see where the lines get drawn. I guess I'm just trying to gauge how filthy and perverted I am on the Waves Disgust Scale, really.

When its back up I be there

The part of the Community Standards document that says "Residents are entitled to a reasonable level of privacy with regard to their Second Lives" could be interpreted as meaning that residents are entitled to a reasonable level of privacy with regard to their Second Lives.

That is something to look forward to.

Wow. Who made that argument? I don't agree with that at all.