No kids in the real SL, EVER!

lets see, kids are here so make it ok for them to be here....

ok Kids have guns make it legal for them to shoot people


people should be able to engage in consentual sex regardless of age race gender etc??

Can you imagine how quickly the NAMBLA members would be logging into SL??

Tell me you dont care and it will show the color of your character immediately

(edited to remove the link to NAMBLA... what was I thinking?)

Eggy,

I can only hope that post was made to inflame tempers, cause I actually feel quite ill.

The first point that struck me was the "fertile" part. OMG... do I need to get a fertility test before I can F... the person of my choice? And umm.. do I have to restrict it to members of the opposite sex, cause I can't be fertile with a girl. I have to tell you, I marched, voted, and did duty at family planning clinics to keep people the hell off my fertility.

Next point. My teenage son is fully informed about STDs, AIDS, etc. He has access to condoms and he knows his Dad's and my views on the subject. He volunteered at an AIDS hospice with me as a kid and if you don't think that gives you a serious reality dose.. well then nothing does. For his age, he is fairly mature.. umm but he is also a teenager with raging hormones... and I am responsible for him, legally, morally, and damn it cause I love the monster.

Nevertheless, if I found out about, let's say a 40 year old of either gender having sex with my minor son... that person had better hope the police find them first. There is no circumstances whatsoever that makes that kind of relationship OK. Every one I have ever seen has been about the older person exercising power over the other one.. and check the research.. those relationships are almost always damaging to the younger party.

Now I'm not talking about the 19 yr. old having sex with his/her 17 yr old partner. And after you turn 18, well you're an adult and if you want to bang 50 year olds... go for it... that's what being an adult is about, the freedom to screw up your own life as you see fit.

Surreal

In response to the question, you CAN'T prove that someone is a minor.

A separate grid would be as bad, or worse than having children integrated.

It is true that children are getting into SL, but as it is now, that is against the rules, so the responsibility is taken off of us and LL and put where it belongs, the stupid ass parents who let their kid have access to their credit card.

Looking at a different issue. . . I'm all for marijuana legalisation, but a big part of that is my desire to get marijuana OUT of kids hands. If it were legal, we could regulate it.

Do you know how much regulation it would require to allow monors in SL?

If LL were to allow minors, either on the main grid or this fantasy idea of a 'separate' grid (read: pedophile playground) then they would have to legally take on the responsibility for what happens to every one of those kids.

It's stupid that the responsibility wouldn't be on the parents, but that is just the way it is in the world.

The lawsuits alone would more than negate any minor money that would come in.

After those lawsuits, LL would have two choices : censor All content in SL (a la There) or shutdown. Actually, both of those choices would lead to the same thing, the end of SL.

As it is now, the only thing keeping parents of the vexacious litigation bent from suing SL is the one tiny rule that they aren't allowed here in the first place.

The term 'consenting adult' exists for a reason. As an adult, I consent to being exposed to SL and all it entails, instantly disallowing me from suing LL over content.

Kids have special privileges and extensive rights to protection in the real world. You'd have to extend the exact same considerations to them in SL.

edit: summary - there are too many people in this thread who are posting bold, large font NOs without reading some of the ideas in the thread. I apologize for me previously claiming it was a majority of the posters

Wow.. I think most people have read the thread. I have been impressed with the breadth of the reasons people have presented to support NO KIDS. I had thought of many of these reasons, but there have been many excellent points raised that I hadn't thought of, or hadn't thought of in depth.

People's responses have only firmed my first gut reaction. Now I'm not sure how representative the forum readers are of the in-world opinions.. I know I go months without reading the forum cause mostly it has been 9 parts drama to 1 part BS...

I suspect however that many people will not say much about things that spoil their enjoyment. They will instead vote with their feet.

So don't trivialize those of us who have actually taken the time away from the game, and real life to put our reasons on pixel.

Oh, I have also been impressed so far that the tone of this thread has stayed relatively civil... Usually there is much name calling by this point. People mostly seem to be sticking with the issues and not doing personal attacks.

Surreal

I appreciate this too. Focus on sharing ideas, not hurting others.

I figure if there was some spinoff of Second Life for the young, it'd be called KidGrid based on what I've read earlier. LOL. Just having fun, that name is whimsical.

edit: okay, I'm sorry, maybe not a majority of posters, but far too many. After half a dozen pages, you'd think we could get better feedback than "OMG JUST SAY NO TO KIDS!!!!!1"

Kids are here. We can either:
(a) Ignore this. The problem will get worse.
(b) Find ways to give them alternatives to our main grid, find new ways to secure SL for youngsters, and deal with it realistically.

i think north american society has created a whole myth about childhood. it's a nice myth though.

we have another myth. the world outside our suburban lots is evil and dangerous. perhaps in a world of tv and internet it is, perhaps people don't really value thier fellow humans save for platitudes. you could argue that if you believe your humanity is merely a platitude.

generally speaking, society is not pedophiles and murderers. i blame the media for creating the illusion. but then if they were to report on every good person not arrested for not doing something wrong, the news would be very long and very boring.

personally, i enjoy the occasional company of children. they say and do funny things and they remind me that life is about wonder and fun, not drama and $$$. i can see young adults adding a new and interesting dimension to the SL community. i don't think they will be in any danger on SL (there is no anonymity). i think parents are still responsible for what they allow thier kids to play. and i think with clearly protected mature areas, it doesn't have to change peoples secondlife if they don't want it to.

and more $$ for LL, and maybe lower fees due to the economy of scale.

Very true, thankfully.

But let me take murderer as an example. If you are murdered, it doesn't matter that there are lots of nice people out there.. you've had your whole day ruined (depending on your beliefs about an after life). And that doesn't count all the heartache the spreads out from you. All your family, friends, co-workers... and if you are in a small enough town, the fear engendered in strangers even. And don't forget the murder's friends, family, etc. if they are caught. I know someone who was murdered, so I have a fair feel for the collateral damage I think.

I would like to see more discussion on the anominity issue.

I know that it is possible to set up a cash reserve card that functions like a credit card to a vendor, yet requires almost no identification to get.... So doing a bogus one of those would be pretty easy.

ISP and IP address would be the next hurdle. I think the motivated person coiuld get around the ISP issue. And you can always pack up and move if things seem too hot. Perhaps the appropriate authorities could track/catch these individuals.. depending on country... I know they are highly motivated to do so, although overworked.

None of which addressed LL legal exposure...

Anyway.. thoughts anyone?

Surreal

They may have read it, and just summed up their opinion in as few words as possible, not everyone has a wish to debate, they just want to express how they feel, just because they dont elaborate doesnt mean they havnt read it.

And yes, people come across as abrassive or unthinking at times *coughEggycough* But this being a forum gives everyone a voice, and the majority of voices are vehemently opposed to the idea, so what if they don't say "why" their vote is still "no" Nobody in the US has to say why they vote for who they want.



Well there are more than just the black and white options, how about the simplest one... Enforce the rules already in place, nobody under 18. if they are here it is a TOS violation and they are subject to banning until they turn 18...

That seems pretty simple to me.

Im sure there are other options, options that will cause fewer problems in the long run.

Facts:
+Currently Minors are in game.
+Currently Minors are NOT allowed in game
+Making it 'legal' for minors will not and cannot be a fast change if it happens at all.
+At this point we are all debating on conjecture.
+The majority of opinions in the paying populace are opposed to the integratio idea, very few accept the idea of an alternate grid.

Right now the best thing we can do is keep the thread bumped to the top to get more people aware of it. At this point the majority voice is to not have minors in SL.

=======
Jauani -



Yes I agree generally speaking, but it will only take one instance, that's not good odds, it's like playing Russian Roulette. Only a matter of time before bad stuff happens.

And, at present if something bad happens, the child was somewhere they were not supposed to be. that's what they call having your ass somewhat covered. Take away that protection and it 'could' mean SL goes away. Either from lawsuits, bad press. Again, the media's love of crusading for the sensational news even if it isnt true. Everyone remembers how easy it is to erroneously blame video games on violence.

I agree, for the time being, as I said, maybe for the next 6-12 months, this would be an ideal solution.

However, Linden Lab has declared that they want to go worldwide. Philip has aiming SecondLife to be the Metaverse, to replace the Internet.

As SL grows rapidly, how can we expect to enforce a no kids rule on something of that scale? This is precisely what I'm talking about. It's a social issue, and much like drugs or prostitution, rules alone are not sufficient to curtail the problem.

I think a second grid is a way to combat the problem from a social approach - you give people reasons not to go into the regular, adult grid.

SL is going to change very rapidly as it grows... more and more it will resemble the Internet we have learned to hate to love and love to hate. If we expect to change what happens down the road, we need to start preparing for it now.

Actually, I think seperate Sims would be a must. Still, it would be nice if we could sell our stuff them even if we can't talk to them

Maybe have a store in the pg/m sims whichs duplicates exactly the kid sims so we would have an idea how our stuff is vending.

But, Tralos made a good point. There's enough drama in SL. Keeping the kids completely seperate at least completely rescues us from the extra drama.

Though I do wonder. If kids came to SLJunior .. do you think they'd be more desperate to get into SLMature?

I thought about this as well. I see it as a matter of scope. When SL becomes HUGE, they will want to get into SLMature regardless of whether there's a SLJunior or not.

I do think that if we introduced SLJr before SL gets HUGE, then perhaps what you're saying may be the case, but again, we're looking at the long term.

I just wish to agree, no minors in SL, please.

***raises hand***
I am in agreement. No kids please.

In the townhall, he (Philip) says that the hope is Second Life will be the "WWW" not the "MSN" of this sort of thing. So.. it's not gonna be your decision at all, they'll come. Why fight it? Rather, try to make things better for both parties.

I think there's probably just a lot of people afraid of getting shown up by minors who are more skilled, talented, and mature. ;) In my experience there's little difference between the 14-17 crowd and the 18-21 crowd (roughly). Just one gets to vote. The maturity level, asshole quotient, and obnoxious factor have little to do with age.

AOL.

LOL
asl
stfu
omg
fag.

SL.

Ok, I've read this entire thing. I just don't understand the need for children here in any case. If they insist on it, make it an entirely separate game. Leave SecondLife alone, it's fine with just us chickens. Not only would it be a nightmare on LL's side, but also ours. Too many reasons to really list.

and if this were not the case, all of the people who are arguing about the dangers SL presents to children from pedophiles would be out petitioning thier senator to ban children from the internet. and the streets.

I agree with what has been said previously. One of the draws of SL is the 18+ requirement, sure it's technically no guarantee that you are dealing with an adult, hell we all know some kids that are more wise and mature than their age.. but that said this game is for adults.

To introduce children into the SL world here would be a huge mistake. I too have played many other games and am sick and tired of dealing with the leet dudes of the world. And yes I've dealt with a few here already, but they are few and far between.

I come here to enjoy myself and that doesn't mean that I am a raving hosebeast here or an angel outside of SL, but I sure as heck can say fuck (in mature areas) without looking around and thinking oh crap did any kids hear that. I don't know what kind of life most people lead outside of SL but personally I don't run around in bustiers, dancing, shopping and goofing off on a daily basis.

I believe a few years back in the news there was a story about a guy that was canoeing and his canoe turned over he of course reacted by screaming a few choice expletives... unfortunately he was in a "family friendly" recreational area he actually was arrested and fined!!

What about the mother who was suing Sony because her son played EQ, fell in love and committed suicide because his "love" left him? Never mind the fact that she knew he was mentally unstable and needed help. Plug your kid into the computer and walk away society will take care of them and if they don't well hell make a buck on it !

Imagine the lawsuits because Johnny saw a naked person or Susie was propositioned.

Do you really want SL to become that kind of "world"?

I chose not to have children IRL and by choosing SL I chose not to have to deal with them in a game.

Ok enough rambling.. bottom line NO CHILDREN

That's true, but what worries me in this case is the problems that may arise legally speaking. As Ferran posted in this thread, "it will only take one instance". Wasn't there a thread, a few months ago, from a player who complained that his friend's daughter saw some "bad" words on the forums, when in fact this child should never have been even allowed on said forums? That's what bothers me. The fact that, if something the slightest bit "borderline" happens, there will be some parents who'll scream, point the finger, and hold LL responsible, when in fact it'd have been their role as parents to avoid the problem in first place.

Right, it's not our decision in the end, and it's likely better to envision solutions rather than let the facts hit everyone in the face. What I'm simply thinking myself, is that if/when this is done, there'll be the need to seriously cover LL's asses, in case some dumb problem of "I don't watch my kid but he saw the word sex and now it's LL's fault I'm gonna sue them!" happens. (Because, well, even in a kids-only grid, how many kids wiill actually know and use "bad" words, and other borderline behaviors, and give the "bad" exemple just as well as an adult could, huh? Way more than one, I bet...)

children give me hives.

/hijack






nice assumption....

I do take an active role in the welfare of children in the community, kids are great, but I dont invite kids out to the bar either.... You can learn a lot from their fresh viewpoint. The problem is that they will learn a lot from us too and you know exactly how everyone here acts, adult humor adult drama and adult whining and adult ASSumption.

I have played a lot of online games with kids in the past, for the most part they are annoying and dont listen. Every once in a while you can find a kid who has their act together in an online community, but it's rare.

Besides shouldnt they be studying, doing chores around the house or something?

Please stop making outlandish assumptions as to our reasons for not wanting kids in SL, adress some issues and take the time to respond to valid points not just one or two out of context quotes. do not devalue intelligent points being made by using an uninformed guess. Thanks.

/de-hijack




I believe that should really read "IF SL grows rapidly....."

What people want to see and the reality of probablity are two different things. There are 75 to 120 accounts being made each day now. that kind of growth does not say "we are taking over the world soon" Yes, it would be neat to live in a William Gibson novel and all that 'yay techno-future' stuff.... Dont let idealism blur reality...

Kids in SL are a bad idea, Ive given my reasons why. I enjoy when you respond to stuff I have actually said. So why don't we all take the time to read the thread instead of just jumping to the last page and putting in a post that you imagine fits into the topic of conversation.

(I need to write shorter thread bumps) =P

When I get home and on ICQ, I have a story to relay to you. Remind me, please.

ferran,
i didn't assume anything. you did. you assumed that i am a simpleton making a simpleton attack on your character. what i did was point out a contradiction in an arguement. there are two arguements being presented.
1> i don't like hanging out with kids. keep them out. they are bad for our community.

2> kids should not be playing with adults. our community is dangerous to them. (we should decide for thier parents).

i cannot debate #1. if people do not want to play with children, there is no rational arguement that can show that they do. but people who argue #2 should take it one step further and ban kids from the internet. the internet has much more damaging content for a young child than SL. anonymous predators, images of horrific events, explicit sex sites, websites promoting racism, websites celebratibg mindless violence and suffering. take your pick. if they do not, they are inadvertantly acting as hypocrites or as passive whiners.

i am not talking about active role for the welfare of children. you virtuous community service means nothing to what i'm saying. i'm talking about banning kids from the internet based on arguements you are presenting. and from public space. i'm talking about locking kids up in the house watching disney cartoons so that they are safe from all the dangers of the outside world.

please stop making hijacks to discredit my points by reframing them to mean something they do not and answer straight forwardly what actions you are taking to ban children from the internet or what your position is on that matter.