What are the free speech limits on an offensive 9/11 build?

Yes..if it is on their land, I do feel the need to tolerate it, because I believe in freedom of expression as long as it's not harassment or a danger to the health of unconsenting groups or individuals.

It's the same reason I would tolerate a concentration camp build, as long as they weren't promoting hatred or bigotry, and they weren't harassing people..

Until they target someone with hate speech or harassment, they should be free to express themselves as they wish on their land. Besides, builds such as this just darken their own soul and make people despise and/or pity them. They show themselves to be the dishonorable and attention seeking children they are.

There are many tasteless and uncompassionate people in the world. But we can't lock them away, or even shut them up, for being that way, unless they step across a line and take it up one more idiotic notch.

Some things are not, never were, and never should be funny; it's a simple as that. Some things should never be treated in a light manner.

The Titanic was long enough ago that a few dark, kinda sick jokes can be made about it among friends, perhaps. It was tragic enough, though, that there has never been (to my knowledge) a comedy made about it, or any other light treatment. On the contrary, the story has been retold as a tragedy ever since.

The Tsunami should never be treated lightly, either. Things which represent huge disasters and deep tragedy to many people should never be treated in any way as a joke.

The Holocaust, likewise, is something that was so horrific it should never be a source of humor (Hogan's Heroes and the like notwithstanding), or, God forbid, fashionable.

9/11 is something that will never, ever, to a thinking, feeling human being, lend itself to having the sting taken out of it in any way.

Time doesn't dim human tragedies or allow them to become a source of humor. Pompei was buried by a volcano long, long ago, but I cried as a child first reading of it. It is as tragic today as it was when it happened.

Of course, in a country with free speech, you can be as tasteless as you like, and that's important. Of course, in a country with free speech, everyone else can feel free to boo you down and/or not buy your product. In a privately-owned venue, the owners set the standard for what is acceptable.

The Lindens should tear down this broadly offensive and hugely childish display of the Twin Towers.

If anyone needs a simple rule of thumb regarding free speech (even in a game) versus broadly objectionable material or behavior, what someone said above is a pretty good guideline:
Murder, mass murder, and other human tragedies should never be acceptable when portrayed lightly or as a joke, so offensive are they to humane people.

Of course you can allow it; you just risk turning off huge numbers of potential customers.

coco

But that's the rub, isn't it? Obviously, we can't assume motivation, but we can make a reasonably informed guess. Was this build designed to offend, and if not, what on earth were they thinking? You're right, motivation must be taken into account, but it seems pretty difficult to believe that the intention was anything other than harrassment in this situation.

Well..but offensive is subjective really. They don't come outright and spew hate speech or malign a particular group. The build isn't really "anti" anything other than anti-good taste or anti-compassion.

If we begin forcing folks to not build tasteless and uncompassionate builds, where does it end? It IS a slippery slope. Who decides what's tasteless and what isn't? And then we have a "building approval" group running around looking for signs of not taking horrendous and terrible tragedies seriously?

LL has known about this build for a long time, and it's still there. I think since it's not targeting anyone with hate speech or a definite harassment, and is on the owners land, they have left it up. In fact, it seems like on a prior thread, a Linden even made a comment to that effect, though I might be mistaken.

Believe me..I don't care for W-Hat and have sparred with them more than once here in the forums, and SA is a bunch of sheep and lemmings in my opinion, but I can't help but be for "freedom of expression and speech" as long as it's not hate speech, abuse or harassment.

As Cubey said, it is important to note that if you are going to neg rate someone, to neg rate the owner, not the creator. The creator of the jet used in that image had absolutely nothing to do with this, and does not deserved to be neg rated for it.

Lets not walk down this path.

While I see this as being in bad taste and disrespectful, I do not see this as a TOS violation. If you look at what this country has become, bad taste and disrespect are par for the course.

The events of 9-11 fill me with sadness. I don't get angry over it; after all it's just one more act of mass murder added to the long list in human history. Murder is murder, doesn't matter if you do it with the authorization of a government. It all depends on your morals; if and when you consider killing just or appropriate. So having a memorial, even in bad taste, gives me hope that human kind might pause and remember their past digressions before committing new ones.

I gotta say it.

Lighten up.

Yep. 9/11 was a horrific event. Key words being "was" and "a", in other words, it happened in the past and it is but one event of many. It's bad enough, in many ways, how many Americans seem to feel that 9/11 is the only "real" terrorist attack and refuse to move on in any way, clinging to it like a battered wife clinging to their husband.[1]

What's even worse is the way 9/11 is used as an excuse for other negative behavior. People want this build removed because they find it offensive. But let's look at the big picture for a moment. Most people never knew this build existed. This thread exposed it to many people - who have now deliberately gone to seek out this item that offends them. And now, having been offended, they want it removed. I know this is a popular pastime here in America, but really - can any of you offer any defense of this behavior? Rationally? Who is the bigger offender - the person who created this art, or the people trying to get lots of people to go and be offended?

Personally, I'm not offended by the build. Why? Because I read the description, decided I didn't care to see it - and unless I stumble across it, I won't see it. It's an image, a collection of pixels, and it can't hurt me, physically or emotionally. Why? Because I won't see it.

Prokofy - you say this build brought tears to your eyes, you imply that seeing this art was a traumatic experience for you. Dear $insert_deity_here, *why*? You /knew/ what this was going to be. You deliberately sought it out. I have to question why it should be removed for offending you when it's entirely *your* fault that you saw it. Yeah, sure, protecting others who might accidently come across it... but is that *really* worth the hassle and struggle and /certain/ exposure of this material to many others who would otherwise never see it?

Cindy - you keep raising this huge moral issue of "glorifying" 9/11. Well, one, if that is its purpose it seems to be doing a pretty poor job; no one's getting that from the image. Two, so what? I'd be offended if you, as my neighbor, put up a wall mural of the Crucifixion. But I wouldn't demand you take it down - I'd block it from my view, or put up a facing mural of a pentagram and the Horned Man, or sell the land at a nice profit to someone who would appreciate it and move.

Second Life is about freedom of action. Yeah, yeah, private property-free speech rules don't apply-blah blah blah. The basis of this world is greater freedom of action by the participants. Forget about free speech - the action you're proposing goes against the basic, founding principles of this *world*.

Now /that's/ offensive.

[1] - Look, offensive imagery! Shocking! For the record, I've worked with victims of abuse, I intend no offense other than, possibly, a small amount of shock value in the hopes of waking up a few fringe "offended-heads" before they're lost to sanity completely. And I'm offended that this kind of footnote is so essential these days. I blame violence on television and New Coke.

Christianity is now banned in SL (more died from that three letter word then 9/11, desert storm, civil war, WW 1 and 2 combined)

Would you throw a fit...THERE IS A SYMBOL OF HIROSHIMA IN GAME! called a nuclear/atomic bomb.

ANY MEDIEVAL RPG/GAME IS NOW BANNED swords and armor made to reflect replica of medieval weaponary is a symbol of christianity.

DRUGS AND ALOCHOL ARE BANNED (More innocents killed by someone under the influence then in 9/11)

ANY WORLD WAR IMAGES OR ITEMS MUST BE REMOVED (if I have to explain this oe you need to erad history again)



One person's attrocity is another person's "Milestone". Let's not debate this it is all perception and perception is an opinion.

Unfortunately, we just can't have the good without the bad, and as long as it does not violoate community standards, it should not be removed by the Lindens. Everyone can (should) neg-rate the owner for the build, but I am guessing the owner doesn't necessarily care about such things and has already gotten what he/she wanted by putting up the build in the first place -- attention. Too bad.

Life is offensive.


What is horrifically offensive to one person in NY may not be more than an "eh" to someone on the other side of the globe.


The TOS is up to the Lindens to interpret on this one. However, considering that it has been up for quite a while and hasn't been removed yet, they've probably already passed their judgement.


I say leave it alone. If it offends you, don't look at it. They're only looking for attention, and probably the kind of attention that will give them license to scream "UNFAIR OPPRESSION OMG". Be more adult than these children.

That is the question though - what are the community standards. We make exceptions for certain things, but not others, why?

That build is no different than a forum troll. It's there purely to solicit exactly this kind of response. People shouldn't take the bait. While Matthew's post is likely to draw some fire I have to say that I largely agree with most of his points. If any action should be taken, someone should send a picture of that thing to the builder's mother. I'm sure she'd be real proud at what a pathetic and worthless piece of shit her child turned out to be. Beyond that, see it for what it is. It has no power unless you grant it.

Looks to me like Cindy and others have already cited a compelling ToS/CS justification for removal. This is not a benign issue over which laissez-faire freedom of expression gobbledygook applies. Whether or not this display is the equivalent of an in-world forum troll or not, it needs to go and it needs to go now.

Lots of things offend me - can I ban them all?

Relativist Fallacy - http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/relativist-fallacy.html

I would say that this is a case where the "truth" as it were is very relative. What is offensive is a matter of opinion and varies from individual to individual. By your link's own definition, her statement is not a fallacy.

Yes. I read the TOS and the Big Six. And I still say they are vague. One of the loopholes griefers like to exploit is the sense of humour angle. They'll say they're just looking at a serious manner in a light perspective. Others will think it's a subject that shouldn't be made funny at all.

If it was written down, "offensive builds will be defined as builds: mocking historical tragedies, mocking criminal acts done onto victims, any mockery directed to any religious or political personality-party-symbol, etc." then this build wouldn't last 10 seconds.

Is that anal? Yes. But obviously, some people have thicker skulls and lack empathy so it has to be spelled out for them. And even when it is spelled out, some still want to push. Common sense would tell anyone the build's offensive.

Considering the diversity of the SL population, you will find people who won't feel as strongly as you or I will feel about 9-11 or other sensitive issues. Like right now, we both agree the build is offensive and shouldn't be up there. Our degree of reaction varies in intensity though. But that doesn't make me a less or you a more compassionate person.

The question was brought up to the forums before. What can be the guidelines? What is offensive, what is the line that crosses over from mockery to griefing or both. They asked us to help them out. I think we did, but when the big six came out, it was the same schtick. I had hoped they'd start drawing the lines between the grays.

Community Standards Big 6

It can fall under Indecency. Note the: on their own Mature land. This is how some get by.

No, my point was that this particular display was and is broadly offensive, and beyond the scope of the "it's OK for you but not for me" relativistic conundrum.

I hate this thread more than I hate the build. This thread is designed to divide - to make us angry.

To make me scream - "you nationalist fuckwit" at people. To make non-Americans hate Americans, and to make Americans hate non-Americans.

This thread creates so much hate.

So why start it? You are doing this to point out a build that you see as UnAmerican. You want everyone to see how terrible it is. You also want everyone to see you as very not UnAmerican. This is an attempt to use peer pressure to censor your internal dissidents.

So how am I as a non-American supposed to respond? I can do some liberal hand-wringing defending your behaviour but instinctively I defend dissidents from lynch mobs. Someone has to stand up for the witch when the government and the media are shouting "burn!"

---
And yes I expect you will all just abuse report me and no I don't care. I am fully prepared to get a ban from the forums. Freedom of speech and opposition to nationalism are a key part of my belief system. Feel free to martyr me morons!

not really, ... sorry.

I think you are reading in this stuff about "celebrating" yourself. I understand you are upset, but I personally did not see the thing as "celebrating" anything.

So to posit a situation reversed from that is not fair IMO.

I think it is intended as a joke.
Perhaps a joke in bad taste, but some of the funniest jokes are, arent they?

Has no one ever seen Monty Python?

In any case I dont want to become the poster girl for defending something like this.

I just wanted to point out that not everyone (especially non-americans) sees it the same way. And also that the act of posting about it here is what *really* turns things like this into a "big deal" that everyone subsequently gets mad about.

You're the first one to make this an issue of being an "American". For your information, hundreds of Koreans, Israelis, British, French, Germans and others died in that tower. This isn't about being American. It's about being a human being.


No it doesn't. It started a discussion on censorship, the TOS, and tolerance. Some of us (those apparently who understand and empathize with such tragic loss) are upset about it, but we'll live.


You're the only one to use that phrase, and now you've used it again. You're purposely choosing NOT to get it aren't you? And "murder" is not "dissent", just FYI.

=======
Update for everyone: I went to the site in question tonight with every intention of neg-rating the owner. But they've changed it. Instead of two towers, the burning airplane is now crashing into a large cross made of American flags.

It's less offensive only insofar as it is less of a direct, obvious, reference to 9/11.

Two players were there, including the creator of the thing. I simply asked "Who built this?" and "What does it mean?"

One informed me that it's good to be offended. I pointed out that I hadn't mentioned that I was offended yet, he was putting words in my mouth.

He then turned to his friend and said, "<xxx> she doesn't like your airplane."

LOL! Obviously I was dealing with a pair of mentally challenged folks here. I pulled up the profile of the one who created it, and the first thing is said was "I AM AN ASSHOLE!".

Well at least we got that straight.

He's also gotten quite a few neg ratings already, so his reputation precedes him.

I flew off without neg-rating anyone. This pair isn't worth the 50L, and the towers aren't there any more. If they want to insult the cross and the U.S. flag, go for it, I don't really care if someone wastes their time insulting symbols. That does bring it into the free speech realm, and frankly I have better things to do than worry about a pair of self-important, obnoxious lobotomy survivors

Lots of people have died in all sorts of tragedies. This one is a big issue because it was a national symbol - the same reason it was targetted.

"If they want to insult the cross and the U.S. flag, go for it, I don't really care if someone wastes their time insulting symbols. That does bring it into the free speech realm, and frankly I have better things to do than worry about a pair of self-important, obnoxious lobotomy survivors"

Agreed. Even though those two symbols are my own. There's something qualitatively different with dissing someone else's symbols and making light of human tragedy.

coco

Exactly. I'm not a Christian, but as much as I may disapprove of religious intolerance and mocking other people's faith, the perps have now slipped back inside the protection of free dissent. Whatever. I have a new script and animation I gotta get done