Better check your land descriptions everyone, censoring has begun

See here: http://www.gridgrind.com/?p=104

This has been going on for a while.

A parcel near my home had 'casino' in the description. The description was changed at least a month+ ago..

I can't get that url to bring up anything

Their server went down (CONSPIRACY!!!!).

Anyway, Allana reported that LL has been deleting land descriptions on lots that have objectionable words in them, without warning.

Basically you discover the problem when you either happen to look at your land settings or start wondering why no one's coming to your shop anymore (because the description field is where people put most of their Places Search keywords).

Me neither and I really wanted to read it to see if it had anything to do with thursdays announcement. Could you please check it and put it back in again. ty

I can still read it..

With the bbcode being turned off in the forums, things may look funky.. Are you sure you're copying the link right? It should be:

http://www.gridgrind.com/?p=104

OK, Newbish question on the subject. Does this mean that if I am seaching for something that may or may not be on land with "rape", "BDSM" ect. that I will not see a desciption for that location, or will it simply not show up? The reason I ask is I have no interest in these things and would prefer to avoid them if I can, and leave those that are be.

Good point, land with banned words won't show up in the search results, if you accidentally wander onto it and the description has been deleted... I'm not sure but do you generally look at land descriptions before strolling onto land?

Generally not, but then here is another question. What's the easiest way to check the land description? Not that I am not mature enough to view sexual content, just that I would prefer to avoid it as it's not of interest. If I were to happen upon it I would give it a wide birth, though checking the land description seems like a good tip.

*sigh* Yeah, apparently they like the idea of making it easier for people to be offended by things, because they won't be warned to not enter the area by the description. I avoid certain places which I'm clued in by the descs. Without that, how am I to make an mature, informed choice?

Next time I wander into an area that has 'stuff that's offensive to me,' and am not warned about it because it was removed by LL.. I'm tempted to chose a random Linden and AR them for offending my senses by not allowing me to have warning that I'm entering an area that is likely to offend me.

And yeah, what is the point of getting verified if there isn't going to be "Adult content?" That would be the ONLY reason I'd give a company as irresponsible* as Linden Labs my personal information! I might not go to the areas labeled Adult, but I would verify to have the choice to go into it or not!

*By irresponsible, I mean, come one, they got hacked, CC information was stolen.. and it took them six months to notify those who might have been affected!

Well you could look at the Map and click areas I guess but that's a bit time consuming. Generally you know when you're entering a dodgy zone, look at the top of your screen and you'll see descriptions coming up.

This is all very silly though, it's deeds not words that are the issue. Banning words is just absurd. This is how Livejournal got themselves in a mess.

I see. I guess I check land descriptions a little more often then I thought. Mostly I just use my eyes as you sead. If it looks dodgy and the type of place such things would be I proceed with caution, or choose another route around that land if possible. As you said it's deeds not words, and words may not always stop me from traversing a piece of land but at least I am informed of what I may encounter and can then decide to proceed to explore elsewhere.

It is most probably a script that runs on a schedule, with a list of keywords it finds offensive. Why would one feel the need to say they are an un-casino? You're either a casino, or you're not. If you're not, don't put the word "casino" in your parcel name/description.

As for the complaint about posting policy changes on the blog, in the very first paragraph of the Terms of Service, it states:

"Linden Lab may amend this Agreement at any time in its sole discretion, effective upon posting the amended Agreement at the domain or subdomains of http://secondlife.com where the prior version of this Agreement was posted, or by *communicating these changes through any written contact method we have established with you*."

The blog is official. Only Linden Lab employees can post on it. It fits squarely within the definition of "any written contact method we have established with you". It is linked to at the client login screen. What more do you want, a personal phone call advising you of a policy change? Pay attention to the blog. Sometimes, it's actually an important read.

There is no new revelation in this story.

Course if they want to change the TOS/CS with a blog post they really should specifically state they are doing so.

To not do so, is poor form , and it insults our intelligence.

At any half organized company if you come up with a document that changes a previous document you are expected to make that clear.

Though you are right, they have the privledge of changing things on us , whenever they want.

Well the changing of an environments TOS is a rather standard clause. I have long since stopped reading TOS and EULAs because when you boil away the wording it all says the same thing, and usually outlines that I can not do things I would not do anyway, thus making the reading of it pointless.

I certainly do not question their right to change the TOS, I question why they are removing these descriptions. Yes some will be gravitated towards land labeled for sexual activity, others like myself will steer away from such areas where possible and when we choose. All removing these descriptions really does is make it harder for those that participate in such activities to find appropriate areas, and harder for those of us that are not interested in them to steer clear.

I say let the descriptions stand and just ban zone images and explicit words from search results. Or better yet add a chat filter to filter out explicit words for those that do not wish to see them.

I have wonder why if we are allowed only pg rating on advertising in new rules. Yet, I keep seeing very sexually expicit advertising. Even when you have mature off. I have no clue how to ar something like and trutfully there so much of it even when you turn off mature settings by unclicking I think the system is bugged and it should be up to LL to fix it if they want to enforce these rules.
There some pretty vulgar advertising out there, if you got in your ad I don't want to go there personally or spend money there but just my opinion. I don't have any problem with adult content I have problem looking for item and seeing tons of really vulgar sexual terms I am not looking for. It is incredibly annoying to be looking for plant textures and keep finding sexual terms. I haven't seen it land sales but I have seen land rentals and comericial things in community events where I think they don't belong.

Thats becuase its boring to go after the offenders thats already existed under the old rules.

Its far more fun to go after people who werent offenders till you changed the rules on them without notice.

I say let them continue to do what their counsel advises them to do. They just need to create a more effective communications channel with the Residents. The Blog should really just be the "heads up, folks, new policy, see it here: :link to updated ToS or CS:"

zaph

Yep.

I seriously have to wonder about the quality of their legal counsel if they think that:

A) The current "you have no recourse" ToS would stand up in *any* court

and

B) They can get away with issuing threats of banning - which amounts to a potential loss of large amounts of money and/or intellectual property in many cases - without clearly and contractually defining what actions can get one banned. They're setting themselves up for a class-action lawsuit with this even if they don't actually ban anyone.

It seems that they want it both ways. They want us to think of this as our world, to create content, start businesses, make investments, etc., and yet they flatly refuse to accept any of the effective governance responsibility that that entails. When it's convenient to them, we're expected to think of it as nothing more than a game.

One thing that concerns me is that we may well end up with a two-tiered "law-enforcement" system. Rather than investigate abuse reports, the abuse staff could look up a person's in-world assets and decide whether to ban on that basis alone. People without much to lose are a lot less likely to sue them.

Our World, Your imagionation as long as it doesn't cause us legal problems, rules we set but we got too many things to do enforce except when news reporters and fbi brings it to our attention, users, investors who aren't corperations beware?