New Zindra Blog Post

Just to make something crystal-clear.

I have nothing against child avatars. I think they're fun.
I don't have a child avatar myself, but I do have a tiny oriental doll avatar. I'm not an extensionist.


The thing that gets me about the Zindra/child-avatar combination is that it sends out an incredibly confusing message.

"the responsible thing to do would be to devise the best counters to the "story" when it hits."
Absolutely!
It is completely irresponsible to create a continent to which all public Adult content and behaviour must be restricted - and then allow child avatars to be in there.
It's completely freaking insane. It's coat-trailing. It's saying to the Kirks "bring it on baby".


Add:
I had originally typed something additional about choosing the right battle ground, and the insanity of trying to fight by proxy via LL's corporate lawers amd PR muppets.
Some obscure combination in there kept giving me a 404, so I dropped the whole thing.

Kirk's concern is regarding real children and predators, his complaint was that someone could signup to second life and claim to be 18 with no attempts at checks, to get to Zindra you need to be account verified, Kirk will have less to complain about now.

But how is that different from a child avatar (RL adult) expecting to be perma-banned if they are ARed for frequenting a sexual area anywhere?

Matthew

This has nothing to do with what I was asking, so I don't understand why you posted it in response to my question. Are you saying that child avs aren't fine and should be eliminated entirely?

I'm familiar with that, but it doesn't say anything about slaves with gags, which is what I was asking about?

No, sorry if I was unclear, I was on about the latest LL blog announcement and saying that LL see child avs equal citizens, meaning it's fine, or all over and done with.

I think I posted a little later too saying LL obviously aren't worried or see a legal need from the push to have child avs censored or they'd have done it now in their big expensive investment in Zindra.

I'm against anyone loosing rights for no reason.
You can look through my post history to see what I think in more depth.

PS, no I just checked, I said 2cd para that in that post you asked about. I say things in a relaxed way at times, also it's at times hard to tell what someone means.

I just basically mean don't worry it's over, freedom and rights won.

That's just something Lias made up.

Even to further point out, it's not just over, it never was an issue, many people tried to explain that through those strings.

Arguably, the first irresponsible part was allowing sex and/or child avs at all, six years ago, without any forethought about the implications. The second was allowing Mature and PG sims to abut.

But the irresponsible part of the immediate action was to combine both sexual and nonsexual content under the label of Adult, along with structuring the rules that would force stores that sell both sexual and non-sexual products to either split into separate stores or lose a chunk of their customer base - or else confront the present issue.

However, creating a continent to which all public Adult content is restricted and allowing child avs there is no different than the previous rule, which said that all adult content had to be on Mature sims, but child avs were allowed there, too.

I must admit that my first reading of your post made me question my memory of what you said in the past, while my second reading made me wonder if the first part and second part had been written by two different people. But now it's all clear, thanks.

NP, I probably sound different as I'm relaxed now and was "irritated" before the clarification from LL.

I think they're making the assumption that not ALL of zinda will be full of adult stuff.

If somebody picked up a zindra region at auction and made it 100% G-rated, would you say that child avatars should not be allowed to be there?

I do not recall seeing "slaves and gags" mentioned in any SL announcements in relation to child avatars. In regards to Zindra, I think the only public statements regarding child avatars have been.

1. At the April 14th brown bag meetings where this was addressed. I do not recall the linden who did, but it would have been either Jack (head of land team), Marty (Legal counsel), or possibly JP. Here's that text, too.


Note that the use of "age play" in the above is assumed to mean "sexual ageplay."

2. In the Mosh sim at the opening, by Blondin Linden. Quote not provided (can't post non-pubic transcripts without permission), but consistent with the above.

3. In the previously mentioned policy statement.

So what are you saying about Lias's statement that asserted "Jack said it is NOT against the rules."? I haven't seen where Jack said that, neither you nor anyone else has provided links where Jack said that. I'm sure he's said many things that people can quote here; I'm only asking about evidence that support Lias's assertion.

Lias? Where's your answer?

I am not going to provide an opinion on the above statement. only providing all I can provide about what was actually said by LL's representatives. Perhaps something more was said at recent office hours that someone can share. I do not have access to such transcripts.

I will add one opinion, though, and that is that this discussion is largely falling into the same "groove" as the previous one on this topic.

Previous ONE?

They always seem to go this way, least since I've been here.

really? it always seemed ageplay was a hair-trigger topic at the lab.

Lias, bloggers and others who continually bring up this 'debate' and seem to think that they are attacking nothing all fit well with what I will now put up to vote as being their lobby 'theme: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkmlujV-TvU

In this case, I was referring to the previous discussion regarding child avatars and Zindra, not the hundreds (or does it just feel like it) that have happened over the last few years.



This was a bit of a surprise to me as well, as reports of sexual ageplay are typically treated a lot stronger than was indicated by this speaker. Then again, said speaker was not a GTeam member. My presumption would be that they may have been including within that situations that were borderline (some of the issues skin sellers have had for example, or some other "edge case" rather than the clear examples of sexual ageplay. Or they were not fully versed on the topic, which is also likely.

There is none. She made it up.

Let's not confuse facts with frenzy.

If we were only had to be concerned with facts, then
1. The *last* place a paedophile/predator would go to find kids would be non-teen SL
2. Even the child avatar being gang-banged would have an adult typist
3. Even the child avatars gang-banging an adult avatar would be adults
4. Even an adult who had repeatedly submitted documentary evidence of age - to an extent that *way* surpasses the Aristotle process - will when they are ARed, be banned again until they submit the exact same documentary evidence.

This is a PR issue. It's not a facts issue. The chances of this becoming a facts/truth issue are slim to nothing.

Zindra has been created expressly to cater for an overweening demand for a 'predictable experience'. LL are dancing to somebody's music.
"Child avatars in Adult-Only environment" is the last echo of open-mindedness in LL. It's Darwin-bound.

No difference in that general aspect.

The difference in Zindra is that Zindra has been expressly created to move that stuff to a ghetto/special-area.
What the f.... would a child avatar be doing there?

The only people getting a free swap into Zindra will be people who have commercialised public Adult content.

1. Once the free swap is over and the rest goes to auction, the prices will be high.
2. At the same time, interesting terrain in the old continent will become even cheaper than is has become recently.
3. Zindra terrain is for the most part mind-numbingly boring.
The combination of 1,2,3 above make it unlikely that much PG-centric new investment will go into Zindra.

I'm a very open-minded person, but I genuinely don't get why a child avatar would want to go into Zindra other that to shove some strange agenda in peoples' faces. According to LL, there's at most 86%-ish of SL that isn't Adult content.
It's simply being provocative in an environment where the landlords will back off when the crap inevitably hits the fan. When they back off, they will back off way too far.
It's the wrong place to have whatever battle is involved.

I think one reason could be to visit friends, who won't all be adult rated after auctions.
Another is that they are paying members of SL like the rest of us and they are allowed to go there. There was talk recently in a thread trying to link bdsm to violence and calls to curtail somethings around that too. Bdsm people also should be let continue full use of their membership.

Neither of these SL avs or styles are wrong in anyway, they are just peoples way, decreasing their rights won't solve a thing. It'll only make problems as I am sure child avs and bdsmers aren't the only thing people want to curtail.

I see it as the problem being the assumption that innocent paying and free members should have less rights.

The point is,achild avs aren't pedo by default and nor are bdsmers violent by default.

Not to interrupt the beating of a dead horse, but what was in the blog still puts the issue as one of personal responsibility for parcel owners and child avs alike. Don't like child avs? Don't be one. Be clear in your parcel restrictions.

The OP started off talking about the offer to move parcels-terraforming and all to their own islands. To a certain extent, this would be a great offer if the terraforming was integral to the build especially. But some of the "hey, we'll move you to you an island" or "get an island and set it whatever way you want" does feel more like LL is sending a collective F*** you to the rest of mainland (Zindra or otherwise) in order to push homestead and estate sales.

The blog was talking about reparcelling some places, particularly so they include beach and waterfront. Are there any rez zones so that its possible to take a boat out and look at the parcels better? Or even just for using a boat or car to play tourist?

It seemed like a lot of the Linden builds were out just as build samples. Are those permanently there? (Like the shell building etc). Are there parcels that are actually normal shaped? The city 1024's I saw had some weird pieces out of them.

Has there been anything announced yet as far as script limitations? The amount of extra scripts running because of how the roads are built seem like they would affect the eventual parcel owners around them.

Am I directly affected? No, only as an adult products customer. I have never experienced the opening of a brand new continent, particularly one that has such a high degree of clusterfudge. Do I have interest in owning land there? No, nice place to visit. Don't want to stay. I am more than happy to help those directly affected any way that I can. I am also interested in watching the before and after. I do however think that if LL is concerned about protecting the infrastructure they should delay the swaps and build roads right first.

I do hope that the Community Standards get clarified as to residential adult activities. Zindra should be commercial areas and residential if someone REALLY wants that. Otherwise, it really does make it look like they want to get rid of adult products if we can buy them but cannot use them in our homes.

Maybe my questions have been answered in other threads, I tried to keep them specific to Jack's blog post. While Desmond and Sling have offered coherent points regarding child avies, they are getting lost when there are those who don't want child avis anywhere other than PG and who will stoop to sensationalism to try and 'win'.

Whether its general behavior, playing as a neko, a kid or whatever it all boils down to individual freedom and responsibility. I thought that was the SL that I joined. If LL did not take action against sexual ageplay or those who setup and file false ARs, THEN there would be a news story. Otherwise, even FOX news would look around, read the policy, find no story and move on.

Yeh, I'd like to see what people think about loosing their lands value and rights to outdoor bonking in mature, I don't like that at all.