lindens latest blog: dob a neighbour

Me, personally? No, I don't support it.

But what I'm saying is that politically, a government or courtroom *can* take that stance. And if they do, LL - and others here - will just have to go along with it, unfortunately.

Then that government does not allow freedom of expression. You also can't apply that to the world wide web because no one government governs the web. The only thing that can be done is that the government the provider of said content is in can police what is legal for them to distribute. So... if a country decides that BDSM is illegal in their country that's fine, but unless the actual equipment is housed in that country they can't do squat about it. If said provider with the equipment has the ability, they could simply move their equipment to a location in which their "offending" material is legal and still be on the WWW anyways.

Community input? Well, We are the community, and so far it seems all were getting is "inputed", so yeah, I guess he's right.

Yea... tha'ts a crock and we all know it. That just sounds good on the video. That's what is called "corporate mentality". It's like where I work at. "Employee input and participation" is when you are given the opportunity to agree with what the corporate heads are doing... just agree mind you. The same w/input... they like you to give input... not so they can take or use it, but so they can go to the media and public and say they asked for "everyone's" input even though they had no intention to use it to begin with.

Besides, the evidence is clear given the responses on the SL Blog, this forum as well as the poll which is also located in this forum. Whatever they define as "the community" certainly isn't the whole of the residents. My guess, as with many others is, the "community" they refer to is the community of investors/businesses they hope to get money from.

Still watching, and not liking him at all .

At 37:00ish he gets all excited about the idea that someone can ban someone else and then that person instantly gets banned across a wide variety of other parcels, the apex of "community rule".

Then he takes it a step further by stating that LL wouldn't close anyone's account anymore, but just publish a "Linden ban list" that you subscribe to to auto-ban people from your land.

well this only confirms what i already knew

But that's not true for Second Life. It's governed by LL, and by extension by the USA. And LL also cares about people from other countries being able to feel safe using it, so they'll submit to their governance, too - to some extent.

Well, you are right in that. LL will do what they want. The problem is this, they've always been supposed champions of freedom of expression. "Your world, Your imagination" riing any bells? The whole concept of the metaverse they wanted to bring into being is about being able to be free to create. Sure, Linden Labs are the Gods of Second Life and they can change their policy at the waive of a hand. Just don't expect the residents to be happy about it. Further, those that purchased islands and invested a lot of money under that premise may very well have a lawsuit in and of themselves because of that pretense. Once you buy a server for an island you've essentially purchased that land as your ownership. LL only provides the service. If LL sold islands to private owners with the intent that those owners had complete control of content. The private owners have a reasonable expectation that they can put on their server what is legal in their country. For intstance if someone wanted to put a BDSM sim up in the US they have every right to do so. Setting up a sim for the express purpose of exchanging RL kiddie porn movies and pictures... not legal and rightfully so.

Wow ..

24:30 - The restrictions against Disclosure will be going away. He didnt even give the tone that it was a good idea.

His claim is thats its unenforcable

Then at 25:00 he admits they cant enforce intolerance restrictions but they will leave it in anyway.

Why is one important to leave in even unenforced, and one not?

He specifically makes a point about the Community Standards .. so He knew about them - but his blog post ignored it. His tone doesnt make the Community Standards seem very important hes only interested in the 1 rule really, Intolerance.


1:12 - He basically admits The Teen grid will be merged into the Main grid. Compared it to World of Warcraft.

Compares PG to Mature as a legacy system to the Disclosure regulations.

1:15 - Says there will always be a Adult 18+ space also.

Journalist background?


Well I understand the Blog Post now. He doesnt think the Community Standards should exist at all except for the Intolerance cluase. So his ignoring a portion of it goes with his statements.

(Keeping in mind I haven't viewed this at all since I'm at work...)

So... the way you make this video sound, he's basically going against everything in that blog post.

I'm not at all sure you're correct there. Whereas LL are based in the US, if they want to broadcast their product in other countries they also have to respect some of the rules of their land.

I know this is certainly the case with World Of Warcraft where on the European realms they hold competitions but exclude certain countries because the rules of the competition don't comply with local laws.

Yeah the Black List World.

I actually unsterstand the idea of not banning people from Second Life at all who dont steal money or compromise data security.

But replacing it with a black list - which since its *not so bad* will be much easier to get on?

I dont like that Idea at all.

Chained Black Lists are very scary to me, becuase they are only as strong as the most irresponsible link in the chain.

I don't, but that's what I was saying - *their* hands may be forced, too. And yes, it's very unfortunate. But the best bet for producers of adult content will probably soon be to get involved in OpenSim.



Where did LL actually say that?



Um, no.. where does it say, in any Linden authored document, that LL will never put any restrictions on content that aren't mandated by a country's own law?

Yes and no -

He says they dont want to police content.

But Later he also says the community pressure will keep adult stuff restricted to adult areas.

I also see why theres no real answer to the Mature/Adult flag discussion

Becuase the way he speaks there eventually is going to be two content types 13+ and Adult.

And teens mixing with adults in all the 13+ areas. Limited by the fact theres US law stating a minimum 13 age for chat rooms, etc.

Probably because he personally believes intolerance is important, and doesn't really care or understands disclosure.

Or he does care, but sees it as an important tool. He talked about the social pressure that comes with identity, the need to have what you're saying is actually true confirmed and how they're going to make it possible to back up claims you make. The more personal (identifying) SL gets, the less disruptive people will be and the less trouble they'll cause.

What striked me the most is towards the end where he talks about diversity in Second Life. "We've never seen people come together en masse to stand behind a single issue" (paraphrased). If he truly believes that, then any claim of "broadly offensive to the community" looses all face value, because he just admitted that there are too many groups and too many people to have a majority, there are only vocal minorties.

I said "a reasonable expectation", I didn't say (or know) if it's written down anywhere. It's not like WoW or other MMORPGs in the sense that you "buy" time in a month per month basis like a subscription. People pay RL money to produce and buy content. If you buy an island (or anything else for that matter). It may be virtual, but it's still your property. So then you get into the leagal morass of "ownership". Someone buys a sim and sets it up as a BDSM sim in 2005. It's been active as such for two years and the owners have invested thousands of real money into that sim. Suddenly LL decides that BDSM is "Boradly Offensive" and bans the owners and takes everything from the sim. How is that right?

Well, that's no different than what's currently set up.



Still... a loosening of the leash more than a tightening. The only question I have is how are they going to avoid exactly what they fear the most if they merge the grids? Unless all content meaning everything down to individual objects and textures will have an "adult" flag on them.

I wonder if Daniel is the Linden the rest of them never talk about. Every family has one.

actually no

He wants to get rid of PG/Mature distinctions - he calls it a legacy system they dont need.

The only things that would be not PG would be in Flagged, Adult areas.

This is a scary motivator.

Combine this with Chained Black Lists and its horrifying.

Im surprized he has a journalism background.

course so did Goebbels.

How is that different?

Becuase flagged adult areas will require Age/Identity Verifications.

And there will be no Mature Land per se.

[that's @573 for those keeping score; how time flies...]
I think "malassociation" is where the Lindens have a legitimate ongoing business reason to influence user-supplied content. While I've posted about the absurdity both of various forms of "pixel sex" and of its repression, I really wouldn't want to be associated with a Second Life that had no standards of decency at all: an Al Queda sim in which RL terror plots are anonymously exchanged or practiced, say, or the Darfur sim where ongoing crimes against humanity are role-played for amusement.

Ignoring their impracticality for the nonce, these absurd examples are meant to illustrate that we all have something with which we are unwilling to be associated. It is not enough that I don't go to an Al Queda sim; rather, it must not exist, or SL is not a fit place from which to receive UDP packets.

Which makes me wonder: has the balance between "art" and pr0n noticeably shifted, one way or another? Is the grid sliding into an abyss of degradation, or is the maturation of the medium gradually pushing sex to the sidelines--as has happened with every new communication technology since cave-painting?

A couple of issues, one a terrorist sim where they plot real life terrorism is no different to doing it via email and I doubt any terrorist organisation are going to be undergoing such practices in a place where it's well known the FBI have been looking.

However with news corporations moving in, a disaster, earthquake, that's the sort of thing they'd love, roleplaying news. Sky News hinted as much in the blurb for their move here. So your examples might not be as extreme as you think.

I think we can agree to some degree with this, however, I think the point you are missing is the targets of this morality inquisition seems to be the sexual going ons between consenting adults. When one practices BDSM they aren't plotting real life terror events nor are they threatening anyone in RL. Hate groups are already not allowed in SL as well. So once again, we come back to the point where the status-quo is already adequate without creating a witch hunt.

Since we are all "sliding into the abyss", can we expect to see you riding your moral high horse on the first of the witch hunts for that which you find "inappropriate"?