Child Avatars and the CDS

[Ranma Tardis]

What is a "child" avatar? Any avatar under two meters?

[Han Held]

What is a "child" avatar? Any avatar under two meters?

Naw, that would refer to "tinys" too.

It's a self-applied label -basically it refers to someone who portrays a kid in SL. If you're 8 meters tall and claim to be 12 then boom...you're a kid avi.

The LL links I posted should explain it better than I have.

[Ranma Tardis]

You quoted Official Linden Labs policy. Some places in SL eject and ban avatars under 2 meters.

[Han Held]

You quoted Official Linden Labs policy. Some places in SL eject and ban avatars under 2 meters.

Right -we're not "some places", though and I don't care what they do.

I'm not suggesting nor approving of any weird height rule. Particularly not the kind that some places set up.

[edit] I removed the post with Penny's blog entry since it depends on the illustrations, but the illustrations no longer load.

[Bagheera]

Slippery slope...At what place do we draw the line? I honestly don't know.

Which is why relying on the Linden Labs TOS is the best path. They have a battery of attorneys and the investment made to ensure where the lines are drawn are reliable. We don't.

Secondly ...
The video you referenced took place before a lot of things in our laws and in our culture changed...considering the dodgy ethics of Led Zeppelin, they wouldn't be my first choice to use as a role model for almost anything.

I hoped the video of the children playing in the water would be taken on its own merits. If you think that video is obscene, then please say so. I don't. I am certainly no apologist for Led Zeppelin.

If one starts carting out unrelated character flaws to further their arguments, the waters get murky very fast - from Hitler was a vegetarian to Greek culture revered pederasty - suddenly you get a whole gamut of culturally enriching and ennobling things that are tainted or untouchable by association.

I still mourn that one of my absolute favorite and very innocent jokes is now one I can't tell because it was by Bill Cosby. I still think the joke is absolutely divine, but I just can't tell it anymore because I have to say where it came from and that starts a dark discussion when I was just wanting to share a laugh.

We humans are not each all evil or all good, but swirling shades of light and dark, all colors of the rainbow.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Have we had a problem with activities with/by child avatars? Or with nudity? Can we not just keep it simple and enforce the TOS, which are adequate for the job?

Why wait until there's a problem to solve a problem?

It's an issue that's not unheard of, and speaking as someone who runs around in a kid avi I would enjoy being able to point to a CDS document that says that I'm fine, that I'm compliant and that anyone who has a problem with my avi can go pound sand.

We are going to be kept very busy indeed if we try to make rules about everything that could possibly happen in the future. Be that as it may, and Bags has addressed this much more eloquently than I am doing, the fact is that LL has already handled the child avatar issue, and I feel sure that Marianne would agree that is the case. TOS says that you are fine and that you are compliant, and that should be good enough to shut down any potential complaints.

[Han Held]

Slippery slope...At what place do we draw the line? I honestly don't know.

Which is why relying on the Linden Labs TOS is the best path. They have a battery of attorneys and the investment made to ensure where the lines are drawn are reliable. We don't.

Secondly ...
The video you referenced took place before a lot of things in our laws and in our culture changed...considering the dodgy ethics of Led Zeppelin, they wouldn't be my first choice to use as a role model for almost anything.

I hoped the video of the children playing in the water would be taken on its own merits. If you think that video is obscene, then please say so. I don't. I am certainly no apologist for Led Zeppelin.

If one starts carting out unrelated character flaws to further their arguments, the waters get murky very fast - from Hitler was a vegetarian to Greek culture revered pederasty - suddenly you get a whole gamut of culturally enriching and ennobling things that are tainted or untouchable by association.

I still mourn that one of my absolute favorite and very innocent jokes is now one I can't tell because it was by Bill Cosby. I still think the joke is absolutely divine, but I just can't tell it anymore because I have to say where it came from and that starts a dark discussion when I was just wanting to share a laugh.

We humans are not each all evil or all good, but swirling shades of light and dark, all colors of the rainbow.

First let me get something out of the way; I am sorry, and I apologize if what I wrote came off as insulting in any way. It wasn't intended to be.

I'm going to try to take one more stab at making the point I was trying to make to you, then I'm going to take the hint and let this whole topic go.

You asked if I felt that film was offensive -I don't think that's the right question. I think the right question is "could that be made and published today?" I believe that the answer to that question is "no, people would flip their shit" -because of how we view things and because of changing mores.

Another great example would be Lou Reed's "Walk on the wild side". It has nothing to do with kids, it as to do with my point that our values have changed. Changed to the point where there is no way in hades that you could get a song on the air with the lyrics "she never lost her head/even when she was giving head" today. Maybe bleeped, but I tend to doubt it. Yet it was all over the radio when I was a child!

Again, I hope you accept my apology if my post before came off as insulting.

[Dianne Mechanique]

Hello, old seasoned debater here, but somehow this is my "first post" lol ...
I know I'm new and probably not up on all the rules and previous arguments/legislation but I thought I'd give my perspective anyway.

I'm with most of you in that I don't really know how to relate to an avatar who plays as a child, but then I don't get role-playing at all for the most part. I have actually played as a child avatar myself though. Garnet Psaltery and myself started at the same time in 2004 and we used to run around as children sometimes just for laughs. It had absolutely nothing to do with sex or sexuality (at least for us) and was more about just acting like an idiot. Another original member of the CDS (one of our founders!) Kendra Bancroft, also used to play as a child avatar sometimes. So while not all of us can understand the urge, it's not necessarily something weird or "bad."

Ranma Tardis asks: "What is a child avatar? An avatar under two metres?" ...which I think highlights that we are talking about role-playing here, because of course, you can be a small avatar and not be a "child." So we are definitely talking about an avatar role-playing as a child in the CDS. Now, the CDS is not a role-playing community, but then as Han points out, some people role play their whole lives in the CDS. I saw a cat that lives in one of the Fachwerks the other day (sorry I forgot your name). So member are allowed to role-play in the CDS as whatever they want.

It also seems to me that what we are really talking about here is someone who role-plays as a child in their leisure time, and the issue of a cat or a baby running for the CDS is a bit of a red herring because it would only work as a "joke" candidacy. People would have to be really quite fed up with Democratic process for that kind of joke to be funny or succeed in the CDS and I don't see that as likely.

What avatars do in the CDS in their leisure time is already covered by the ToS so maybe there isn't much need for clarification, but on the other hand the whole point of the CDS is making our own rules and our own laws. If our laws can only ever be a subset of the ToS, then what are we doing here anyway? There are also logical arguments that can be made that the CDS is not legally obligated to follow the ToS.

An issue that I find more important and more interesting in general is that of nudity. Obviously child avatars are not okay if they are sexual in public, because in fact no avatars are allowed to be sexual in public, either because of the ToS or because of our own rules.

As Bagheera points out though, nudity is not necessarily sexual, so is public nudity (child or non-child) okay in the CDS if it isn't explicitly sexual? I don't think the answer to that one is actually very clear at all.

For instance we are not "Adult" sims, but in RL, I can legally go topless in public in what would be a "G-rated" area in SL. Do we really want to be more restrictive than RL? Are we an explicitly conservative community? If so, who says so?

If I sit out in my back yard topless in SL, am I in violation of the law? I'm still on my property, but people can see me and the current rule for nudity as far as I understand is "only indoors." On the other hand, if we get upset about someone being topless in their back yard, isn't that a bit foolish considering anyone can cam inside anyone else's house and as Bagheera points out, anyone can secretly derender anyone else's clothes at any time.

Ultimately, I think we should focus on our own Democracy and our own rules and forget about what the ToS says for the most part but then .. I'm a bit of a rebel, lol.

[Han Held]

Hello, old seasoned debater here, but somehow this is my "first post" lol ...

Welcome! Your old account is probably still around -if you want back, it might be possible to have Gwyn fix it?

It also seems to me that what we are really talking about here is someone who role-plays as a child in their leisure time, and the issue of a cat or a baby running for the CDS is a bit of a red herring because it would only work as a "joke" candidacy. People would have to be really quite fed up with Democratic process for that kind of joke to be funny or succeed in the CDS and I don't see that as likely.

Definately -though I think there have been times (I'm thinking around 2014?) where the mood has been that exasperated -or so I gather. That's right before I joined and I could be wrong, but that's the impression I got.

I wasn't talking about serving on the government, and I was a little startled when Em mentioned it because I thought that would be covered by our over-all philosophy that we're not a roleplaying community. Someone acting like Jon Snow in the middle of an RA meeting would be just as unwelcome as someone pretending to be a kid or a kitten.

What avatars do in the CDS in their leisure time is already covered by the ToS so maybe there isn't much need for clarification, but on the other hand the whole point of the CDS is making our own rules and our own laws. If our laws can only ever be a subset of the ToS, then what are we doing here anyway? There are also logical arguments that can be made that the CDS is not legally obligated to follow the ToS.

It depends on what you mean by 'legally'. There's legal as in the real-world court system; in which case I would agree with you. But then there's 'legally as in 'in compliance with the terms of use for this service (admittedly a more informal use of the term).

Nothing obligates us to toe the Linden Line except for a shared desire to keep using this service. Interestingly enough, Rosie did a survey recently on people's desire to expand to other platforms (specifically Opensim) and there was like near-zero interest in moving out of SL.

An issue that I find more important and more interesting in general is that of nudity. Obviously child avatars are not okay if they are sexual in public, because in fact no avatars are allowed to be sexual in public, either because of the ToS or because of our own rules.

As Bagheera points out though, nudity is not necessarily sexual, so is public nudity (child or non-child) okay in the CDS if it isn't explicitly sexual? I don't think the answer to that one is actually very clear at all.

For instance we are not "Adult" sims, but in RL, I can legally go topless in public in what would be a "G-rated" area in SL. Do we really want to be more restrictive than RL? Are we an explicitly conservative community? If so, who says so?

I don't believe you can go topless or naked in a General ("G rated") area in SL, specifically because they allow people who are real-life minors there, and that could potentially cause no end of legal hassles for LL.

We're not "General" though and in theory we could turn into a nudist colony and I'm not aware of anything in the TOS that would forbid it. It does bring up a bunch of other issues to work out, however. For instance, if a public event is being held and a citizen objects to having to face nudity, and another person insists on being naked ...who would have to concede? IE who would be in the right? That's simply the most obvious question I can think of off the top of my head. I think there's probably a lot of others.

If I sit out in my back yard topless in SL, am I in violation of the law? I'm still on my property, but people can see me and the current rule for nudity as far as I understand is "only indoors." On the other hand, if we get upset about someone being topless in their back yard, isn't that a bit foolish considering anyone can cam inside anyone else's house and as Bagheera points out, anyone can secretly derender anyone else's clothes at any time.

Ultimately, I think we should focus on our own Democracy and our own rules and forget about what the ToS says for the most part but then .. I'm a bit of a rebel, lol.

So far the sense I get is that people think that I'm tilting at windmills (nods towards Sylvia) -so why don't we drop my issue and focus instead on making a decision on how to handle nudity instead? Or at least talking it out?

There's at least one technical point to be made on this. These days parcels offer a setting in about land: "Avatars on other parcels can see and chat with avatars on this parcel".

What that means is that by disabling that option, no one can see your avatar...clothed or naked.

That offers the possibility of two compromises between a nudist and anti-nudist (if such a POV exist currently) camps we can choose either
1)The CDS require that people who want to be naked outdoors have that setting disabled so that people cannot look in.
or
2)The CDS require that anyone who has a beef with nudity disable their own parcel privacy options and stay in their own nudity-free encampment if they can't hang.
Or both.

Before getting behind the idea of a separate nudist area, though, I would have to see examples of non-cruisey and mature nudist areas in SL. The reason for that being is that I have had "adult" accounts and have seen a fair number of nude beaches but in SL that always has seemed to go hand-in-hand with sex.

That makes me skeptical that one can have a beach (or nudist resort) in sl which is open to the public and not have it devolve into a cheapo hookup joint.

Although that only is relevant for official, government-sponsored areas. I'm not aware of anything that would prohibit anyone from setting up a nudist anything and opening it up to the public ...ill-advised or not. (though if it's commercial then I think certain parts of the covenants would kick in?)

[Shep]

As far as I understand the TOS .. you cannot be nude outside unless the sim is graded as Adult ... I believe there are many sims with nude beaches .. not my scene but each to their own lol ... I certainly have no desire to turn any part of the CDS into a nudist area ... I think CDS does just fine as it is as far as nudity is concerned ...

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

A nude beach without sexual activity can be on Moderate land. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_ ... ontent_FAQ

[Coop]

I'd go for something clear and simple to sort out several issues, mostly as a restatement of the local rules...

Make sure the 'No RP talk in public meetings' is clear for everyone, no nudity or obvious sexualized behaviors in public, and try to clear up any misgivings or misunderstandings about child avis, to restate that we hold close to the TOS and won't put up with anything that appears to be over the line.

As far as height goes, my avi is close to my RL height on the scale, with maybe a tick more (I'm 6'4" in socks IRL). I can't tell you how many times Josie and I were the shortest people in the room in some clubs we used to visit. Depending on which scale you use, I'm a touch under 2 meters. I don't want this to turn into a Height Purge, as one of my best friends has a very short adult avi (because she is a very short adult in RL) and she occasionally gets grief from the mainland Glamazons.

the bottom line is kid avis are ok, childplay, as in TOS, isn't.

[Ranma Tardis]

I'd go for something clear and simple to sort out several issues, mostly as a restatement of the local rules...

Make sure the 'No RP talk in public meetings' is clear for everyone, no nudity or obvious sexualized behaviors in public, and try to clear up any misgivings or misunderstandings about child avis, to restate that we hold close to the TOS and won't put up with anything that appears to be over the line.

As far as height goes, my avi is close to my RL height on the scale, with maybe a tick more (I'm 6'4" in socks IRL). I can't tell you how many times Josie and I were the shortest people in the room in some clubs we used to visit. Depending on which scale you use, I'm a touch under 2 meters. I don't want this to turn into a Height Purge, as one of my best friends has a very short adult avi (because she is a very short adult in RL) and she occasionally gets grief from the mainland Glamazons.

the bottom line is kid avis are ok, childplay, as in TOS, isn't.

Coop what is "RP talk"? As for nudity it is not prohibited in moderate zones. The Adult area was made to do the nasty in public. I do not think the CDS has a law against public nudity. You make us out to be prudes.

As for height, I am about 5'8" tall in the game well under two meters. I often get harassed in clubs and thus do not visit them.

What is "childplay?" What do we as a government have to do that is not already covered in the Linden Terms of Service?

[Han Held]

Coop what is "RP talk"?

Imma not knows evver so's I asks my dadd an he says lil hannah you too youngs an I say BUT DADDY I WAANA KNOWS so he finks vor a minutes an then he tawks real funny and sats up straight an he he saids

Lo, behold the land which is laid before us -the praeatorium. It is here where we will lay waste to our foes with whom we have fought these many ages. For each of the deaths we have suffered, indeed for each injustice we shall with our swords and our chariots and our arrows inflict four fold injuries upon them. So sleep well, on the morrow we ride!

I nots understands so he hans me catsnip an says "Make believe, little Hannah...it's playing make-believe." I still not knows but I habs catnips an that all I cares bout.

As for height, I am about 5'8" tall in the game well under two meters. I often get harassed in clubs and thus do not visit them.

and that's an example of why using height as a way to gauge "age" is stupid as fudge and also why no one is proposing height limits, and why several of us have said that they're not on the table.

Like, not at all on the table.

What is "childplay?"

I'm not Coop, obviously; but I believe he's referring to sexual ageplay. (in contrast to non-sexual ageplay -ie what they do at the willowdale estate; school play, pretend families, etc)

[Coop]

but I believe he's referring to sexual ageplay. (in contrast to non-sexual ageplay -ie what they do at the willowdale estate; school play, pretend families, etc)

Spot on Han. Thank you for clarifying what I meant.