Recent content by AngelKitty

By special case, I mean that the tiny avatars are so small that they seem to escape the assumption (of many people I've either met or read their opinions) that an avatar that is "too short" is a child.

On a G rated sim, that would not be expected. G rated sim policy expressly forbids nudity and sexual activity. On an M rated sim, "non-explicit" and "mildly sexual" conduct is allowed under LL policies, so the "is expected" clause applies - even on land where the owner or tenant has published a...

In RL, there is the "fur suit loophole": The person in the suit is covered, so isn't nude. But the character the suit portrays could be "in the fur". In SL, I have no doubt that "if it looks like a skin, it is a skin, no matter what layer it's worn on" will apply. So, a skin with a modesty...

From a screen picture, no one could tell if the modesty layer was removable. However, LL can examine your Current Outfit folder to determine what your avatar is currently wearing. (For that matter, there are scripts that can list what your avatar is wearing, though an ordinary user would not be...

I would suggest only setting G in the viewer preferences as that is the only land where LL content policy expressly forbids nudity. However, the "is present" clause could still be validly applied even to a G (general) area since nothing in SL actually prevents nudity in a G area. Aside from...

From the policy: "Child avatar content creators are required to add a modesty layer which is baked into child avatar skins or bodies, is not transparent " While that could be interpreted as "not sheer", the language "not transparent" could be construed as excluding alpha layers to render those...

While I believe that is their current intent, I am concerned that they will be pressured to adhere to some minimum avatar height and breast size if for no other reason than that would be legally safer. For many years, many area owners/operators and their managers have had policies that declare...