Has The Backlash Begun?

[Cristiano]

A recent Reddit post .which seems to becoming more and more common, mentions an avatar being banned for "ageplay" when they are not involved in anything except having a younger looking avi, with no recourse or appeal. Granted, everyone always claims they are innocent when banned, but this is still concerning:

 

[Cristiano]

A mod from the secondlife subreddit that I know nailed it pretty well on the head:

 

[Madi Perth]

This is what I'm afraid of. Another witch hunt based on the size of the avatar I've chosen to play.

 

[Monica Dream]

This is going to be really ugly, really soon. I age shift (bounce between kid and adult depending on my mood and on what I'm doing) so I expect to end up with a ban sooner or later. I'm guessing more sooner.

It'll hurt, but luckily I'm spending more time on rl hobbies so it'll hurt less.

 

[Monica Dream]

Here's the thing, someone in reddit mentioned new rules -I didn't see any threads about them in reddit, nor in SL's General Discussion. Is there a link or anything talking about them -or was it buried on some video or podcast or something?

 

[Madi Perth]

It is ridiculously easy to get around a SL ban. I've know of at least one who manages to get his/her ass banned at least a couple times a year. Once you think they are gone, then they will wash right back up with the same name, and basically the same look and everything. I really think it's unfair that they have to tar all of us with the same brush just because of the actions of a few. An personally I'm getting tired spending insane amounts of money on a hobby only to be treated like crap by some people and the people that run the company. The only reason I've not walked away is because of the insane amounts of money I have spent on this hobby, and the friends I have in world. I tell myself its better than a cocaine habit, but I'm to sure about that anymore.

Anyway, if they decide to crack down on child avatars and I get banned, then I won't be back.

 

[Cristiano]

Here's the thing, someone in reddit mentioned new rules -I didn't see any threads about them in reddit, nor in SL's General Discussion. Is there a link or anything talking about them -or was it buried on some video or podcast or something?

They have not been announced yet, they were hinted at in LL's letter a few weeks ago addressing everything.

 

[Monica Dream]

It is ridiculously easy to get around a SL ban. I've know of at least one who manages to get his/her ass banned at least a couple times a year. Once you think they are gone, then they will wash right back up with the same name, and basically the same look and everything. I really think it's unfair that they have to tar all of us with the same brush just because of the actions of a few. An personally I'm getting tired spending insane amounts of money on a hobby only to be treated like crap by some people and the people that run the company. The only reason I've not walked away is because of the insane amounts of money I have spent on this hobby, and the friends I have in world. I tell myself its better than a cocaine habit, but I'm to sure about that anymore.

Anyway, if they decide to crack down on child avatars and I get banned, then I won't be back.

Oh, sure, totally. I have the same attitude. I'm here mostly for friends and "sunken costs" but if they give me the boot then neither of those will be a factor for me.

Hell, I already quit once (last fall); tell me to fuck off and I will.

 

[Monica Dream]

They have not been announced yet, they were hinted at in LL's letter a few weeks ago addressing everything.

Ok -so nothing's dropped yet. Obviously, that doesn't mean nothing will -it just hasn't yet.

I suspect there won't be a set of new rules but rather more stringent (and arbitary? that's my fear) enforcement and interpretation of current ones.

EDIT: my reason for thinking that being that their window for getting good PR by laying down stone tablets has passed and they seem to want to say as little about this as they can get away with. Changing enforcement allows them say almost nothing, but dropping new rules would draw attention to a subject they don't want people to think about.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Well one of the things which kept SL running for such a long time is the most popular role play setting in it - families. So playing children the platonic way is for many of these players an important part of it. Adoption agencies have been around for that since ages.

If LL should really axe this community, well then good luck with that - it would be probably equal to shooting yourself into the knee.

 

[Monica Dream]

Naw, as long as they have the furries they'll be financially solvent. I'm not even kidding.

 

[Sid]

Here's the thing, someone in reddit mentioned new rules -I didn't see any threads about them in reddit, nor in SL's General Discussion. Is there a link or anything talking about them -or was it buried on some video or podcast or something?

There was some mentioning in the Lab Gab of April. It was vague and soon™.
Nothing is implemented yet.
My guess is there will be a mandatory agree moment with the new TOS at log in, when new rules get in place.

Of course land owners can swing their ban hammers whenever they feel like it. And the drama lovers will, as always.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

I suspect the vast majority of people nuked for age play are guilty. I think reports of Linden Lab being trigger happy are overblown. I think the latest moral panic is maybe being used to reignite fears of a witch hunt that might not actually be happening.

I bet Linden Labs is in a difficult situation where they worry about being sued if they share how much dirt they really have on the people banned, so they sadly leave us with too many unanswered questions. I'm honestly willing to bet they won't ban people without explicit references to age play in chats, but they don't want to advertise that because then guilty parties would get smarter about self censoring.

In short, I am not convinced LL has ever been trigger happy about avatar appearance, but but I would love to know more about their secret policies we have basically no transparency on. Even if they of course don't want to tell us everything. I don't completely trust LL to be fair but also take all the reports of false bans with a grain of salt.

...I mean... maybe I'm wrong. I'd like a bit more transparency from LL about what they look for and I do think people with nuked accounts are entitled to know what LL had on them, but I'm still very suspicious of the people who were banned but claim total innocence.

 

[Cindy Claveau]

I always feel somewhat conflicted over the issue of ageplay. It's not always all the time about sex, contrary to the allegations of so many. I know for a fact (close friends) that some SLers use ageply as platonic therapy, re-enacting lost or abused childhoods. To me, that's a perfectly legit way to use Second Life. But I also know that that moralistic climate in the US (home base for LL) has been hyper-sensitive about anything even remotely suggesting ageplay or pedophilia. I remember a few years back, one well known and creative member was raided by the FBI and ended up leaving SL. I never did (probably never will) find out if he was guilty. He was just gone. There's no doubt he had legions of enemies.

 

[Monica Dream]

...I mean... maybe I'm wrong. I'd like a bit more transparency from LL about what they look for and I do think people with nuked accounts are entitled to know what LL had on them, but I'm still very suspicious of the people who were banned but claim total innocence.

A few years ago, I would have agreed. However, I've had too many aquaintences I'm reasonably sure didn't do crap just 'poof'. If you make someone mad and they do a bogus report on you you're more likely to get a knee-jerk ban from LL these days than back when we had this conversation on SLU (about people protesting their innocence).

I've sat through enough dubious threads that I can get where you're coming from -but it doesn't match my inworld experience in 2024.

 

[Madi Perth]

A few years ago, I would have agreed. However, I've had too many aquaintences I'm reasonably sure didn't do crap just 'poof'. If you make someone mad and they do a bogus report on you you're more likely to get a knee-jerk ban from LL these days than back when we had this conversation on SLU (about people protesting their innocence).

I've lost a few friends over the years over a suspicious ageplay report. I can't be 100% certain of their innocence but a few of them I've known for years and I'm inclined to believe them.

What I wish LL would do is enforce the other rules in the TOS as half as they do the ageplay issues. My estate gets harassed by a individual that sneaks in and records places in the estate, including private residences and performances, in defiance of the covenant of the estate that says video isn't allowed. This is also clearly in the TOS that in places where you do not have permission to video you can't. He then posts them to youtube and makes disparaging comments about us there. When we ban him he just creates a new alt, comes in and starts the process all over. When you get banned from a estate and then create an alt to get around the ban to continue your TOS violation, I count that as harassment. Yet, when I file over two dozen AR reports about his activities and TOS violation, talk to them on the phone about his activates, all I get from LL is "keep filing AR reports on him and his alts and we'll look in to it." What happens? Jack and shit happens.

An I'm not the only one filing AR reports about this issue. Last time I counted there was over 36 AR reports filed by others.

So yeah, my confidence in LL ability to not fuck this up, isn't that high.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

I know for a fact (close friends) that some SLers use ageply as platonic therapy, re-enacting lost or abused childhoods. To me, that's a perfectly legit way to use Second Life.

This is exactly why I have never or will never rat someone out for it. I mind my own business.

A few years ago, I would have agreed. However, I've had too many aquaintences I'm reasonably sure didn't do crap just 'poof'. If you make someone mad and they do a bogus report on you you're more likely to get a knee-jerk ban from LL these days than back when we had this conversation on SLU (about people protesting their innocence).

I've sat through enough dubious threads that I can get where you're coming from -but it doesn't match my inworld experience in 2024.

I can relate to wanting to trust someone who protests their innocence. We'll never really know without a lot more transparency from LL.

 

[Madi Perth]

Something just occurred to me. What is to stop some child hating user from setting up a M sim, or even a G sim, luring a bunch of child avatars there, changing the rating to A and then ARing everyone there? Technically they are involution of the new rules coming up now.

 

[Cindy Claveau]

Something just occurred to me. What is to stop some child hating user from setting up a M sim, or even a G sim, luring a bunch of child avatars there, changing the rating to A and then ARing everyone there? Technically they are involution of the new rules coming up now.

That's a LOT of work.

 

[Monica Dream]

That's a LOT of work.

Not impossible, and I've seen it done over opensimworld when two grids were feuding. I re-read what she wrote, I'm mistaken. However, it is a lot like what Adequacy.org used to do back in the day (write a flame bait article, use a sock-puppet to post in news groups, get people to come over and then play games with them in their comment section). I'm sure there's much more modern examples to be had (I'm just not paying attention).

Point being, it's not completely implausible, or even slightly.