Fear and Loathing in Second Life: The New Sex and Violence Policy
by prokofy on 01/06/07 at 1:30 am
By Prokofy Neva, Community Affairs Desk. Op-Ed.
The new Linden policy on explicit sexual and violent material in Second Life is going to cause a total uproar. It was posted this evening California time at 6:00 pm, and not everyone may have noticed it. It is signed not by Robin Linden, who has signed the last few posts on “ageplay” much less Philip Linden, and not by Chadrick Linden. It’s signed by Daniel Linden, head of community affairs, a Linden from who we actually don’t often hear very often, and see much less in world (he has no office hours).
Here’s the nut graph:
The diversity of things to see and do within Second Life is almost unimaginable, but our community has made it clear to us that certain types of content and activity are simply not acceptable in any form. Real-life images, avatar portrayals, and other depiction of sexual or lewd acts involving or appearing to involve children or minors; real-life images, avatar portrayals, and other depictions of sexual violence including rape, real-life images, avatar portrayals, and other depictions of extreme or graphic violence, and other broadly offensive content are never allowed or tolerated within Second Life.
No more can people endlessly speculate whether the Lindens are or are not banning and penalizing “ageplay” — it’s now laid down in black and white by stipulating that not only “real-life images” but “avatar portrayals” that depict sexual or lewd acts involving or appearing to involve children or minors are now an actionable offense.
The new policy is not put in a TOS — yet — and it’s upgraded considerably from Chadrick Linden’s curious extrajudicial notecarded policy of some months ago. But it’s unmistakeable. No “ageplay”. Full stop.
Going even further — further than anyone might have imagined — the Lindens also appear to be taking steps here against BDSM, Capture Roleplay and other forms of rape, slavery and “extreme or graphic violence”. The mere “avatar portrayal” of rape, as in Angel Fluffy’s popular “Capture Roleplay” maze and many other RP scenes in SL, is no longer to be tolerated in Second Life.
On the one hand, the policy is to be applauded, in my view, for finally explaining very clearly and unambiguously that even “avatar portrayal” counts; that avatars are as real as people when it comes to TOS violations and even RL crimes. That’s striking a blow in favour of virtuality of the kind Urizenus wants to have for the Bragg v. Linden case. On the other hand, many people will seize on this very long-delayed and very disingenous policy as placing a serious chill on freedom of expression, art, creativity, and the kind of deep, intensive human relationships that people have in Second Life, about which Philip Linden especially seems to rhapsodize about. Most disturbing, in two tiny phrases, “our community” and “are never allowed or tolerated,” Daniel both wipes out history — he puts the public record down the memory hole — and makes it appear as if there is something called “the community” which ostensible deliberated and “has spoken”. Neither is the case.
I personally, as a person who believes strongly that virtuality affects reality and is a part of reality (a view that isn’t popular among cynical Herald reporters, readers and commentators), am glad to see the Lindens finally take a moral stand and play the role they need to play as a virtual world service provider on the Internet in establishing the moral code. I have grown increasingly distressed at the way in which both BDSM and “ageplay” have spread virally in SL, have taken in more and more vulnerable and younger people (even if their underage status cannot be determined), and have become more and more tolerated in a climate that creates, as I have often argued, an enabling environment for real-life crime. While apologists for BDSM and pedophilia constantly wave around arguments about “consent” and ‘the age for consent” and “consual adults,” in fact RL penal codes make infliction of pain or enslavement even with consent a crime, and society often questions whether that consent is really what it claims.
The Lindens aren’t a religious people, however; their sudden piety about “a safe world” and their sudden revulsion over extreme sex and violence isn’t driven by morality — it’s driven by a very deadly-earnest practical wish to limit their liability for litigation. Urizenus and other cheerleaders for Bragg — a bad case making a good law (never happens!) want legal sanction for virtuality — this litigation liability development has caused our Lindens to run for the hills and protect themselves with as much legalized language as possible around another set of controversial issues — sex and violence.
How will this policy be policed? The same “community” that ostensibly “spoke” and said it had “never tolerated” these awful things (of course it had!) is now going to be charged with a) policing itself under the new abuse-report regime and b) informing on its neighbours in the police-state method for which SL is notorious. That’s why, when I fired off a response immediately to Daniel Linden, why I applauded him making a clear statement and taking a moral stand — something I think a company making the Metaverse and taking a leadership role in virtuality *should* be doing — I cautioned him that in their current climate of vindictive score-settling, the policy would more likely serve as a club to beat others with and remove undesirables than to really achieve that moral world that Daniel claims is his vision. (And one only has to watch his video presentation at Stanford, where he snickers at the concept of weasels having an “age of consent,” to understand that he is merely hanging on to his job by issuing this edict, he’s not articulating a genuinely-held belief from the bottom of his soul. Oh, well, we’ll take our morality where we can get it, these days.)
So what’s likely to happen? People who are disliked by some, like me, people who are controversial, who have opinions others don’t like — like this one I’m writing — are going to be targeted and victimized with this policy. Somebody like csven Concord, who hated that I supported the idea of accepting that LL must act against virtual child porn, will try to threaten me with chat-logging my tenants he finds suspicious and trying to “pin something on me”, and even outrageously accuse me of failing to report a real-life crime — incredibly vicious posts that he cluttered up Clickable Culture for days with, leading me to challenge him to the hilt, and culminating in both of us not only being permabanned from Clickable Culture by the soi-disant civil libertarian Tony Walsh, but having all our posts for three years nuked.
The Doomsday approach by Ratboy to the controversy around “ageplay” is a taste of what control and morality and the rule-by-community and code-as-law will bring us in the coming years, as the old concept of civil society and rule of law is thrown overboard — because people could not remain moral and law-abiding when let loose in a virtual utopia and left to their own devices. Nor could they be civil in arguing what the boundaries should be.
Or we’ll get things like the odious Jauani Wu, mendaciously blackmailing me and seeking a payment from me of $50,000 Lindens in order to prevent him from publishing what he claims is a lewd chatlog of mine — and then claiming he was paid off — a lie. We’ll see more of that. Whenever there are more things criminalized, whenever a lot of discretion is left to those in power, whenever illegitimate abstractions like a non-existent “community” are put forward as tribal decrees rather than a democratically-created rule of law interpreted by accountable justices, that’s what happens — blackmail, scamming, lies, libel.
The police-state concept is alive and well as we can see from the second — and last — paragraph from the Daniel Edict, and the punishment truly harsh — confiscation of one’s land and goods (viz. Bragg)
Please help us to keep Second Life a safe and welcoming space by continuing to notify Linden Lab about locations in-world that are violating our Community Standards regarding broadly offensive and potentially illegal content. Our team monitors such notification 24-hours a day, seven-days a week. Individuals and groups promoting or providing such content and activities will be swiftly met with a variety of sanctions, including termination of accounts, closure of groups, removal of content, and loss of land. It’s up to all of us to make sure Second Life remains a safe and welcoming haven of creativity and social vision.
What can a landlord like me practically do with an edict like this, which professes a morality I share, which comes close to my very own policy drafted in recent weeks in anticipation of the Linden verification procedure — whenever they were to announce it — but contains awfully draconian punishments in store? While no “team” is available to restart my broken and blocked sim 24/7, they’re available to come look at a swingset and see if maybe some child avatar is lewdly posed on it. Because “avatar portrayal” doesn’t just mean pictures; it means any act or motion or…anything at all…in our streaming video world.
Will people get warnings? Will they have a chance to try to warn their tenants? Will they be able to police their land effectively? I’m expecting rough sledding ahead as I try to enforce the unenforceable with the non-compliant and beligerent.
If vigorously implemented (and not merely a show of good intention to limit liability from litigation) and abuse-reported from inworld, these two paragraphs of Daniel Lindens could have a profound effect on the society and economy of Second Life. Hold on to your hats…
Klink Epsilon
Jun 1st, 2007
>Gays and AIDS do sometimes go together. To say they are unrelated would be retarded. BDSM and pedophilia go together often too, more’s the pity. And both are reprehensible lifestyles intellectually indefensible in a democratic and free society.
You have just made a statement of fact about BDSM and Pedophilia go together often. Statement of fact that needs be BACKED UP, thats hearsay on your part
>I don’t condone violence, coercion, slavery, rape, and pedophilia. None of these phenomena contribute to civilization or the dignity of the individual, vital for a free society.
Free society?, what about CONSENTING ADULTS you know people who actually want to be a slave, now thats a free society.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>But I must point out today, that when you file an abuse report, a feature there allows you to include a snapshot – which is not in your inventory or on your computer – so an AR shot of the scene you said you refused to take for the abuse report would not incriminate you by possession.
Of course, it’s a well-known fact that an abuse-report can collect a snapshot. Have you actually tried doing that, howeve, in a laggy sim? It takes a long time to rez into place.
It would not occur to me to attempt to use the abuse-report system to report something that I could no longer see, that a Linden was not acting upon, about a situation that involved a person’s private home. I’ve stated that over and over. That’s how it was. That’s how it will be in the future.
I don’t have sufficient malice, hatred, and vitriol like Gladys/csven and you such as to abuse report someone speciously, on what I think I can get on them. It simply never occurred to me to be fiddling with some AR screen when there was lack of evidence beyond my own hasty glimpse. I was trying to get ANY pictures that were remaining; I was trying to show the gaps on the wall; and I was trying to figure out which pictures somehow might go in the Herald. I wasn’t in Gladys snoop spy abuse report fanboyz mode, I was in reporter mode, trying to see *what was happening*. The main thing that was happening is that the people under fire were *removing the evidence*.
Again, the dynamics at that time were different than they were now. There were no German police or Belgian police. Instead, there were groups of zealous residents hysterically hounding anyone they felt was an “ageplayer” — often on specious grounds, and even when they had a case, being the worst possible source of an AR themselves, given their own violent and oppressive lifestyle. I remember people ranting for ages in groups and forums on this, and one woman had a website where she regularly outed ageplayers. This is the sort of thing that today, puts Meta Linden into a tizzy and caused her to swoop down on that resident’s website over this very issue.
I was not eager to give any support to either side in this confrontation, since both were hideous. I did not wish to write the story and take the harassment over it. Nor did other Herald writers, for various personal reasons.
I think it curious that csven, if he is *sincere* about really trying to prosecute a story of nearly a year ago, isn’t contacting the Lindens about this. More than curious. And that’s because csven doesn’t have the balls to be this vindictive and mean to a Linden. He wouldn’t dare. At root, he’s a coward. And that’s because it’s not really about trying to prosecute these particular people and stop whatever contribution to the misery of child porn they may have made; instead, he’s merely trying to trump up a club to beat me with here.
It only makes him look bad; why would anyone tolerate virtual rape, hideously mauling a child???
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>Free society?, what about CONSENTING ADULTS you know people who actually want to be a slave, now thats a free society.
1. I question their notion of consent; I find many of the people broken in various ways.
2. A free society is made of free people, not slaves.
csven
Jun 1st, 2007
@Klink – ProkLogic allows her to do that. Remember:
“A statement I believe to be true *is* a fact until it is *disproven*.” – Prokofy Neva
-
@everyone – I’m planning on approaching the Lindens about what Prok says happened re: the RL child porn and Guy Linden. Anyone know anything more that might be of use when asking questions?
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>I am very disappointed that the blog post seems to reflect a policy that muddles roleplay and crime. People roleplaying, communicating, exercising their free speech are placed along side with people who cause and enjoy the exploitation and harming of children through child pornography.
Here’s a good article of mine to read that explains why your argumentation is false here, and ultimately ominous.
It’s more than fine to “muddle” things that in fact do feed into each other. Law-enforcement establishes it; read the linke to the NYT article and other links that show that a climate of impunity, condoning the “ageplay” helps lower the barrier to action. Why are so many people who are prosecuted for child molestation found with child porn? Because they don’t just content themselves with porn only.
In the one case that prompted Lindens to act swiftly, not only was there inworld “play-acting” but an allegation that they possessed RL pornography (and here, despite a television show saying it; despite Robin Linden saying it, csven is curiously unconvinced and can’t find his way to condemning what this involved and applauding the Lindens’ actions — instead, he’s trying to bang on me to explain why I didn’t call the police to a scene of a crime with no evidence or house or people in it).
>SL has bandits who pretend to kill people who are not placed alongside RL murderers, goreans who pretend to rape people who are not placed alongside RL rapists, and people who pretend to cause their own deaths who are not placed alongside RL suicide victims. Why? Because they have not actually murdered anyone, raped anyone, or committed suicide. Similarly, it does not make sense to subject people who have not harmed children to punishments with those who have.
Virtuality has more effect on the soul than you seem prepared to admit. It’s broadly offensive, that’s enough. Most people, even in a liberal democratic society, do not condone much less applaud violent and coercive rape play and Gorean oppression of women. And as I explain in my article, to rebut Aimee’s specious post about this, people shooting others in a game where they know they will bounce back up are restricted in a magic circle, and likely don’t have weapons, will, or occasion to go shoot their neighbour. Whereas a pedophile who has had his inhibition lowered by justification of the act can talk himself into it in RL more easily.
The two categories of people are different; both are in an enabling environment of crime, in varying stages of acting upon it. So if one wishes to reduce this criminality, it’s important to act on both and not split hairs and allow the one ostensibly unrelated to the other.
Klink Epsilon
Jun 1st, 2007
You side stepped the first issue – to be expected
>>1. I question their notion of consent; I find many of the people broken in various ways.
You basicly you are saying that all slaves practising BDSM are mentaly/phyiscal/emotionaly crippled?? I beg to differ with you on that subject, go live in the lifestyle then say that. Some people feel that it is impowering to them
>2. A free society is made of free people, not slaves.
OMG you didn’t get the point, yes free people in a free society can choose to be a slave if they so wish.
I’m done for today, your arguements are so flawed
Kahni Poitier
Jun 1st, 2007
Oral sex is illegal in several US states.
Should we all be held to that states standards now?
Women showing their face is “illegal” in some cultures.
Should we follow that standard now?
No matter WHAT you do, SOMEONE will be offended.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
Gladys/csven is such a tool. Look at what she put up on Hamlet’s blarg, following his spotty interview with Daniel.
Note how differently he talks on a high-profile blog where he can’t quite get away with being a troll. Of course, since Hamlet pre-emptively banned me from that blog even before it was open, I can’t answer. Just look at how this hypocrite frames the issue now, putting the burden more on the Lindens:
http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2007/06/broadly_ambival.html
“Considering Prokofy Neva’s recollection of a scene inside SL last summer in which she claims to have viewed real life child pornography, and in which she strongly implies in comments on the Second Life Herald that
a) a Linden Lab representative at the scene almost certainly saw the illegal material, and
b) she was “ignored” by the representative who apparently took no action against those involved,
I have to wonder if Linden Lab employees even understand what is “broadly offensive” and, more importantly, what isn’t even within their right to judge.
Real life child pornography is illegal. Period. The fact that neither Prokofy Neva nor, perhaps, Linden Lab took action, is more troubling than any *virtual* activity I can imagine. I, for one, would like to hear Linden Lab’s account of the incident. It may have been months ago, but I can’t imagine their representative simply forgetting what happened… if Prokofy Neva is accurately describing the situation.
Perhaps when we start separating “virtual” from “real”, and hold people appropriately accountable, we can more clearly define some boundaries… as a real community.”
I can’t speculate for the Lindens. I imagine they didn’t see much of anything they could act on either. I don’t know if they act on offensive and possibly even illegal material after it’s DELETED.
Furthermore, Gladys once again distracts from her essential problem here: inability to admit that the stuff she’s countencing and allowing is what WAS visible, what WAS left on the walls longer, while the demonstration died down — and nothing was done about THAT then – but now it IS. Huh? And the people involved removed the entire thing in the end by morning.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
Knowing Hamlet will delete my post, I’ll reprint it here, and note that csven simply has never been able to adequately explain how he thinks there is such a firewall between the imaginary and the real, when these *actual* inworld ageplayers segued between virtual and real pornography easily, even knowing one was illegal and the other not, selectively removing some things from their walls when under attack. How does csven account for this OBVIOUS LINK?
To Hamlet
As I’ve explained now on numerous threads on a variety of blogs, I could not abuse-report or take action on something that I glimpsed being whisked away as I arrived on the scene, and which was DELETED. I had no screenshots, nothing to point to, no evidence.
The Lindens at that time were also taking a position of not acting on simulated porn — which was remaining on the walls. I saw that something was taken down that looked like RL people and thus RL porn — the fact that it was hastily removed and the gaps in the wall in the picture arrangement was left shows that the owners felt they had something to hide. I couldn’t report them to anyone on that basis, however, and csven’s implication that I’m responsible for not reporting a crime is tendentious and libelous.
As for the Lindens inaction, I don’t see how they could act on something DELETED, either, and at that time their policy was to tolerate whatever consenting adults did and made in their homes. The community has let them know that is not tolerable — and chief among these reasons is that real-life authorities explain that it erodes the inhibition to commit criminal acts when they are virtually enacted and helping to justify the offense itself.
csven needs to explain why he justifies simulation of brutal rapes of children as young as 8 with “consensual adults” being invoked to cover a multitude of sims — it never appears to enter his consciousness that from what we could tell, these people engaged in the behaviour csven wants to permit and rationalize and justify EASILY and with NO QUALMS also evidently kep the RL stuff as well, thereby objectively illustrating the connection. csven simply cannot explain THAT away with all his conniptions and claims of my or Linden inaction. It’s clear their *is* a connection; it’s important to stop the condoning of both real and simulated child pornography.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | Friday, June 01, 2007 at 05:13 PM
csven
Jun 1st, 2007
Prok, for the sake of holding someone accountable for *not* taking action in regards to REAL child pornography, could you be more specific regarding this comment on your blog post:
“the people sold their land”
When did they sell their land?
What were the avatar names?
Who else was at the scene protesting?
What other information can you provide that might lead us to them?
I *do* intend to follow this up. You can either do the right thing and help, or you can keep running on at the mouth about virtual pretend.
csven
Jun 1st, 2007
Hamlet Au on NWN: “Csven, repeating single source hearsay of serious allegations are exactly what responsible journalists don’t publicize.”
Perhaps, but will Hamlet act as a responsible journalist and determine if they’re true, or will he refrain from looking into them because of his past ties to Linden Lab?
Curious how no one seems to want to learn the truth. Even Prok – now silent – doesn’t seem to want to pursue this; seemingly content to forget about it and relegate it to unrecoverable history.
I can’t help but wonder why. If we’re going to go around judging people, I say let’s hold a raffle to see who gets to through the first stone. Count me in. I know where I’m taking aim.
Mr May
Jun 1st, 2007
“Gays and AIDS do sometimes go together. To say they are unrelated would be retarded. BDSM and pedophilia go together often too, more’s the pity. And both are reprehensible lifestyles intellectually indefensible in a democratic and free society.”
I am not gay. I do not have AIDS. I do not play BDSM in RL or SL. Or ageplay.
A BDSM lifestyle is almost certainly intellectually defensible, more so in a democratic and free society than in any other.
These things may well be indefensible from some religious, Judeo Christian mindeset… people tend to believe all a kinds of fairytales; but in the real world, made up of real people trying to live there lives to even suggest that GAY = AIDS is ignorant, bigoted and sickening to read. And why HIV/AIDS continued to rise among hetro and gay alike. ‘AIDS.. its a gay, junkie kind of thing…’
“Gays and AIDS do sometimes go together.”
Lets expand…
“Beer boys on the pull and AIDS sometimes go together.”
“Black people and AIDS sometimes go together.”
“White people and AIDS soemtimes go together.”
“People who have had blood transfusions and AIDS sometimes go together.”
“Drug users and AIDS soemtimes go together.”
“People with red hair and AIDS sometimes…”
My point? What the hell is YOUR point?
“I don’t have sufficient malice, hatred, and vitriol like Gladys/csven…”
You do yourself a grave injustice there Prok
And to anyone as picky as me does the US have a different spelling… Paedophilia surely?
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>Prok, for the sake of holding someone accountable for *not* taking action in regards to REAL child pornography, could you be more specific regarding this comment on your blog post:
>”the people sold their land”
>When did they sell their land?
As far as I recall, the land was sold very soon after this demonstration — I think by the next morning or earlier. Those who were following this more closely at the time could comment.
>What were the avatar names?
I don’t recall. While I might have had notes on this at the time somewhere, a computer crash since then wiped out most of those notepad files. Perhaps someone else will recall.
>Who else was at the scene protesting?
A group of people filling the sim, who crashed it at least once — these were an amalgam, as I stated on my blog, of BDSM practitioners with BDSM in their groups, and this some group with Native American artifacts and textures on it.That’s all I recall about it, I don’t recall their names.
>What other information can you provide that might lead us to them?
The incident took place around the end of August 2006. It was when I began having posting permissions at the Herald and discussed stories with Walker. Among the stories at the time were the closing of the forums’ general and other discussion sections. Perhaps paging through the forums at that time, before they were closed, might yield more.
>I *do* intend to follow this up. You can either do the right thing and help, or you can keep running on at the mouth about virtual pretend.
Follow up as much as you want. I don’t see what “help” one can provide for a group of people who whisked away the offensive material and made short work of their land. There isn’t any question of “do the right thing” or not here — I wrote about it on my blog as fully as I recollected, to protest the phenomenon that IS calculable and DOES matter in a virtual world which we can READILY see and that’s the VIRTUAL porn that is CONNECTED as we can see with this very incident!
csven’s REFUSAL to see the CONNECTION between virtual and real here is truly appalling.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>Hamlet Au on NWN: “Csven, repeating single source hearsay of serious allegations are exactly what responsible journalists don’t publicize.”
Good for Hamlet! On one level. But of course, Hamlet is being a dick here, as usual, most likely having my post captured on his blog somewhere where it was quickly banned — he knows full well that in fact *I have not made any serious allegation* and that *I, too, am a responsible journalist* here who DID NOT MAKE any allegation about material THAT WAS DELETED and DID NOT PUBLISH any half-researched story of that time. So, that’s that. Glad Hamlet understands at least the principles involved, even if he is too pig-headed to concede they apply to me.
CSVEN is making one-sided poorly-researched allegations, NOT ME. I described the incident in my blog in the course of trying to explain several things: that it is not about 17 year olds, that the people involved are very cunning and determined, and that they themselves have both kinds of porn, and make the distinctions, and there’s a connection.
>Perhaps, but will Hamlet act as a responsible journalist and determine if they’re true, or will he refrain from looking into them because of his past ties to Linden Lab?
I have zero use for Hamlet, and don’t view him as any sort of journalist, really, he’s a corporate blogger. However, in fairness to Hamlet, he has no obligation to investigate this story whatsoever. He had none then; he has none now. If an “ageplay” group tolerated then by the Lindens happened to have RL pornography — or so it seemed — and whisked it off the walls when demonstrators, Lindens, and reporters came calling, not much can be done.
However, one can condemn the virtual that was readily seen; and now the Lindens have come around on this, realized there is some kind of connection, regrettably, due to the investigation of RL law enforcement and lawyers of their own, and have decided to eliminate even what is only virtual. csven will have to live with that.
>Curious how no one seems to want to learn the truth. Even Prok – now silent – doesn’t seem to want to pursue this; seemingly content to forget about it and relegate it to unrecoverable history.
I fail to understand why I’m “now silent” if I don’t sit and refresh a page and instantly answer like obsessive Gladys but go offline to do RL stuff for some hours. Gladys is truly unhingeed.
Whether I wish to forget it or not is not the issue; it is relegated to unrecoverable history anyway. Other people who were hounding this particular set of people might come forward readily and recall their names, their group that was disbanded — even the sim name, which I believe I’ve gotten wrong. There were at least 30-40 avatars around that night, so possibl someone will recall more.
I can’t help but wonder why. If we’re going to go around judging people, I say let’s hold a raffle to see who gets to through the first stone. Count me in. I know where I’m taking aim.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>can’t help but wonder why. If we’re going to go around judging people, I say let’s hold a raffle to see who gets to through the first stone. Count me in. I know where I’m taking aim.
This is an odd statement. csven is describing himself here without sin? *Shudders*.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>A BDSM lifestyle is almost certainly intellectually defensible, more so in a democratic and free society than in any other.
Coercion, violence, and slaving are not intellectually or morally defensible for any reason. But read the back pages of the Herald, I’m not interested in repeating myself here.
>These things may well be indefensible from some religious, Judeo Christian mindeset… people tend to believe all a kinds of fairytales;
Um, ok, Judaism and Christianity are “fairy tales,” and paganism, wiccan, and secular humanism aren’t uh…fairy tales. Oh–kay! Whatever!
>but in the real world, made up of real people trying to live there lives to even suggest that GAY = AIDS is ignorant, bigoted and sickening to read. And why HIV/AIDS continued to rise among hetro and gay alike. ‘AIDS.. its a gay, junkie kind of thing…’
“Gays and AIDS do sometimes go together.”
They do? In the real world, made up of real people, accessible to me probably far more than this poster. Tragically, a significant number of gay men have died of AIDS. As a contributor to this cause in RL and in SL, I can’t imagine how anyone could claim otherwise. Different kinds of people get AIDS, including needle-users and children of mothers, etc. but one significant category is gay men. To pretend this isn’t the case is to engage in wilful ignorance.
>Lets expand…
“Beer boys on the pull and AIDS sometimes go together.”
“Black people and AIDS sometimes go together.”
“White people and AIDS soemtimes go together.”
“People who have had blood transfusions and AIDS sometimes go together.”
“Drug users and AIDS soemtimes go together.”
“People with red hair and AIDS sometimes…”
And gay men and AIDS go together in significant numbers, such as to cause entire organizations to form just on this one category of AIDS/HIV sufferers. Hard to fly in the face of reality on this one.
>My point? What the hell is YOUR point?
That AIDS and gay men go together? Because they do. It remains a significant and serious issue affecting this population
>”I don’t have sufficient malice, hatred, and vitriol like Gladys/csven…”
You do yourself a grave injustice there Prok
I’m in touch with reality; you’re in denial of it.
>And to anyone as picky as me does the US have a different spelling… Paedophilia surely?
Uh, yeah. The U.S. has a different spelling. The spelling in the US for this word, which linguistically tracks as with similar words, is pedophilia. It’s “paedophilia” in the UK.
csven
Jun 1st, 2007
“by the next morning or earlier”
So not “immediately” as in right there and then. And I see on another SLH post you did say “later”. Okay. This is helpful.
-
“I don’t recall. … Perhaps someone else will recall.”
Yes. And that someone else might be the person who summoned you. Who was that?
-
“end of August 2006″
Gracias.
-
“I don’t see what “help” one can provide for a group of people who whisked away the offensive material and made short work of their land.”
Not my concern. I’ll let the real authorities decide this, as you should have.
-
“the CONNECTION between virtual and real here is truly appalling.”
I disagree. What’s TRULY appalling is not taking action to help protect REAL children who are directly and unquestionably victims.
csven
Jun 1st, 2007
“This is an odd statement. csven is describing himself here without sin?”
Are you not implying the same when pass all your judgements on others? I’d venture I’m as sin-free as you.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>”by the next morning or earlier”
So not “immediately” as in right there and then. And I see on another SLH post you did say “later”. Okay. This is helpful.
By the next morning could mean “immediately” or “later”. I have no idea. It was quickly sold. Find some other witnesses. There were plenty of them.
>”I don’t recall. … Perhaps someone else will recall.”
>Yes. And that someone else might be the person who summoned you. Who was that?
I have no recollection. There were a group of people who were anti-ageplay vigilantes. They, too, had a group, they posted on the forums, they may be connected even to a third-party site, they may have deliberately moved in next to these people. I simply don’t recall the particulars, but perhaps it can be dug up.
>”end of August 2006″
>Gracias.
Some 9 months ago, so that means the trail is very cold, and it makes more sense to go after offenses in the here and now, and that means removing virtual porn which, as we’ve seen, often links with real porn, something law-enforcers and other experts have cautioned us about.
>”I don’t see what “help” one can provide for a group of people who whisked away the offensive material and made short work of their land.”
>Not my concern. I’ll let the real authorities decide this, as you should have.
Yes, I did. The real authorities in this situation, by my reckoning, was LL. They were present. They have the capacity to examine inside chatlogs, inventories, server records, and I don’t. If I don’t see something, if it is deleted, that’s it. I have no more to say about it. The Lindens may have more — but not necessarily. In any event, I don’t see that this situation merited one for either journalistic display, given the incompleteness — and nastiness — of the material, and I don’t see that it merits a report to RL authorities.
What is a reasonable way to deal with a situation where one sees or thinks one sees or suspects RL child pornography? Abuse report it to the Lindens. They are those directly in charge and have the capacity to find out the account names and such. They can make the decision to call in authorities or shut down accounts or do whatever is needed. I fail to see how we, server-side, with incomplete information always, can be summoning the real-life police. The RL police would need access to these accounts’ RL names and such that only the Lindens can give them.
Possibly the vigilante groups tried to call RL police; perhaps they got nowhere. I suspect that’s why they began their vigilantism, that’s often the case. The German TV people who were so vigilant about this used their method of publicizing this matter precisely because merely calling LL or the authorities wasn’t working.
If csven is finding that one of the ways he can conceal and rationalize and justify his curious indulgence of simulated child molestation is by trying to zealousl go after RL porn purveyors, um, I suggest he’s a poor candidate for this social task, given…his indulgence of the virtual and his disbelief in its connection to the real.
>”the CONNECTION between virtual and real here is truly appalling.”
>I disagree. What’s TRULY appalling is not taking action to help protect REAL children who are directly and unquestionably victims.
A man who desires to indulge in the simulated may become overzealous about prosecuting the real, so it seems. It seems a common tactic used by pedophiles, turning the tables, arguing against opponents by accusing them of the same offense, and so on. All pretty despicable.
I often find that people who have no RL children become the most zealous and accusatory about matters involving children, in ways that are really suspect and odd. I certainly don’t have any desire whatsoever, as a parent especially, to give any pass to the harming of children.
I find that virtual pornography contributes to that harm, something I’ve become more aware of with the recent attention given the matter and my own research, and I felt it important to stand up to those who give virtuality a hideous pass like this.
I don’t see that it is rational to become a zealous and smug moral crusader on this topic like csven, because I believe there is something covered up here with csven, some curious oddity that we will eventually find out, when it all comes out in the comments…
Prokofy Neva
Jun 1st, 2007
>”This is an odd statement. csven is describing himself here without sin?”
>Are you not implying the same when pass all your judgements on others? I’d venture I’m as sin-free as you.
I don’t shrink from condemnation of sin, even being, like all people, a sinner, nor do I refrain from calling “the near occasion of sin” what it is — an enabling environment.
Kahni Poitier
Jun 1st, 2007
Good lord, would you two take it to tells, or e-mail or something? Your petty bickering and name-calling has TOTALLY derailed this conversation.
Good job.
Again. What set of standards do dumb ourselves down to?
It’s bad to shoot someone in RL, so let’s make it illegal in SL?
It’s illegal to be naked in public in most places, should all of our avatars have non-removable clothing?
Hell, even in some communities it’s against the local laws to SAY CERTAIN WORDS! Are we going to fall back to that level?
I WILL NOT pay to be part of a G-rated SL.
And you two bitchy whiners. Take it somewhere else. You may quote a line or two from the current argument in your diatribes against each other, but you’ve degenerated into nothing but a petty name-calling contest.
YOU ARE BOTH WRONG! SHUT THE FUCK UP!
Good god, I’m sure I”m not the only one tired of listening to you two whiny bitches go after each other.
JUST SHUT THE HELL UP ALREADY. You’re not making any points.
Good lord.
csven
Jun 1st, 2007
“If csven is finding that one of the ways he can conceal and rationalize and justify his curious indulgence of simulated child molestation…”
You should be careful what lies you spread, Catherine Fitzgerald. They can be dangerous.
Mr May
Jun 1st, 2007
“Coercion, violence, and slaving are not intellectually or morally defensible for any reason.”
Hmmm. But my girlfriend saying, once in awhile ‘take me, take me you brute…’ IS morally defensible and… dare I say it… not that unusual really Prok…
And in the great scheme of things if you honestly believe that people who dress up in gimp suits and whip each other are a problem in the world that we all live in… well… I dont know… hit a few clubs or someting… get off this damn blog for more than a day…
I also begin to see how the Prok thing works… so before the assumption is made, no… I dont do Gimp suits either.
Assumptions… ok, just this once…
“Um, ok, Judaism and Christianity are “fairy tales,” and paganism, wiccan, and secular humanism aren’t uh…fairy tales. Oh–kay! Whatever!”
Umm… ALL fairytales mate, I didnt mention any others, you did. Humanism seems to be for people who want to believe in SOMETHING but arent sure what… I may be wrong and I am sure you will correct me regardless.
“In the real world, made up of real people, accessible to me probably far more than this poster.”
Lets run that last bit by again…
“…accessible to me probably far more than this poster?”
Thats a very odd thing to say… I dont really understand that… do you get out more than I do? How would you know and what would it matter?
Is it a points thing? Because I watched a close friend die of AIDS. He was gay. Do I get more points?
“I’m in touch with reality; you’re in denial of it.”
Which is where we part company I’m afraid. You are in touch with A reality Prok… if my back reading ASSUMPTIONS are correct, a reality in which a man, who was really the son of God, died then came back to life and… you are in no position to judge anyone elses fantasy world.
Goodnight, been nice almost communicating with you.
Tenshi Vielle
Jun 1st, 2007
Uh-uh. Sorry, csven, you will not sit back behind your computer and make veiled threats to *anyone*. Not cool. Grow a pair, and grow up while you’re at it.
Don’t make me break out my Mommy stick.
csven
Jun 1st, 2007
That wasn’t a threat, Tenshi. That was a clear reminder that she’s not anonymous and that there are people who will not react intelligently and with a level head to that kind of libel. It’s disgusting.
I am, of course, completely non-anonymous. Anyone who wishes to look me up can do so easily. Hence I chose my words specifically to remind her that she treads on thin ice; not with me, but in her general demeanor.
Suggestion Boy
Jun 2nd, 2007
I suggest that you pedophiles jam a knife in your ass.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
>That wasn’t a threat, Tenshi. That was a clear reminder that she’s not anonymous and that there are people who will not react intelligently and with a level head to that kind of libel. It’s disgusting.
>I am, of course, completely non-anonymous. Anyone who wishes to look me up can do so easily. Hence I chose my words specifically to remind her that she treads on thin ice; not with me, but in her general demeanor.
What a flaming LOZER. Anyone who has to stoop to such low bullying and harassing tactics as linking a person’s RL name with their SL name has run out of arguments, surely.
So let me repeat it again, as forcefully as I can: csven’s unhinged and zealous *obsession* with trying to make the distinction between virtual and RL pornography is suspect. There’s something he’s not explaining here. Again: If csven is finding that one of the ways he can conceal and rationalize and justify his curious indulgence of simulated child molestation is by trying to zealousl go after RL porn purveyors, um, I suggest he’s a poor candidate for this social task, given…his indulgence of the virtual and his disbelief in its connection to the real.
Why does csven have this overwhelming *need* and *obsession* to indulge virtual child molestation? That’s obvious. There’s no “lie” involved in stating that; indeed, his own words state it.
Hence I chose my words specifically to remind her that she treads on thin ice; not with me, but in her general demeanor.
Chose away *asshole*. I’m not treading on thin ice, but you are. Bullying *fucktard*. I’m glad the record is showing your despicable behaviour.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
“People have an interest in their property and the integrity of their person. But in virtual reality, these interests are not tangible but built from intangible data and software,” said Greg Lastowka, a professor at the Rutgers School of Law at Camden in New Jersey.
Greg is positing the idea with this implication: that just because everything in a virtual world is *programmed* and *controlled by tekkies,* therefore THEY can decide what is crime or not, virtue or vice. That’s really the root of csven’s sickness here.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/01/AR2007060102671.html
And look at this interview with Philip, where now he’s not only making a world, and not only a country, but a country that is a supra-country above other RL countries with its own law:
“Philip Rosedale, the founder and chief executive of Linden Labs, said in an interview that Second Life activities should be governed by real-life laws for the time being. He recounted, for example, that his company has called in the FBI several times, most recently this spring to ensure that Second Life’s virtual casinos complied with U.S. law. Federal investigators created their own avatars and toured the site, he said.
In coming months, his company plans to disperse tens of thousands of computer servers from California and Texas to countries around the world in order to improve the site’s performance. Also, he said, this will make activities on those servers subject to laws of the host countries.
Rosedale said he hopes participants in Second Life eventually develop their own virtual legal code and justice system.
“In the ideal case, the people who are in Second Life should think of themselves as citizens of this new place and not citizens of their countries,” he said.”
Reality
Jun 2nd, 2007
“Anyone who has to stoop to such low bullying and harassing tactics as linking a person’s RL name with their SL name has run out of arguments, surely.”
Anyone daft enough to believe that this isn’t going to happen once they themselves give away their real life information to a source that is available to the general masses quite frankly does not deserve to be on the internet itself.
Anyone daft enough to think that the use of such publicly available information, given away freely to any source which can be viewed by the general populace, is proof that there needs to be some control over the gene pool.
All of that said: If the information is really being used for personal vendettas and attacks and such use can be proven in a legal standpoint then by all means it should be ‘fought’.
don’t use words – they mean nothing. Action on the internet means nothing. Take it to court.
Cocoanut Koala
Jun 2nd, 2007
“In the ideal case, the people who are in Second Life should think of themselves as citizens of this new place and not citizens of their countries,” he said.”
What? Megalomania.
coco
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
Here’s what Csven has to say about his RL identity:
“Csven Concord (Sven Johnson, SL Future Salon): I’ve never hidden my RL identity so I very much consider this an extension of my real life. I don’t act differently because that would be incongruent (and too hard to track)”
http://www.coroflot.com/public/individual_profile.asp?individual_id=61340&sort_by=1&
Here are some blurbs praising Sven Johnson:
“deepest thinker of 3D virtual/meatspace stuff so far” – Michael Frumin, Technical Director, Eyebeam R&D OpenLab; Jan 2006
“It turns out that the increasing detail of 3D objects in virtual environments makes it possible to think of them not simply as game objects, but as digital prototypes — and 3D printers are the tool of choice for turning the prototypes into real objects. WorldChanging ally Csven Johnson is at the forefront of this movement.” – Jamais Cascio, Senior Contributing Editor, WorldChanging.com; Feb 2006
“one of the best and brightest out there” – Jerry Paffendorf, Futurist, Electric Sheep Company; August 2006
Paging Jerry Paffendorf, Jamais Cascio, and Michael Frumin. I believe you are mistaken about this individual Sven Johnson to whom you have given such kudos. that is, whatever “world changing” he was doing in 2006 has been left behind, and now he is spending his time harrying and bullying people he disagrees with on forums in the most hideous and unhinged way.
The methods he uses in debate on the Internet with people he disageres with are utterly atrocious — the record here and other threads and on the nuked Clickable Culture show that. Sexual harassment, forcible linking of my RL name against my wishes merely as a bullying tactic, poundingly sinister allegations of wrong-doing — it’s really filled with bile in the worst way and really disturbing.
We who believe in free speech and free commentary everywhere and want to maintain a client of open debate can’t call for him to be banned or muted — so there’s only one recourse, which is to hope that his peers will influence him.
What’s deeply sick about Sven Johnson isn’t even his predilection for apologizing for virtual child porn. I’d never cross the street to try to haze someone over such an opinion. It’s their opinion, I don’t agree with it, but they have a right to it.
However, what’s sick about Sven Johnson is his obsessive jihad being waged now against other people who think differently than him on this controversial subject, who believe that virtual porn is wrong, too. That’s a legitimate view, and one that people can hold, too, just as legitimately as he holds his view that it is not wrong. The zealousness, the frenzy, the mad, hateful frothing at the mouth about this topic is really strange and suspect, and I refuse to endure it.
What’s really scary isn’t even his giving a pass to all those who indulge in virtual child molestation. That would be bad enough, but surely not grounds to go harry and harass people like HE does.
No, what’s really disturbing is his ability to hound, harass, bully, and intimidate someone like me who refuses to give into his intimidation campaign for having a different point of view. THAT’s what’s scary.
So Jerry Paffendorf, Michael Frumin, and Jamais Cascio, take your big friend Sven Johnson aside, and tell him to quit it. Tell him to stop using these despicable tactics, as he is ruining his reputation. If you think something of his reputation is worth salvaging, try to get him to see that he himself is ruining it by his behaviour in using such tactics on me, merely because he doesn’t like what I write.
Sven could be posting a paragraph — even a page — in disagreement. People disagree. They disagree strenuously. But he has gone far, far further, reaching into really scary hysterical depths, using the most outrageous charges against a person of good reputation — me — who hasn’t committed any crime — and accusing me of wrongdoing.
What can we do on the Internet when someone links our names with allegations like this? Who calls us “virtual fascists” and worse?
Only fight fire with fire. Sven Johnson needs to be restrained by the only thing that can restrain someone like him who has no belief in God or anything higher than his own ego and coding abilities: the fear of ruin of his reputation by his peers.
So I am urgently calling on his peers to come forward and get him to stop his despicable and vile campaign.
Kahni Poitier
Jun 2nd, 2007
I don’t know either of you people, yet I hate you both.
Shut up and get back on topic.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
>Anyone daft enough to believe that this isn’t going to happen once they themselves give away their real life information to a source that is available to the general masses quite frankly does not deserve to be on the internet itself.
No, it’s not about being “daft”. It’s about insisting on norms of decency and the common code of Second Life, which is that it is a realm with avatar names. It’s about respect. It’s about not using a person’s name to harry and harass them and bully them in some mistaken notion that this will “make the responsible”. Because as much as Sven goes on doing that, I cam going to keep on fighting back, undeterred. It’s simply not going to work.
The idea that there is some concept of “deserving” to be on the Internet or ‘not deserving” is of course part of that neo-fascism of tekkie youth who are always *on* the Internet and imagine that it can have these powers — or take them away LOL.
>Anyone daft enough to think that the use of such publicly available information, given away freely to any source which can be viewed by the general populace, is proof that there needs to be some control over the gene pool.
The idea that anonymous fucktards like “Reality” should be even allowed *near* any concept of control of the gene pool is one of the really scary aspects of the future.
>All of that said: If the information is really being used for personal vendettas and attacks and such use can be proven in a legal standpoint then by all means it should be ‘fought’.
Any idiot can see it IS being used that way. But there’s no “law” against such usage; one can only appeal to common decency.
>don’t use words – they mean nothing. Action on the internet means nothing. Take it to court
One cannot always extract human decency from courts. The jury of one’s peers is a better place to start, although of course legal options are viable when someone harasses you to the point of trying to smear you with a claim of a RL negligence regarding a RL crime.
NegroThunder
Jun 2nd, 2007
attn: Prokofy
you are fat and long winded and no one cares about (or even reads) your asinine rants.
Reality
Jun 2nd, 2007
There is no issue of respect here Prokofy – you show none, no matter if the person is kissing your ass or disagreeing with you. You have no room to even type the word respect.
Now then – You gave out your information. You linked your real self to a compilation of computer data which forms an image.
Did you really think that people were not going to use that information – for any and all purposes?
Do you honestly think anyone needs your permission after you have given away that information?
If your answers to the above are anything other than No and No …. you live in a fantasy world where everyone must adhere to the whims of each and every person alive.
That said, do yourself a favor: In the future, try to remember that the rest of the world doesn’t give a shit about your little theories concerning what goes on in anyone’s mind.
THAT said …. No, you do not deserve to be on the internet and no, your genes should never have entered the pool. You are proof positive that a person really can be so detached as to believe the absolute worst in anyone – even if all they have said, in the exact same harsh manner as you – that you have no place in the world today.
Kindly get over yourself, hmm? You’re not above using the exact same tactics as those you profess to ‘fight’ – that is a verifiable fact. All one needs to do is read the drivel you write. If you are not ranting about some nonexistent conspiracy, you are too busy huddling people up into groups and telling them what to think, how they should act, what moral values they should have ….. The list goes on.
Now, to put it in a manner even a daft little twit like you – who posts behind the name of a nonexistent entity while at the same time making an attempt to blast others for not gibing you their personal information – can understand: Your moral compass and sense of reality is so badly fucked that you honestly believe you live in a world that does not exist (Second Life – by the by, where’s that scientific evidence backing up your brain dead notion), you honestly believe that you can give out your personal information and that people have to ask you before so much as looking at it, you believe the entire world thinks as you do (sorry – it doesn’t), and you cannot resist the opportunity to mix together issues which have little to do with each other (your response to my most recent comment).
In the future you might want to remember that not everything posted to you in response to your mountains of bullshit connects in with an issue of the day you are ranting about (my prior response was about information in general – anyone who is not blind could have seen that).
to sum this all up Prokofy – do not respond to a post or comment to which you know very little about and cannot go for more than three words in without somehow confusing the issue.
Your response was off base, off topic and in no way whatsoever related to mine except at the end.
Again, don’t want people using your real life information? Don’t hand it out to anyone news agencies included.
Want to stop the current use? Sue the individuals once you have their information. It’s as simple as that – your words mean NOTHING.
Kahni Poitier
Jun 2nd, 2007
I’d rather listen to nothing….
Amanda
Jun 2nd, 2007
__But I do so love how, when someone comes up behind you and goes “BOO!” you spin around, grab them by the nuts and swing them over your head.__
Perception builds individual realities, and thanks to that fact, I see a completely different picture than you do. Fascinating.
__1. I question their notion of consent; I find many of the people broken in various ways.__
For the sake of argument, lets say you’re correct; these are broken people. So should they be stripped of the right of self determination when it comes to acts that are LEGAL outside of SL? And since you argue so fiercely that RL and SL are so enmeshed, maybe we ought to get into people’s RL business and start telling them what type of consensual sexual acts they can employ with other consenting adults? Maybe we ought to lock them up like they did with mentally ill people a few decades ago, so they can’t “hurt themselves”? That’s sarcasm, but not without a point. We all know that we locked the mentally infirm away under the pretense that it was “for their own good” — when it was really all about not wanting to have to face “imperfection”, an irrational fear of behavior different from our own, and ultimately so that WE would feel safe, which is exactly what this is — some feel threatened by BDSM practitioners and they want them gone. A sane person would just shrug it off and say “to each his own”, but.. well, never mind.
__and now he is spending his time harrying and bullying people he disagrees with on forums in the most hideous and unhinged way.__
Here you sound like a fishmonger telling a passerby that HE smells. An informative demonstration of projection, me thinks. If anyone engenders “harrying”, “bullying”, and “unhinged”, it is you Prokofy, although I do think it would be wise for Csven to disengage at this point as it, a) does not good to argue for more than a couple of posts with Prokofy, and, b) because he is also starting to come off as a bit unhinged and unable to let go of the bone here.
__Uh-uh. Sorry, csven, you will not sit back behind your computer and make veiled threats to *anyone*. Not cool. Grow a pair, and grow up while you’re at it.
Don’t make me break out my Mommy stick.__
What an ironic statement Tenshi. Answering threats with threats.
Newbie wannabe fashonista, quit acting like you’re some sort of SL veteran/VIP by injecting yourself sideways into any drama you can find. It’s like this — you’re not smart, you’re not thoughtful, you’re not funny, you’re not nearly as important as you think or that you’d like others to think you are, and you’re really, really much too conceited for your limited tenure in SL. But then, I’m sure that particular trait of yours isn’t just limited to SL…
As far as telling others to grow up, shovel you own driveway first chica.
Barney Boomslang
Jun 2nd, 2007
Question to csven, all the csven- fightes and those trying to bash on Prok for something you not even know from hear-say – does any of you actually believe that your abrasive, harrassing and plain and simply annoying behaviour makes any grown up really believe the stuff you write or take your stuff serious? Sorry, but from just skimming this thread I would put you all down in the “whining minors” category. If this was inworld and happening around me, your avatars would plainly be reported to LL as suspected minors, because no adult with half a braincell behaves that way.
I don’t get what you think you will accomodate – break Prok’s image I guess, but the only thing you put down as ugly and icky is your very own self. You show serious lacking in reading comprehension, show that you have no manners at all and that you are just trolling.
The only person discredited by your writings are you yourself.
csven
Jun 2nd, 2007
Now that I’ll be spending less time here and more time looking into the events described by Prokofy on her blog, let me catalog some mostly obvious observations I’ve made:
a) The most vocal, obsessive person I know surrounding the issue of “virtual child porn” and other “perverse” pretend activities is Prokofy Neva.
b) The only person I know who claims to fully equate a sickening real life crime perpetrated on actual children with a victimless virtual crime involving adults, is Prokofy Neva.
c) The *only* person I know who’s claimed to have seen real life child pornography within Second Life is Prokofy Neva.
d) When questioned about the relatively recent events she vividly described on her blog – witnessing users with real life child pornography – Prokofy Neva has attempted to downplay her original assertions while pushing responsibility for dealing with the illegal activity entirely onto a Linden Lab employee who may not even have been on the scene in time to witness the real life child pornography first hand, and who is obviously not a representative for the real life authorities.
e) When questioned about the relatively recent events she described on her blog – witnessing users with real life child pornography – Prokofy Neva has conveniently claimed that she doesn’t remember details; no other names – not of all the protesters she saw nor of the person who alerted her to the situation – and nothing that would directly assist in finding those who were committing a real life crime.
f) When questioned as to why she did not contact U.S. authorities regarding the real life child pornography she viewed inside Second Life, Prokofy Neva’s done nothing but made excuses for why she *couldn’t” instead of being proactive at the time, contacting them directly and letting them determine what was and was not possible and appropriate.
g) In comments, Prokofy Neva has clearly indicated that she believes the virtual crime involving consenting adults role-playing as children is as bad as the real crime involving actual children, yet her self-described inaction regarding the real pornography she claims to have seen indicate a nonchalance that a) could be considered complicity by some people, and b) suggests she actually takes real life child pornography *less* seriously than the pretend activities inside Second Life.
h) As the logic of her excuses for not acting when confronted with real life child pornography inside Second Life is increasingly scrutinized, Prokofy Neva has become increasingly agitated; spouting vitriol ranging from suggestions I have a mental disorder to stating outright lies about me to using abusive language of the sort that has even gotten Uri to admonish her.
—-
Lastly, I’m looking for information regarding the incident described by Prokofy on her blog which occurred in the Yongchong sim sometime around August 2006. Feel free to contact me in SL (Csven Concord) or by some other means (links on my blog).
VIKINGBEZERKER Bobak
Jun 2nd, 2007
lol…… some people here seem to think gor is in trouble, they also seem to think they will be exempt……. 2 points….
1)you can’t do anything nasty to another av in any form of sex play WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT…..you can’t force anyone onto a pose ball, and you can’t stop them tp’ing out….. you can stop them tp’ing in, and you can boot them but that’s it.
2) EVERYONE WILL BE SUBJECT TO THIS……meaning if you’re getting frisky with your partner in open chat in your own home and someone happens to get within chat range, you’re gone……it gets notecarded and the hand of doom gets you….. all you have to say is that YOU WERE OFFENDED.
Gor, is not in trouble, some sims will have to modify their rules, and the BDSM LUNATICS WHO CALL THEMSELVES GOREAN BUT ARE MERELY PERVERTS are in trouble, but not the people who like Gor, and treat their slaves well…..i know for a fact that some people love being a slave in Gor, it’s a liberation for them…. others like being men in Gor, because we get to do things we can’t do in real….AND I’M NOT TALKING SEX OR BDSM.
and people wandering into Gor are not subject to shit that’s what the “observer” tag is for….. if you don’t wear one and get hurt, ITS YOUR FAULT PEOPLE!.
and on a personal note…… i am sick to fucking death of the self rightious fucking windbags trying to tell us what the fuck we should be doing on a community that does not exist in real, that has no real connection with real,and what’s more….people slagging off Gor.
if you don’t damn well like it there are other places in sl to go to…..stay the fuck away! if you don’t like us don’t come near us! we don’t want you and you don’t want us… that’s fine by me.
by the way….. a lot of you people out there slagging off Gor don’t know what the fuck you are talking about, you think you do, or have read that intellectual toilet paper that is “the problem with Gor” or whatever it’s called and have got on your moral high horses and gone and done a don quixote over the hill…..
truth is, i’ve never ever seen any age play or padeophilia in Gor, and i i’ve seen people driven out of Gor because they were too BDSM, and i’ve even seen people hunted all through Gor because they’ve overdone their role playing and got really nasty…. and i’ve seen inter sim wars because of it too.
and one thing i do know, i’ve seen a lot more morality, respect, and downright honesty in Gor than i ever have in any other sim…… why? because idiots who start shit rapidly get put in their place in Gor…. and unlike the rest of sl, they are not tolerated in any shape or form.
you don’t like us, then don;t damn well come near us leave us be.
Hazim Gazov
Jun 2nd, 2007
csven, if you care so much about it, why don’t you report Prokofy to the police? Otherwise, shut the fuck up about it.
Hazim Gazov
Jun 2nd, 2007
“VIKINGBEZERKER Bobak”
Hahahahahaha, oh wow. I don’t even know what to say. Fail Gor is fail.
csven
Jun 2nd, 2007
“csven, if you care so much about it, why don’t you report Prokofy to the police? Otherwise, shut the fuck up about it.”
Exactly. Do you have any information?
VIKINGBEZERKER Bobak
Jun 2nd, 2007
got a problem with the name? i’ve used it on a lot of different communities sl included, and if you have then tough.
it merely strikes me that as you don’t like the label, you think the contents are bad, that’s pure discrimination in it’s worst form, and arn’t you and the rest of the idiots out there trying to stop that?
or is the truth simply that the fight is all and damn the reason for the battle in the first place?
then if that is the case you deserve a label yourself….. one of IDIOT.
Mr.F
Jun 2nd, 2007
Imagination game targeting adults and you can’t RP sex?
WTG Linden’s, fucking wankers.
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
“csven, if you care so much about it, why don’t you report Prokofy to the police? Otherwise, shut the fuck up about it.”
>Exactly. Do you have any information?
*Bursts out laughing*. Well that about sums up what Sven Johnson is up to: merely trying to use this issue to terrorize and ‘punish’ me for not agreeing with his odious view that simulated pornography is as serious as real pornography. It is. The scale and magnitude and “consenting adults” differences between the two issues doesn’t erase the severity of the issue: there *is* a connection; that connection *has been found* despite Sven’s rabid denials.
If someone is serious about investigating this old incident, they would treat each possible source of information who might really get to the bottom of the story — if that were possible, which I don’t believe it is. They’d start with *the Lindens*. Likely getting nowhere with that, they’d look through forums and third-party sites for those dates trying to find the people most obsessed with the issue — the vigilant groups. And then that would begin to pose problems. Which witness is going to come forward *now* — supposing this is a legitimate exercise to try to investigation, which it is not?
They could hardly come forward and tell what they know when several things might happen: the zealous and unhinged Sven Johnson might determine that their concern about simulated child pornography isn’t in keeping with his own ideological vendetta. They wouldn’t “work” as sources for him because what likely motivated their vigilantism is more the *avatars in child avatars doing outrageous acts* — the most visual thing about the scene for them — and not pictures on the wall, which might be hard to see, even zooming in.
Sven might discover some of these people aren’t interested in speaking up because they are practitioners of violent BDSM or Gor or something — and now that, too, will be policed by the Lindens using police informers, and they won’t wish to come to the public eye.
No, Sven, precisely because he’s a rabid junkyard dog, has completely polluted the stream here and it will likely be impossible to get any more information — assuming that was a good idea, which it was not.
There’s likely more cases of child porn on the SL servers, we can’t see them. But I know a good place to start looking, given the relationship between simulation and reality: places that have simulated child porn. THAT’s where Sven logically would need to start his “campaign,” but of course, his campaign isn’t about protecting RL children, or preventing adults from being drawn into supporting child pornography actively or passively, or ending the degradation of SL culture. His cause is only to extend out forever fuck-you hedonism, assert his own rectitude as a tekkie, and control and intimidate other people into conforming with is beliefs.
Kahni Poitier
Jun 2nd, 2007
Prok,
Were you abused as a child, or just convicted of abusing someone else and don’t want the temptation around you?
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
Barney is correct: the only person discredited here is csven concord/Sven Johnson himself with his own unhinged writings.
>Now that I’ll be spending less time here and more time looking into the events described by Prokofy on her blog, let me catalog some mostly obvious observations I’ve made:
Harriet the Spy Meets Gladys Kravitz
>a) The most vocal, obsessive person I know surrounding the issue of “virtual child porn” and other “perverse” pretend activities is Prokofy Neva.
That’s ridiculous. I have never written a single article on “ageplay” for the Herald. Indeed, in August 2006 when I began regularly posting stories here after getting permissions around that time, I simply gave the story a pass — not only hard to research, but a tar baby as far as the way people will treat you in the most vile fashion for any expression of revulsion. But revulsion is what I feel, and I will relate that.
This story here about the Lindens’ policy isn’t “about” ageplay but is about the difficulties now in trying to actually have the so-called “community” enforce this *on themselves*.
In August of last year, and at other various times, I can see various vigilante groups, as well as various crusaders springing up on this issue. They are terrorized and witch-hunted for doing this on the forums with savage glee. Some don’t survive that. Anybody taking on this issue opens themselves up to that kind of unhinged zealotry that Sven exemplifies on the fuck-you hedonism side of the aisle, and opens themselves up to hatred and accusations of “never doing enough” on the other side of the aisle. No thanks. I’m not a crusader on these issues, I gave at the office.
On my own blog, I’ve also written exactly one article about this issue, because I was tired of the propaganda tirade of these sick proponents. And what happens? I’m now accused of being “the most vocal” for having one article. Other people have made their concerns known even on the official Linden forums which has much more visibility, where I’m banned. The person who fell into the targets of Meta Linden, who tried to use the power of office to intimidate just the way Sven Johnson is intimidating, had a sign and blog dedicated to pursuing this issue. They likely have a lot more information on it. But Sven isn’t really interested in really pursuing it; he merely finds it useful as a stick to beat me with. I’ll be beating right back.
>b) The only person I know who claims to fully equate a sickening real life crime perpetrated on actual children with a victimless virtual crime involving adults, is Prokofy Neva.
An outright lie. As I’ve said countless times, you can’t EQUATE simulations and reality; but you can RELATE them. NOT EQUATE, RELATE. Actually, I know some other people concerned about the connection displayed by law-enforcers and experts in the field: Daniel Linden, Robin Linden, and all the people quoted in the New York Times. I do RELATE a sickening real life crime with simulation of that crime because the connection IS DEMONSTRATED. I do not morally equalize them; I don’t “equate” them as Sven is preposterously claiming here, but I sure as hell POINT TO THE CONNECTION. As for “victimless,” I don’t believe that people creating a substrate for legitimization of crime are engaging in “victimless” activity.
The whole reason the Lindens even have a policy at all now is because a connection was made, and likely not only in the German case. Their lawyers persuaded them of the connection, as Robin indicated.
The connection is visible to all but the zealous crusaders for the rights of fuck-you hedonists, heedless of the climate they create to justify, rationalize, and then *enable* this crime.
These are real concerns. I’ve possible been the most articulate in my post on my blog where I’ve lined up the arguments. But I haven’t been the most vocal.
That seems absurd. Surely there must be many more. There's RL porn all over SL, and no one can provide proof that it is all "over 18". The other people who came to this demonstration likely saw it too. The holes in the wall let us know the connection. Perhaps what Sven's mission is here now, I see, is somehow proving there was no porn at all, that it is somehow physically not possible. Huh? But there was. Why would people be busy removing it from the walls, yet leaving the avatar screenshots??? The assumption that they had RL porn or something that might appear to be underage seems reasonable. And yet we have no proof. That's why I don't think it's rational to pursue it, and that what makes more sense is preventing it by not enabling simulations which have been demonstrated to connect to RL stuff. The zeal with which this particular jihadist wants to show that there is absolutely no connection lets me know *every time* that there *is*.
>d) When questioned about the relatively recent events she vividly described on her blog – witnessing users with real life child pornography – Prokofy Neva has attempted to downplay her original assertions while pushing responsibility for dealing with the illegal activity entirely onto a Linden Lab employee who may not even have been on the scene in time to witness the real life child pornography first hand, and who is obviously not a representative for the real life authorities.
1. An event of August 2006 for which there are no notes, avatar remaining in the list that are known, pictures, or land parcel even, is not only “not a recent event” — 9 months ago — but an event that is likely impossible to reconstruct.
2. I haven’t downplayed shit — that’s merely a harassing tactic used by Sven Johnson. I originally described it as “graphic RL porn” and nothing has changed about it. That means it has RL people in it visible as pornographic, but it doesn’t mean I have a clear description, copy, or evidence to make the case. So I do not.
3. The Linden very likely saw the RL porn, as he arrived shortly before, or just as I arrived. I saw him flying around when I got there. He did not answer my IMs. I’m sure he’ll never comment on this, because he had no policy guidelines to follow then, as liaisons do now, and because the stuff was deleted.
4. These people were abuse reported, so perhaps abuse reports might contain something, but what most disturbed the protesters was the people dressed as child avatars doing unspeakable things with adults, not necessarily the pictures on the wall. That’s the most graphic and upsetting thing of all precisely because it acts on the emotions, is immersive, and illustrates a callous lack of concern for how it looks or affects people, precisely because of the chilling justification that it is a “victimless crime”.
5. The Linden definitely saw whatever there was to see — but it was deleted. Unlike client-side users, Lindens have access to past copies, trash, inventory, etc. and might have gotten more on it, but they were unlikely to have pursued people who were hastily decamping. We can’t do. But I would argue that in this case, indeed the Lindens have to be the authority one turns to. That isn’t dumping responsibility on them; it’s merely conceding that only they have the tools and server-side knowledge to make some reading of the situation. RL authorities have to deal with them, not a gaggle of witnesses who think they may have seen something but have no proof. Sven appears to have a very weak grasp of what investigations involve, whether by journalists, law-enforcement, or experts in the field. Hamlet summed it up by stating that what we have here is a “a dubious single source”. And it’s dubious not because it’s me (that’s what Hamlet may think) but because I have no pictures.
>e) When questioned about the relatively recent events she described on her blog – witnessing users with real life child pornography – Prokofy Neva has conveniently claimed that she doesn’t remember details; no other names – not of all the protesters she saw nor of the person who alerted her to the situation – and nothing that would directly assist in finding those who were committing a real life crime.
No, I certainly do not. I have no notes from this incident, nor pictures. I didn’t wish to keep pictures on the hard-drive. And I don’t recall avatar names or groups. I don’t see anything wrong with this whatsoever. I think protesters’ names might be dug up, but I don’t recall them. It wasn’t a story I followed, it wasn’t something that I wished to become involved on, as both sides in this conflict were disgusting. I’m not *required* to cover stories I don’t think I have either a good angle for or which I find repulsive. It’s not my beat at the Herald, which in any event is a freelance gig.
The people in that house were driven out of business or underground by vigilantes, who appeared in the face of Linden inaction. These vigilants, by the way, along with just ordinary concerned people, have been filing abuse reports, writing to Lidnens, and confronting them on the forums. If we are to believe Daniel, and I think in part we can believe him, the community’s agitation on this is in part responsible for this developed policy of theirs. Of course the German police concentrated their minds wonderfully.
Sven is a very poor researcher for this issue, since he believes there’s no connection between simulated porn and real porn, and he will remain wilfully blind even if it stares him in the face. I have no trouble believing there is a connection; empty spaces on a wall of photographs and the haste with which these people deleted what appeared to be graphic RL porn is one indication for me; but not the only one, as having read on the subject now, I’ve seen the dynamic: justification, enabling, through the Internet.
It would never occur to me to think that the extreme zealous tekkie-wikis, of which Sven is obviously one, would cling so hard and so fast and so hysterically to virtuality, that they’d create this autonomous region of existence for it free of all RL rules and dynamics. That’s truly startling. Sven prides himself as having an avatar that is merely his RL extention. Then perhaps the entire project of his RL is a kind of abstraction and virtuality. Here I am, promoting virtuality as something real; but that’s merely because I see that it has an effect on the world in ways we haven’t fully measured, comes from human beings and is an artifact of humans, and therefore is grounded in the organic world. Look who proved to be more the utopian!
>f) When questioned as to why she did not contact U.S. authorities regarding the real life child pornography she viewed inside Second Life, Prokofy Neva’s done nothing but made excuses for why she *couldn’t” instead of being proactive at the time, contacting them directly and letting them determine what was and was not possible and appropriate.
I absolutely would not contact any U.S. or international authorities about an incident for which I have no evidence. In my real life, I’ve had to file numerous affidavits and testimonies and reports. I know what goes into this sort of activity and what you need. I can’t imagine how RL authorities could have done anything at all with this except to take my temperature to see if I was feverishly hallucinating. Who is more of a virtual nutter immersed in SL, me or Sven?
You don’t call the police to a non-scene — even in virtuality, you have to have a scene. There was no scene.
The Lindens are the proper authorities here — it’s their servers.
And in the legal and political climate of August 2006, I honestly couldn’t have imagined that the RL German or RL Belgian police, or the U.S. FBI, would be entering SL to examine its contents. That’s because it’s a virtual setting. I think it has an effect on the real. But I surely didn’t see at the time how RL authorities would come to it. Today, I see that’s more possible for two reasons: a) the world is bigger and b) there is more attention and more capacity for entering and understanding.
My template for understanding this, interestingly enough, is Urizenus and Evangeline. Urizenus first became concerned in the Sims Online that here there was this seeming underage prostitute. He got all involved in the story and tracked the story with the help of reporters in his state of Michigan. I think at one point he got as far as getting the reporter to call the home of the alleged Evangeline and only get his/her mother, who claimed she would not let this minor come to the phone. It was then I began to have a hunch that Evangeline *was* the mom, and there was no underage character in RL. Who the hell knows?! I then perpetrated the Selene Witch hoax on Uri, and concluded, from all of this, that it’s almost impossible using normal tools, even for journalists, to find out who is really operating the switches.
Law enforcement and Lindens, using server data and other forensic tools might get further on this. So if Sven were sincere — which he is not — he’d call the RL police in his state, try to convince them to get started on this, or call the FBI, which might demand of him first some other exhausting of remedies, and get to work — calling one of those campaign organizations that work on child porn might be useful, too. I doubt they can get very far on this — I’d be interested to hear Urizenus’ opinion. I have no doubt that he, even with his zeal for finding this stuff in the past, will conclude it’s not easy here, and that Sven is pursuing this for his own agenda of belittling me and trying to silence my commentary.
>g) In comments, Prokofy Neva has clearly indicated that she believes the virtual crime involving consenting adults role-playing as children is as bad as the real crime involving actual children, yet her self-described inaction regarding the real pornography she claims to have seen indicate a nonchalance that a) could be considered complicity by some people, and b) suggests she actually takes real life child pornography *less* seriously than the pretend activities inside Second Life.
a) I have no nonchalance; I just don’t have pictures or evidence.
b) I have no complicity in any RL porn operation or failure to comply with some legitimate investigation into RL porn — we don’t have one in the form of Sven’s vendetta here.
c) I’ve never said the two are equated, I’ve seen they’re related.
d) RL child porn is more serious, but knowing that, pedophiles are more careful not to have it or to whisk it away. Good luck finding it.
e) Simulated porn creates a substrate for legitimizing and rationalizing the real pornography and real molestation. That’s hugely disturbing, now that we see this claim from officials and experts, and it is Sven’s nonchalance, nay, callousness on THIS point that suggests complicity.
Uri hasn’t admonished me. He hasn’t followed the story, but merely tuned into this thread. Sven Johnson is indeed a rabid, raging, unhinged, fucktard. I’ll be happy to repeat that. This doesn’t come from “agitation” or from “spouting vitriol” it comes from *fighting back hard* against someone trying to silence my criticism through disgusting and low tactics.
What we can see here is that Sven Johnson is digging himself a hugely deep hole to justify his chilling justification of simulated child rape. What motivates a person to do that?
Lastly, I’m looking for information regarding the incident described by Prokofy on her blog which occurred in the Yongchong sim sometime around August 2006. Feel free to contact me in SL (Csven Concord) or by some other means (links on my blog).
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
>Prok,
>Were you abused as a child, or just convicted of abusing someone else and don’t want the temptation around you?
Neither. Were you?
Prokofy Neva
Jun 2nd, 2007
>There is no issue of respect here Prokofy – you show none, no matter if the person is kissing your ass or disagreeing with you. You have no room to even type the word respect.
>Now then – You gave out your information. You linked your real self to a compilation of computer data which forms an image.
Did you really think that people were not going to use that information – for any and all purposes?
No, that would be silly, but I’m bolstered in my certitude by the fact that 99 percent of the people in this community do show respect for each others’ wishes and call each other by their Second Life names, unless a person adopts a habit of showing themselves as a slash or interchangeable all the time (SnoopyBrown/Jerry for example). They also refer to their chosen SL gender, without making a schoolyard guffaw about it each time. It just seems the basic cultural norm. You refer to people by their SL names in the SL setting.
>Do you honestly think anyone needs your permission after you have given away that information?
Yes, they do. I’m bolstered by this certitude seeing how the community behaves, 99 percent of the people refer to each other by their SL names especially if that’s a request, and not countered on the FL profile. Most people don’t go scouring in someone’s first life to “come up with stuff” to victimize them with on forums. That sort of forums jackals sport is a lonely, isolated tactic only used by total losers like csven Concord and Ian Betteridge who can’t argue coherently and who are untethered from common sense.
>If your answers to the above are anything other than No and No …. you live in a fantasy world where everyone must adhere to the whims of each and every person alive.
No, I live in SL where in fact 99 percent of the people do this. We all know Uri’s real name as it has been linked by his first forrays into the RL media. But we don’t incessantly reprimand him and say, “Now *Peter Ludlow*, could I try to link your name with things that will search under Google and discredit you?” No. We don’t do that. We say “Urizenus” becuase in this realm, that’s his name.
Erm, let me suggest — just a crazy, crazy, crazy thought as Adri would say! — that a person using the fake nickname of “Reality,” who cannot even muster a pseudonymous SL avatar’s name, and who isn’t remotely connected to a RL name, is HARDLY a credible source of fact or opinion on this matter *stifles horselaugh*.
>That said, do yourself a favor: In the future, try to remember that the rest of the world doesn’t give a shit about your little theories concerning what goes on in anyone’s mind.
I guess worrying about what the world thinks is YOUR occupation, given the fact that you hide behind not only one, but twice-over a nickname so as never to be discovered.
>THAT said …. No, you do not deserve to be on the internet and no, your genes should never have entered the pool. You are proof positive that a person really can be so detached as to believe the absolute worst in anyone – even if all they have said, in the exact same harsh manner as you – that you have no place in the world today.
Good thing people like you aren’t in charge!
>Kindly get over yourself, hmm? You’re not above using the exact same tactics as those you profess to ‘fight’ – that is a verifiable fact. All one needs to do is read the drivel you write. If you are not ranting about some nonexistent conspiracy, you are too busy huddling people up into groups and telling them what to think, how they should act, what moral values they should have ….. The list goes on.
I express what I think is right. I don’t huddle people up into groups, however.
And your reason for not putting out even an SL name is...?
Yes, I honestly believe I live in a world called SECOND Life where you can have some reasonable expectation to shield your first life form the attacks of vicious anonymous fucktards *like yourself*. yes, I do!
>to sum this all up Prokofy – do not respond to a post or comment to which you know very little about and cannot go for more than three words in without somehow confusing the issue.
Your response was off base, off topic and in no way whatsoever related to mine except at the end.
I try to visualize what sort of neuralgic whiney little dweeb could be behind a comment like this ROFL.
>Again, don’t want people using your real life information? Don’t hand it out to anyone news agencies included.
Well, 99 percent of the people in SL disagree, as they have no problem simply calling someone by their SL name without getting their undies in a twist like you do.
>Want to stop the current use? Sue the individuals once you have their information. It’s as simple as that – your words mean NOTHING.
Yes, perhaps it will come to that.