Comments on: Op/Ed: Linden Lab’s Weasel Worded Quasi-Assurances

By: Oxycodone.

Oxycodone. — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:03:18 +0000

Oxycodone.

Oxycodone cr side effects. Oxycodone. Oxycodone online.

By: Apap codeine pill.

Apap codeine pill. — Mon, 25 May 2009 19:31:00 +0000

Cheap codeine.

Apap codeine. Tylenol 3 codeine. Codeine facts. Codeine.

By: Victorria Paine

Victorria Paine — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:04:27 +0000

“And if you think age verification is making a mountain out of a molehill, take a look at what SL has. Some resident’s might believe that age verification will knock out the escorts. This is possible due to privacy concerns on the part of the participants leading to a possible population collapse. Less customers verifying combined with less escorts verifying equals less opportunity for clubs equals fewer clubs and overall revenue . But I think the real losers in this as far as sex in SL goes would be the free sex areas. How many residents take part in the free sex areas solely to have anonymous sex, ie SexyBeach number two under popular places. Age verification takes some of that anonymity away. So for some portions of the SL population, age verification is a big deal.”

That’s interesting. I would think that if the anonymous free sex areas were to see a decline, that could *help* escorts in the medium term. One of the “levers” on the demand for escorts is the availability of free sex in various places on the grid — if that free space dries up a bit, that could drive up demand for escorts and actually help the situation somewhat for them economically as compared to where they are today.

By: Jessica Holyoke

Jessica Holyoke — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 11:33:42 +0000

Hi Merlin

“Adult” land was initially designated as areas with explicit sexual activity or extreme violence. Presumably, “Mature” land you can have violence or sexual activity, just not extremely or explictly types of violence or sex. Plus you can swear. “PG” would be no swearing, no fighting and no..well 30-50% of what appears in the Herald.

And if you think age verification is making a mountain out of a molehill, take a look at what SL has. Some resident’s might believe that age verification will knock out the escorts. This is possible due to privacy concerns on the part of the participants leading to a possible population collapse. Less customers verifying combined with less escorts verifying equals less opportunity for clubs equals fewer clubs and overall revenue . But I think the real losers in this as far as sex in SL goes would be the free sex areas. How many residents take part in the free sex areas solely to have anonymous sex, ie SexyBeach number two under popular places. Age verification takes some of that anonymity away. So for some portions of the SL population, age verification is a big deal.

Then you have to look at where should age verification end? If the Linden’s intend for age verification to be a $L sink,revenue or a means to ensure ToS compliance, then why limit it to 30-50% of the population? Why shouldn’t everyone be age verified, other than privacy concerns over data?

By: Stone

Stone — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 11:11:42 +0000

Here’s my true horror story. Concierge members were sent an email asking them to act as test dummies for the age verification system and then fill out a survey about the experience. It was done by a link from the SL account web page. US residents were asked to supply either their state driver’s license numbers or the last four digits of their federal SS number. I decided to be a good guy and help out. Well, despite being older than dirt, I flunked both ways repeatedly. I could not prove that I am older than 18. So, I called the concierge phone number they provided. The response: don’t worry about it. I said I had a big investment in SL and didn’t want to lose it. The response: don’t worry about it. I said I didn’t want a black mark on my record. The response: we aren’t keeping a record of it. The only relief offered was: don’t worry about it.

By: Merlin Oddfellow

Merlin Oddfellow — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 01:26:27 +0000

Ok can you enlighten me ? “adult flag” ? I thought that :
1- SL was only for people above 18
2- That in SL, PG-rated areas were for ADULTS wanting to have “non offensive” content
3- Mature-labeled areas were for adults who don’t mind that “potentially offensive” content.

So now there will be another type of land ? Or will the “age-verified” flag replace the “mature” areas ? If not, what will it be permitted in “mature” areas which will not be in “PG” ?

oh, and for the “i have nothing to hide” people, in RL i have sex with my gf, it doesn’t mean that i want people to know when i do so and give them binoculars to look.

By: janeforyou Barbara

janeforyou Barbara — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 01:08:52 +0000

@ Asp Grelling I got adult flagg on all my SIMs. I allways had. The age verifi are just on beta for us now.We it goes full scale i ONLY want verifi adults on my Mature lands.

As land owner i am responsible for not letting in minors so i will keep my lands adult flagged, i dont want a a law sue on me!

Besides i think it will also be safer for my 3800 members.And i am not worried for traffick as the real matures will come to adult flagged sims.A lot was conserned wen we got voice chat on traffick, i desided to keep voice chat and my traffick booms!
So i dont worry,,i adapt, if you cant adapt to development and to the future you dont got any.Just the same as RL

By: Asp Grelling

Asp Grelling — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 08:05:45 +0000

The adult flag goes hand in hand with verification and only verified avatars will be able to get onto land that has the adult flag set.
Setting the adult flag will reduce the number of people who can get onto land but more people on land means a higher search ranking so land owners first reaction will be to leave the adult flag unticked.

By: Nacon

Nacon — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 03:17:13 +0000

Mmmm Molehill! No wonder why I post.

By: DireLobo

DireLobo — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:15:57 +0000

It has been highly entertaining reading the paranoid ramblings of some of you. So I thank you for the yuks.

Here are a few highlites which I choose to address, briefly:

>1. “Why indeed should ANY Concierge
>customer – someone who pays Linden Lab
>thousands of dollars a year for the
>privilege of occupying a sim remember –
>be expected to provide further,
>redundant, ‘proof’ of their age?”
>
>You got me. I dunno.

It has nothing to do with verifying the ages of Concierge customers, though if the policy is stated to be applied to everyone then it should upply to Concierge customers also – the point was to select a small easily reached subset of users to beta-test the age verification.

>It is not a platform – my computers are
>platforms. It does not function on its
>own nor enable other software to be run
>upon it, unless you count scripting.

You are undestimating the power and flexibility of LSL if you dismiss so easily the idea that LSL does allow you to run other software on top of SL. Additionally, nowhere will you find in a definition of Platform the statement that it MUST be an Operating System that interacts directly with the hardware in order to be considered a platform. At times systems like Smalltalk, Toolbook, and even LotusNotes were considered platforms. The definition is not so clear and it is neither clear in this case that SL is not a platform.

>Nacon is right. This is yet another
>Tempest In A Teacup.

HAH! Hardly! Its more like a mountain out of a molehill…