I'm goin' to Muriel, see, can I bring some coffee home? (part 2)

So, near the entrance--before one walks through the entry gate, in point of fact--is a port up to the Haunted Skybox.



It's very dark up here. I'm finding a new Windlight setting.



That's a bit better. What that parchment actually says only applies to people playing Bloodlines. I don't, so I'm passing it by. The wolf's pretty good, though.



Ancient, demonic statue on a deep sanguine carpet while lightning flashes outside. Atmospheric.



The lady of the cas...skybox?...drifting through a bedroom, complete with sex bed, while portraits of bloodletting line the walls. Sure.



Going down one level brings us to a pool of blood--very derivative--set into a bloodspattered checkerboard floor, with a slowly rotating corpse floating on the surface. Ick.



And on the other side of the room, various implements of torture and deathing.

Okay, so...it is actually following the rules of moderate sims--sex in the sky, PG (more or less) on the ground. And for blood fetishists, this would be a party--blood splashed on nearly every surface, pools of blood, fanged photography--the gang's all here in that sense. But to be honest, I liked the ground level better. S'just me, I know, but...there seemed to be a sense of whimsy downstairs, and some sense of subtlety here and there, whereas upstairs? It's all WE'RE VAMPIRES GRR WE'RE EVIL LOOK AT OUR VICTIMS NOW HAVE SEX. I mean...yeah, okay, we get it, now can you back it up a bit?

It's not the worst haunt I've been to this year. But it's far from the best. There are some good touches, but most of them are downstairs. Take it in if you're bored, I'd say.

I'm goin' to Muriel, see, can I bring some coffee home? (part 1)

Okay. Took a bit of research, and trying out different things, but--for now--I ran a test entry with the new picture display system in place, and it seems to work. Now I just have to redo it for every other image on my blog, and sorry, folks, I'm only going to do this--again, for now--for the recent entries only (September 1st on). It's just too daunting to consider doing this for every single image that's ever been posted on the blog.

But...until I can secure a more permanent solution...this puts the blog back to as functional as it was before. Ish.

Now then. The next haunt. Something isn't adding up here. The description of the place:

*~~* Family Land where All are Welcome. Peaceful Friendly Place for Couples to Share Romance, Love, Dancing, Date, Photogenic Environment for Relaxation and Romance. Adult Animations, Halloween Cemetary and Haunted Skybox. Seasonal Themed

Okay, so...nothing makes this a a haunt but "Halloween Cemetary and Haunted Skybox", nearly the very last set of keywords?

Oh, and keep in mind, while they say they feature Adult animations, they're on Moderate-rated mainland. Just FYI.



Though the gate we go.



Okay, I actually really liked the dance circle until I noticed the pole at dead center. Is that really...?



It is! It's one of the old Sine Wave poles! Man, I spent a lot of time on those at various clubs.



Just some skeletons chillin' by the tree.



Radioactive spider. Huh.



And a winged skeleton catching some moon rays.

So yeah. This isn't terrible. But she mentioned a skybox?

when your heart was open wide and you loved things just because

I don’t understand how the principles of cordial business behaviour suddenly don’t apply in SL.

The RUTHED blog bugs me on a lot of levels; but to be fair, those are pretty much all technical ones. Beyond the typos, occasionally freakish grammar, and missing words, there's a lot of truth to be found. There's a genuine heart there, speaking powerful words, and misspelled or fractured or lolspeak-encoded as it sometimes is, there's power in the words put down in (digital) print.

And, forgive me for waxing nostalgic--my fourth rezday passed two weeks back without even me being aware of it--but it's innately refreshing to find someone who speaks of the "old days" on SL and she's referring to 2004. The real "old days" of the game. Damn right.

Do I agree with her all the time? Hell, no. But is that the point of any blog, that I completely, wholly agree with everything said? And at least she's putting it out there--right or wrong, she's standing on her own merit.

So--and admittedly, at the behest of Mr. Allen--I have downloaded the new release of the main Second Life client again. To be utterly clear, I loathe with a fiery burning vengeance viewer 2.0; I think it was pushing too many changes, too fast, with no clear idea of what the bulk of the population of Second Life wanted, or cared to use; it had too many bugs at launch and should never have been approved for beta delivery without those bugs fixed; and when I used it, I discovered two things, right off the bat:

* Never make ALL YOUR GODDAMN MEDIA default on in a new viewer; this, above any other single factor, cemented my loathing of 2.0. I logged in to my home--a previously considered "safe place"--and, within moments of rezzing in, had to deal with music on (no clear way to stop it), media on (no clear way to stop it), voice (no clear way to stop it); and media playing on a prim Fawkes had rezzed as a demonstration (with no clear way to stop it). At the time, I had a less sensitive sound card, so my only recourse was to be screamed at, freak out utterly, and mute everything. I am not a person who multi-tasks, aurally, that well on the best of days. To suddenly have four inputs screaming in my head made me phobic of the entire viewer--a phobia that unfortunately still exists. I view anything on the 2.0 structure now with wary dread, and that's not likely to disappear any time soon.

and

* Never make it impossible to build, or script, or texture, in a viewer, unless the point of that viewer is to ensure people don't build with it. Which rather invalidates a large part of why many people log in to SL in the first place!

Apparently? They've corrected these two fatal flaws, and at least made others less buggy, so--carefully, with wary watchfulness, I'm willing to try it again. Conditionally.

[15:40] RockAndRoll Michigan: Our world, our imagination went out a long time ago, now it's their world, their rules, their office, bug off
[15:40] Magdalena Outlander: Well, I think they've shown that customer service is their top priority. . .except for all the priorities that come ahead of it.

Gad, that's so true.

Now, in continuing news from yesterday; there's more oddity behind the Ikaru Aichi ban.

First, the report (from Aura Falta) about the IP ban was in error; it wasn't an IP ban, it was just a standard ban from Second Life. (Though by report at least one roommate was also supposedly having trouble logging in.)

Second, there's additional weirdness to this case. First, Falta swears this is the first time Aichi has been banned by SL. This is not the truth; she had been banned previously, in 2008, for unknown reasons (unknown by me, obviously, not by Aichi).

Secondly--and I don't have logs to support this, I wasn't online at the time--but apparently, Falta stated in group chat that Aichi's boyfriend was abusive, and bullied her into giving him her password, and then logged in under her account and used Copybot with it. I have no verification if this is true or not; just the word of a source. This changes both the story I was told initially, as well as Aichi's own version on her own blog.

Secondly, by Aichi's own account, the original incident happened over two years ago; and what my source was questioning (and, now that I think it through, what I'm questioning as well) is--why on earth would Linden Labs wait two years? If they had evidence of ToS violation, they would have taken action against her then, not wait. It nearly has to be recent bad activity under her account.

Something else my source mentions--with the previous ban now on record, it may just be a 'last straw' motivation--that this last infraction (whatever it was) wasn't so large in itself, but taken as a pattern of directed misbehavior from 2008 (or before) to now? It may have finally caused the Labs to say enough is enough.

Again, this is all speculation, and please note: I am not saying anyone lied, specifically, I am not saying Aichi is a bad person; I don't want to log on tomorrow to a new spate of messages about how I'm a heartless whatever attacking the poor abused chicklet who's just trying to get back onto the grid, how could I....whatever. Don't want to see it. Not going there.

But there's still more to the story. Something else is going on.

Next, there's some controversial oddity at the Dead Carrot exhibit at the Summer of Love fair. I'm not sure how long Photobucket is going to host these pictures, and the large versions are definitely not for the faint of heart. This is, mind, at an event which is at least partially to raise awareness on mental illness and how various types affect us.



The oddly-named "Why hate my tits?" Which, for me, phrased in such a way, implies that someone else did that to one of her breasts. Which, okay, fine, we're talking extreme roleplay, we may even be verging on Dolcett girl territory, but even with that...this is disturbing and unsettling.



Next up, "What happens when I sparr" (with the double Rs, yes). What happens when I spar with someone else (and it's happened rarely, but it has happened): I get things bruised. Things swell. Perhaps there are scrapes. Sprains? Quite possibly.

In no combat scenario, real or virtual, have I ever had my nipple sliced off.



The offering titled "Shorts are unfun now". Again, that's not a 'drat, I should wear longer pants' realization, that's "oh dear God I can see bone. Hospital! Now!' realization.



I am not saying these items don't have their uses. They do. Trust me, even now, in the age where anything dark or adult is pushed off to one side so "normal people" won't have to deal with it--there are still roleplay scenarios, in a lot of diverse settings, where avatars could likely use all three. I am not saying the artist behind Dead Carrot is bad or evil or any loaded descriptive term for making these; that's not my point.

My point is--and I think it's excellently illustrated by the above photograph--if the whole concept behind the fair is to raise awareness of mental health issues, then why, for the love of all gods, have something this potentially triggering on display?!?

That's where I think Dead Carrot crosses the line--and keeps right on going. Because inducing panic attacks or abuse flashbacks while someone's browsing fashion? Just not cool.

(Again. Not saying me. Both my nipples are still very much attached, thaaaank you.)

my hand just can't reach for the light

As much as I still loathe the slipshod execution of Step Up!--that's not likely to change, any time soon, either--I do give props where due: this post on the Prim Perfect blog details yet another loss of revenue for the Labs that never had to happen, and exactly how tragic the Lab's execution of copyright infringers still is.

We do need a better system for ending copyright infringement. And Linden Labs needs to back their claim and state positively that it will follow its own guidelines and ban avatars found to be infringing content; ban suspicious viewers that are known offenders; and delete the infringing content itself. And all of this should have gone into action long before now.

I will never thank Mark Kingdon for any of the ham-handed strategies he tried to 'save' the company he was put in charge of; but I do agree that Miss Grace McDunnough is right in her recent blog post on Philip Linden's return as "temporary" CEO. Second Life needed some kind of change; short of setting Kingdon on fire and chanting "BURN, you bastard, BURNNN..."...it'll have to do. And now, as she says, he needs to stride forward and find someone to solve all those pesky bureaucratic issues he's not equipped to deal with.

[17:40] Emilly Orr: Hi, Drummer. Let me know if I can help with any Solace Beach questions.
[17:40] Drummer Somerset: ty
[17:40] Emilly's Google Translator: Drummer Somerset:Company

Wait, now Google Translator is sponsoring out translations? What the hell?

More of the top ten list; this time, the last five.

#5 is The Haunting:



In 1963, Robert Wise acquired the rights to The Haunting of Hill House, one of Shirley Jackson's more well-known works, even at the time. He made a few changes to the layout, so to speak, and then proceeded to film over one hundred minutes of black and white film that still unnerves to this day. Eleanor, the lead character, is the prototypical Lost Girl, trying her best to crawl away from her broken past and start her life. Let's just say that doesn't work out as planned.

But she does have the adventure she so desperately longed for; and in her bruised and battered hard, it doesn't so much matter if it's good or bad; she just wanted something to happen. Needed something to happen.

Be careful what you wish for.

It's available on Netflix to rent, and on Amazon to purchase.

Or you could buy the original book by Shirley Jackson, published in 1959. It still packs a punch on its own.

#4 is 1984's Children of the Corn:



Forget the nine billion sequels, most ranging from bad to unwatchable, and the recent remake, which was utter dreck--we're talking the original film, with Peter Horton and a very young Linda Hamilton.

And yes, it's dated, and yes, it's an odd concept to begin with, but be serious for a moment: how many films will give you a dread fear of corn?

And everyone stole this concept. Pick any backwoods thriller post-1985; if it had a cornfield, it's because someone saw this film. And it's not like it's even a silly concept; for those of you who've never done this, you'll just have to trust me, but for anyone reading who's walked out into a big cornfield? You know what I mean.

It's that thick green hush, when you're standing surrounded by corn. You can no longer see the road; sometimes, you can't hear cars. All you hear is corn leaves, whispering; all you hear is cornsilk's soft sussurance on the breeze. If there is one.

If there isn't, it's even worse; then it's thick, and muggy, and the smell of earth and corn is heavy on the air. Insect drones cover up most modern sounds; it is extremely easy to get disoriented in a cornfield and walk out significantly past where you walked in.

Add to that "He Who Walks Behind the Rows", a group of children who decided--on their own--that adults had to be punished for the sake of...something...in the corn...and the skewed Biblical overtones, and you have the town that EVERYONE is trying to forget, in the hopes that whatever went bad there will eventually just die off and wither on the stalk.

So to speak.

It's available on Amazon for purchase, Netflix for rental, or you can go the fun route and get the RiffTrax version.

#3 is Identity:



Oh, there is so much fun to be had with this one. It's another one where the plot is intense and deranged and hard to figure out and then one thing, just one thing happens...and suddenly you're watching an entirely different movie.

Splash of gore, splash of disturbing on the character side of things, but for the most part, this is a set piece. The action rarely lifts from the motel, and even when characters try to leave, they learn they can't. Only later do we know why.

Brilliantly played, brilliantly written, and Jon Cusack, as expected, is amazing in it.

It's available on Netflix for rental and Amazon for sale.

#2 is Scream:



Scream took every single slasher film ever made and broke it down into its component parts...and then made its heroine savvy to all of them. The audience knew what was going to happen all the way through--any serious slasher fan knew the rules as well. And the film did not hold back, driving us along those well-worn paths, but the end outcomes were wonderfully skewed.

I'm not so much talking about the sequels; most sequels suffer simply because they're sequels. But the original is a strong and vibrant thing, and it makes no apologies. It is a slasher film, pure and simple. People will die, and do die. But the rules are adhered to...most of the time.

Also, fun drinking game: watch the film and catch the references to other movies.

#1 is, has to be, Saw:



Saw was revolutionary at the time, in that it made horror personal again. I'm not sure if that will make sense to anyone who's not a hard-core horror fan, but horror had spread out into a lot of areas, and it seemed like movies were centering on entire groups of folks, and some entire towns, going under to whatever dark force inhabited the woods/the skies/the earth/other planets.

In the first Saw film, most of the action takes place in one single room, with tour-de-force performances turned in by Cary Elwes and Leigh Whannell. Leigh has another tie to the film, which is even more interesting--director James Wan sketched out the plot, and Leigh decided he could make that into a screenplay. And here we are today, six films later.

Actually, that's a stunning point as well--Saw was, and remains, an amazingly visceral horror film. Saw II was okay, but it jarred, a bit, because a character is given Jigsaw's test a second time. Saw III and Saw IV most viewers thought were barely tolerable, and cheapened the entire process; and then Saw V arrived, and nearly blinded us with the revelation that of course the previous two movies didn't make sense, because it wasn't Jigsaw behind the tests.

It's one of the few cases where--at least in the first five films--everything retains internal coherence. That is rare in horror films, believe me.

I'm also offering up the concept film behind the first Saw; the one that got them funded for a full movie:



Back when Adam was named David, and took the place of Amanda (Shawnee Smith).

So those are my ten, these five and the five from yesterday. They're not a complete list of my favorites--that would likely toss in A Nightmare on Elm Street, Bad Dreams, In Dreams, April Fool's Day, and more than one Stephen King miniseries as well--but these are a good, solid, dependable list of the unnerving, the gleefully bad, and the incredibly well-made that I keep coming back to, year after year.

Enjoy? If that's the right word...

so you've returned to lengthen my shadow

On occasion, we find things we never knew we wanted:



"Needle decollete", she calls it. This is it in the red lace...



...in the dark lace...



...and in the "Mystical Light" lace. Notice, especially on the close one--these are pearl-threaded needles trailing thread and bits of fabric. I especially like the color-changing; it will go with ever so many more outfits that way.

It's from the little shop in the lava field, these long threaded needles draped with gauze. The entire thing is touch-scripted to glow (or not) and to change color (or not). L$150. Stabs into your chest and flutters.

So, admittedly, I've been thinking about horror films. It's not exactly October, though I can revisit this list then, but I posted the "lesser-known" list yesterday. What would be on my list? Not necessarily greats, or even passables, but the ones I go back to, time and time again?

#10 has to be Blair Witch II: Book of Shadows:



Whereas the Blair Witch Project was, purportedly, a "true" story using "real" video and hand-held camera footage, the sequel had no such pretensions. But they wanted it to feel "authentic", and that, my friends, is where things skew so delightfully.

Admittedly, I will be honest--the movie works best if you are cynical, first, and pagan, second. Because the Wiccan character in Blair Witch II does everything wrong. I mean, completely, totally, if there's a way to cast or chant or even pray to the right godform...she spins it 180 and does it in reverse.

When she first hits the woods, she chants "Evil intent in the ground, may your release soon be found" over and over. When she's praying for guidance, she prays to Persephone, goddess of the underworld. "By earth and air and water and smoke, Persephone do I invoke..." It's...almost impressive, in a mind-numbing sense. If you have any pagan leanings at all--or have friends who've shared some of the multiple beliefs of the faith--you will be laughing hysterically in spots. It's an utter, braincell-slaying joy.

Even with that, though, it has its share of genuine unsettling moments, not the least of which is wondering what's real and what isn't, in terms of the movie's universe. We know--because we see the original events--what happened in the woods...don't we? Videotaped footage later found says otherwise. But videotapes can't be altered...

...can they?

A surprisingly canny question buried under some heavy-handed screenwriting, but there nonetheless, and still a pointed question to this day.

It's available to rent from Netflix, available to buy from Amazon, and if you're willing to be annoyed by technical glitches, you can watch it online.

#9 is Audition:



Director Takeshi Miike's profound and disturbing vision of the game of love, or what passes for it, in the modern day. Everyone's looking for something...but sometimes, we need to be very sure what we want and need is the same thing that the other we seek wants and needs.

It remains as powerfully raw and disturbing today as when it was first released; several members of several audiences, in fact, have walked out of showings of the movie. One notably broke down, though he later discharged himself from care.

It's set off some odd little ripples in other forms of media, as well; My Chemical Romance, for instance, turned one of their videos into a three-minute capsule of the film. (More or less; the ending changed. But to that point, it follows the film fairly closely.)

Audition is available on Amazon and on instant watch on Netflix.

#8 is 2001's Frailty:



Frailty is a deceptively simple film that asks the audience a simple question: is a man mad for listening to God? Then asks a follow-up on the heels of the first: Is that same man mad for killing people on God's command?

Sane, insane, religious and devout, schizophrenic and demented; the film delivers strong performances from an excellent cast that leaves you questioning which way the film's going to turn until the end. Inspired, genuinely inspired, and terrifying for its simplicity and honest presentation.

#7 is Alien:



Forget about the downline of the franchise, almost a full dozen films now: thirty-one years later, this claustrophobic little space epic still packs a punch. Now, yes, any horror fan worth their bloody popcorn knows about the Nostromo, the Weyland-Yutani Corporation, and what a Xenomorph actually looks like; but back then, we were given glimpses to the full picture only sidewise, and shadowed, and it worked surprisingly well. It was science fiction only tenuously, in that it was set in space; otherwise, the events could have happened anywhere, which made it perfect as a horror film.

It gave us new monsters to fear by virtue of not explaining much about them; and even though Dan O'Bannon, writer and screenwriter for Alien, admits it was gleefully plagiarized from every sf plot he could find, that makes it feel mythological, more than rehashed; we are invested in these characters nearly from the beginning, and we feel genuine shock when they get hurt.

It's available on Netflix, and also for sale on Amazon. I get the idea that it's not available to watch on Hulu, but mysteriously, Alien III is.

#6 is 2009's Orphan:



Orphan is a whole big ball of disturbing wrapped in a sweet sticky glaze of insanity all tied up with a bright red ribbon of WTF. I'm not kidding. Even assuming things are as we see them, it's wholly screwed up; but then the plot points drop, and everything we've seen before is turned on its ear.

We know from first sight of her that Esther has something wrong, deeply wrong, with her; but we're just the audience. Soon, how'ver, the wife of the couple that adopt Esther starts to feel it too; and from then on, it's us watching along, helplessly carried forward, as a couple's life completely disintegrates, with Esther spinning gracefully in the center, utterly deranged.

Absolutely compelling to watch, vicious hook of an ending, brilliant casting. This one will linger.

It's available on Netflix for rent, and on Amazon for purchase; a quick search didn't turn up another online source, though at the still regrettably-named SyFy Channel, you can catch an excerpt and interview with the director of the film if you like.

Think I'm posting the next five later, as this is becoming a rather largeish post.

And they're not specifically in any particular order, save for numbers 10 and 1. I really felt those two needed to be the top and bottom of the list.

how strong must I become so that no one will be hurt?

"An unperson can’t tell about beatings, rape, torture and murder, if she does, she will not be believed."

Why do I bring this up? Some years back--so long back I won't even bother digging up any extant links that may still exist--there was some debate on virtual rape. Is it rape, the respondents asked, if it's not physical and in the flesh?

The rational answer to this, of course, is no. If one can log off the net, if one can port out of the setting, then one cannot be raped--or, by extension, tortured, beaten or murdered. In a sense, it's all consensual violent acts on the grid; one can always get away. Even if it's only by virtue of pulling the computer's cord to disconnect everything.

And that's all well and good--and that's actually a truthful position--but I spoke (from personal experience) on those occasions when the lines blur. Sure, I said, we may be able to leave any particular roleplay, but by the same extension if we are living in that moment, if we are caught up in the emotions of the rp--we may forget we have these options. We may forget we can just type out You know what? This is stupid. No. I'm gone.

And go.

With that in mind, Lillie Yifu has a thought-provoking entry on her journal, about the Lindens' subsidization of rape clubs. At first glance, this seems beyond outlandish. Especially with the arrival of Zindra, and the Labs' insistence on "cleaning up" the grid for business, educational and commercial ventures--why would they ever protect a virtual 'rape room'?

But LL is doing more than that, in that [its] policy enforcement is clearly intended to mainstream rape. LL does not enforce its rules against rape parcels almost at all. Despite personal knowledge of them by LL employees, despite repeated reports, despite flagrant violation of its own rules.

How is this possible? It's not the first time Miss Yifu's mentioned it.

But--as has been pointed out innumerable times before--business clients (the market the Labs desperately want to get into) don't care about furs, vampires, ageplay, BDSM, or forced sex. They really, really don't. What business clients do care about is platform stability. Platform security. Knowing that the company one does business with isn't open to hacking for passwords or credit cards (and the Labs have been hacked, notably, twice).

Compared to what life's like on the grid now (severe lag, crashing, inventory issues, widespread sim issues, scripting burdens, server strain, and gridwide breakdown), what's a little bump and tickle between victim and oppressor?

(Btw: the "BnB Forced Sex RP" sim doesn't appear to be there, because they have cleverly changed their name to BnB Forced Sex Roleplay ( still on Mature land). Cheeky devils. I suspect people who weren't able to follow that stunning renaming on their part will have to content themselves going to Stolen Innocence, Brigadom Market, Pirate Cove's Orgy in Forest, or SlutLand. Unless they want to not violate LL's stated rules--not that the Labs seem to care--and actually do Adult things on Adult land. Good thing the Lindens are cracking down on 'rape rooms', I feel so much safer...)

The Living in the Metaverse blog takes on content theft, protests against the Lindens, and November 5th. I pretty much agree with their perspective--it didn't do a hell of a lot of good, and the Lindens didn't notice. As expected. As noted in the comments, at least one respondent planned a major sale that day, never knowing!

So much for 'getting the word out'.

Also from over a year back on the same blog, how to avoid drama:

Stay firm. If that means to be rude or impolite… well life is rough sometimes. If you have to stop answering IM's, avoiding some places, muting people… do it. There is no "just one more time" excuse. Make a clean cut. Now. Go live happily.

That's something I still find extraordinarily hard to do, but you know what? Maybe it's time to toughen up. Mute those I need to. I already shrug off sim bans--honestly, they only get in my way if there's something I want in there, and that so rarely happens. And in the case of that one chain of sims I just keep my virtual rear clear of--hey, it makes everyone happier. And I finally realized "everyone" now includes me.

Maybe muting isn't so bad, all things considered. After all, it could be worse. And it has been.

nothing matters but the times you do as much as you can

Miss Sphynx Soliel sent me a wonderfully informative link to new British law regarding something termed extreme pornography. These provisions seem remarkably clear, actually:

It refers to pornography (defined as an image which "of such a nature that it must reasonably be assumed to have been produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal") which is "grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character", and portrays any of the following:

• (a) an act which threatens a person’s life,
• (b) an act which results, or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or genitals,
• (c) an act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse,
• (d) a person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal (whether dead or alive),

and a reasonable person looking at the image would think that any such person or animal was real.

By the way? I fought very hard to make sure the pictoral links were as non-offensive and safe for work as I could. Trust me--it's out there--I could have linked some deeply demented images.

So. This is a very specific list. Let's go through it, point by point, put into SL terms--since I can do that, it's my blog--and we'll talk about my limits.

1. Images, animations and/or equipment designed to provoke sexual arousal, that entail threatening another person's life: I vote yes for adult; I also vote yes for extremely violent. You can't have potential loss of life (which, by the way, I do not associate with breathplay, certain semi-choking scenarios [I'll carefully draw a curtain over which ones] and knifeplay/knife massage), without an extremely violent context.

2. Images, animations and/or equipment designed to provoke sexual arousal, that entail result, or the potential result, of serious injury to breasts and/or genitals: I vote yes for adult. I also have to vote yes for extremely violent. After all, the once and nevermore half-Drow demon warrior in Lumindor, Sid, was the fellow that gave me the eighteen-inch limit. He was also the one who came up with the fairly disturbing catchphrase, Blood makes a good lubricant. (It doesn't, by the way, but that might be more than anyone needs to know. Let's move on.) This is also known personally by me as, anything it takes me (Emilly the shapeshifter, my definition of "me" here) more than three days to heal from? Is serious injury on SL.

3. Images, animations and/or equipment designed to provoke sexual arousal, that involve necrophilia. If I really have to define necrophilia, I'm talking to the wrong crowd. How'ver, let's go back to the judging portion. (And I realize, on SL, "necrophilia" gets slippery--sexy zombies? There are groups for that. Vampires? Is vampire sex necrophilia? If you're not starting to decay, or you're still moving around, does it count? Is it just cold still corpses for this?) Would necrophilia be adult? Yes. Would it be extremely violent? And here's my first no, because really--once the body's cooling? All the violence is over for the most part.

How'ver, even on SL, a lot of people consider the body holy, and sacrosanct; and any violation to it is violent in the extreme. In this light, necrophilia is rape, pure and simple, and for many, rape is very violent. There's also the question of consent: would the person, living, have given consent? Is that even a question once experience becomes effigy, so to speak? It's that line between being and inanimate states, really.

If you want, you can trundle over to the Sexy Losers necrophilia comic (they did a few pages on it, once upon a time), or just move on to:

4. Images, animations and/or equipment designed to provoke sexual arousal, that involve sexual contact with an animal. And here we get into very interesting waters for SL. Because what immediately springs to mind when we think of animals on SL?

Furries! So now we have the interesting ethical quandary of deciding whether or not furry sex--with or without human partners--is bestiality, by the conventional understanding.

Some folks say yes. My long-departed Ryce would not be intimate with me--wouldn't even kiss my cheek--if one or the other of us didn't match species. (It didn't seem to matter to him which species, but we both had to be the same one. It created certain...conflicts...at times.) And for those folks, understand, the mere mention of furs makes them all crazy. Furs by their nature, in this light, become sexualized objects, because they have fur. It doesn't matter whether they only date within their species, or not--they have fur, thus they are promoters of bestiality. And bestiality goes beyond the pale for a ton of people, for a ton of reasons.

My opinion? This does come from a partial fur, mind: Furs, by themselves, are not adult. It's like sexy little miniskirts or latex outfits--by themselves, they are not adult. How'ver, if they want to have sex with their specialized attachments in public: adult. If they want to have sex and then one chooses to swallow the other whole (though I have no idea if there are even animations for that in SL), then that would have to be somewhat, if not extremely, violent.

Of course, I think that goes without saying--it's not specifically about being a fur, having sex in public--I think anyone having sex in public is engaged in acts that are adult by nature. I think an avatar all by themselves, strapped into a machine pumping in and out of them is adult by nature. On this, Nany Kayo and I are (for once!) in complete agreement: I am forsquare for your ability (and mine) to do absolutely anything that doesn't restrain/harm/permanently kill another avatar in the privacy of our own homes; but if you want to do it on the green in Victoria City? That's just not right.

Which of course dovetails into the huge discussion of what is a private home and what is grid privacy, along with what is public space on the grid...and you're free to wrangle that out amongst yourselves...Me, I'm nipping blithely on to the next point. Which is:

Keep in mind that the UK definitions deal with images and/or media which is considered to be "grossly offensive, disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character". And that's the really big issue, because, even with all these carefully crafted definitions, they still seem to be relying a lot on "I'll know it when I see it".

On SL, will we know it when we see it? So many people are offended about so many things, and really, at the end of the day, this isn't a conversation about what offends people at all. This is a conversation on how best to protect the grid from itself, in the eyes of the Lindens.

And in the end, while I think this is a good article to read, and definitely informative on the laws of the UK concerning pornography in general, and extreme pornography in specific...this passage should have attention well paid to it:

There is a defence for the defendant if he can prove that he "directly participated" in the act, and where the participants consented, but only if the acts are those that can be legally consented to in the UK.

Another important point? The two sites mentioned as being heavy providers of "extreme pornography"--one current, one now gone in the mists of time--in terms of that article? Both operate strictly within US law on the legality of pornographic image.

So. While I'm sure I could find examples--everything from providing SLUrls to providing images--of "extremely violent" pornographic media/image on SL, I'm now wondering--what about pure violence? The guns and tanks and armaments that His Serenity, Otenth Paderborn, mentioned a few days back? I know about the Jessie sim--apparently, that's been replaced by, or is connected to, the New Jessie sim--but, because I'm not hugely in the shooting-guns crowd, I don't actually know what's on the ground now.

Maybe I should find out.

it's only the broken edge of love, it's never the tide

Back in, back in. So looking forward to this being done. May have to go out and wander, manic and wild-eyed, and just snap visuals for a post coming up.

At any rate, Akira Luminos pondered a question:

Maybe I'm way off - but...thinking about the child safety element (whether LL are planning introducing minors or not, but acknowledge that they are here anyway, as we probably all do) - *IF* the end result is to have an adult population 'verified', so they can access restricted adult content (which may well happen), and they still allow unverified accounts in SL generally, won't that result in an easier target for predators than we currently have, where at least they have no idea whether someone is a minor due to the cloak of all the adults with NPIOF status?

There's a point there, a good point. Deserves a good answer. Doubt there'll be one, but nevertheless.

Nany Kayo chimes in again:

Depictions of human slavery should be categorized as restricted adult content.

Slavery is considered extremely offensive by most people. No one should be confronted with images of ongoing slavery without giving their explicit permission.

I'm really starting to dislike Nany Kayo, frankly.

Then Blondin Linden actually responded:

What do other thinks about this? Would others agree that depictions of human slavery would fall on the side of extremely violent?

I'm more than halfway tempted to send him a notecard explaining exactly why Nany is on crack over this, with links and reference photos.

Deltango Vale responded to Blondin:

No, slavery is considered extremely offensive to Nany Kayo. The rest of us will decide for ourselves what we consider offensive.

Blondin responded again (miracula!):

What do you consider offensive in terms of violence?

Which is actually a damned good question. Sexuality, sexual identity, gender identity, it's all fluid, slippery, difficult to pin down. Violence, on the other hand, that's easier.

So what do we consider offensive, from a standpoint of extreme violence? Let me give a brief framework, maybe that will help.

* A collared avatar, kneeling, leashed to a standing avatar: not violent.

* Being slapped in the face: whether it's amusing or irritating, still mildly violent.

* Being trapped in a bear trap (bloodlessly): annoying; mildly violent. If there is particle blood--still annoying; moderately violent.

* Being punched: moderately violent.

* Being stabbed: weirdly, mildly violent, unless it involves particle blood again. Then I'd have to say moderately violent.

* Beheading: If it's carrying around one's own head, weird. Occasionally fun. If it's the head being cut off in an amusing fashion (I'm thinking the Unlucky Chair series of "deaths"), mildly violent (to moderately, depending on amount of blood). If there is a chainsaw involved and screaming, *extremely* violent.

* Loss of limbs: If in a cartoon fashion (avatar limbs folding up), mildly violent. If it's avatar limbs being torn off, accompanied by particle blood and screaming, very violent. If there are viscera dangling and the avatar is made to drag itself across the floor, that's the definition of horror for most people.

* Avatars roasting on spits: Very violent.

* Avatars being eaten by large animals: if it appears relatively painless, then bizarre, not necessarily violent (to me, at least). If it appears painful, if the avatar is struggling, if, again, there is screaming and blood involved--very violent.

So (for certain definitions of, to be sure), we're verging on sex again. So let's go into BDSM:

* Avatars chained: Not violent.

* Avatars dangling from ceiling cuffs: It's wince-worthy, it might appall some folks, but it's not violent, per se.

* Avatars stretched on racks: There's pain, sure, visibly; does that mean moderately violent, then? If there's moaning or screaming, then likely so.

* Avatars flogged (floggers being generally made of softer materials, though admittedly, an RL friend of mine made one from lengths of chainmail chain--which, believe me, having been dared into trying it? Welts nearly instantaneously), to the point of skin blushing, no welts, no stripes: mildly violent, at best.

* Avatars whipped (full cat-o-nine-tails-styled flogger, all the way up to full bullwhips snapped gently), to the point of welting: moderately violent.

* Avatars whipped with devices that cut the skin, or leave scars: very violent.

Beginning to see the definitions, or mine at least? Did I lose anyone?

And is defining "violence" in SL starting to look like it's a case of the Lindens trying to define sexual violence, emotional violence?

Will places like Toxia, for instance, have to move to Pornadelphia? Just because they offer places that might happen to mix pain and sex?

Though I am beginning to get a very dire image of the way Nany Kano's mind works:

Depictions of slavery would be considered objectionable in any public place in the United States, similar to burning crosses.

Wau. Just...wau. How deluded is that? And what does she mean, then, when she says "slavery"? Does she mean BDSM relationships--which is, in nearly all cases, consensual and worked out in advance, even on SL? Does she see a woman in silks, a woman collared, a man with a whip, a woman in tight latex, and equate them mentally and emotionally with lynch mobs and the KKK? That's not rational. That might not even be sane.

Kyle Steig has a detailed list for what he wants to see happen on Pornotopia:

Here's a solution that will leave me a satisfied customer and not one inclined to see what my legal options are:

- Skip the 'age verified' plan and go with 'age affirmed' as an opt-in process unrelated to payment info on file. Get yourself out of the liability business.
- Give me a 'reverse mute' so I can mute myself to anyone who has not 'age affirmed' and agreed to see 'adult content'.
- Give me an additional permissions flag that lets me not sell to or allow anyone to even see any products I make who have not 'age affirmed'.
- Let me apply this flag retroactively or flag content as 'pre and post' rift so I can't be blamed for things I made two months ago.
- Move every single prim on my mainland to equivalent parcels on the Adult Continent. Make it zero work for me or waive 3 months tier so I can do the work myself on land swapped meter for meter to ensure there's no out of pocket for me.

All the current options being discussed involve taking value I have paid and or worked for. This taking is in an effort to move SL to a standard not even applicable to my Cable TV in my home or the internet in general. The above terms let you demonstrate a commitment to segregate the pervs from your would-be investors and the press and they don't mean taking away my value.

We're only 2-4%. You won't miss us. It won't cost much. Be generous.

Hard bottom line there, but one that I think is more than reasonable. If the Lindens want this done, it's maybe the least they can do, really.

Phoebe Hatfield brings this section home:

I can not choose whether to be censored or segregated. I can not choose whether to be forced out of my land because your company is hell bent on alienating its customers. The only real acts of violence on Second Life are committed by Linden Labs. You can choose not to, but will you?

Likely not, all factors considered.

Blondin Linden finally defines something in the forums:

I would consider extreme violence to be things like torture. Can anyone here make an argument where torture would not be considered extremely violent?

Okay. That's a base line I can live with. Torture. Fine. Let's define the how, then.

Torture according to Dictionary.com:

1. the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.
2. a method of inflicting such pain.
3. Often, tortures. the pain or suffering caused or undergone.
4. extreme anguish of body or mind; agony.
5. a cause of severe pain or anguish.

Medicine.net's definition:

An act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person, for a purpose such as obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation or coercion, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind. Survivors of torture often suffer from physical and psychological symptoms and disabilities. There may be specific forms of physical injury including broken bones, neurological damage, and musculoskeletal problems. Torture may results in psychological symptoms of depression (most common), post-traumatic stress disorder, marked sleep disturbances and alterations in self-perceptions together with feelings of powerlessness, fear, guilt and shame.

So for me? The line between those two definitions is markedly slim. I would have to say, and say positively, that--according to these definitions, as understood--that the submissive/slave relationship to the dominant/Master or Mistress is not torture. And that torture, as defined, is well over the line of what we want to consider as "extremely violent".

Let me say that again, as it seems to be vaguely important: BDSM and D/s relationships are not, in themselves, relationships depending on torture.

Of course there are cases that go beyond the bounds of generally understood concepts. But I believe by and large, on SL, what we are dealing with is a subculture that operates by choice. Pain by choice. Force, in this sense, by choice. Suffering, if we go that far, by choice.

So. Let's move one step farther back. If a relationship is consensual, it is not slavery, under the generally understood definitions.

Let's pull those in as well.

The Free Dictionary defines slavery as:

1. One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household.
2. One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence: "I was still the slave of education and prejudice" Edward Gibbon.
3. One who works extremely hard.
4. A machine or component controlled by another machine or component.
intr.v. slaved, slav·ing, slaves
1. To work very hard or doggedly; toil.
2. To trade in or transport slaves.

And West's Encyclopedia of American Law defines slavery as:

1. The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household.
2.
1. The practice of owning slaves.
2. A mode of production in which slaves constitute the principal work force.
3. The condition of being subject or addicted to a specified influence.
4. A condition of hard work and subjection: wage slavery.

Okay. I'm tired, I'm for bed, so let me wrap up this conversational jog somewhere at least safely off the road. Here's my take on this issue, at present:

1. People like Nany Kayo need to be more open-minded and less judgemental; also a good dose of thinking before they send out such ill-considered idiocy is heartily recommended.

Actually, no, there's a better starting point than that, but damn, I'm just irked enough to let that stand. But let's restart anyway.

1. The Lindens need good working definitions of extreme content, adult content, extreme violence and extreme sexuality.

2. They are soliciting opinions months in advance on how to word the coming documents, but they've already decided a new continent and segregation is the Best Plan.

3. Many, many people chimed in with alternate suggestions. These suggestions were ignored.

4. The Lindens began pushing for definitions again, and what bothered people, both in terms of open sexuality, and extreme violence.

5. The conversation was motoring along (at least as well as a luxury car with sugar in the tank and four square tires can) when slavery and references to Southern oppression were dropped like napalm candies into the front seat.

Now, I realize Blondin did leave the door open, but really--Blondin was asking about extreme violence. At what point does a conversation about the nature of violence in a virtual world even have to mention slavery in the real world? It's not just me, right? Nany is pretty much fifty cards short of a playable deck, here?

And me, personally, I don't care what your stance is on D/s, on BDSM at large. It does not matter. Pro or con, it doesn't even feed into this because Nany so completely overreacted that one almost has to stand back and applaud the effort, just on theoretical points of applied confusion.

It does seem, however, barring other factors--and more information coming past page 78--that the Lindens, or at least Blondin Linden, is trying to link BDSM with extreme violence. And that just doesn't work for me. Label Dolcett violent, fine; vore and snuff equipment violent, fine; label anything that shreds an avatar and bumps the typist off the grid; fine, I have no problem with that.

Gor? "Extremely violent"? The pretty little slave girl in silks, violent because she is a slave? The quiescent prettyboy under the spiked heel of the dominatrix holding the whip, violent because he's chosen to submit to a woman? Strippers, violent because they work in BDSM clubs?

No. Just no. It doesn't pan out, it's ludicrous, and whether it's coming from the Labs or demented social conservatives like Nany, it's a baseless accusation. It doesn't hold up. Logically, this allegory will not serve.

But it does make me curious about what the definitions for the adult continent will be, when the Labs finally release another draft...

scapegoat to rock the boat, yeah, we need someone expendable

Cheetah has new colors of cabbits! Woo! (For anyone who doesn't connect Cheetah with furs--or Lost Furest furs--maybe this will help, her release for Hallows.)

(And, as has been pointed out, that video needs much better head shots. We know she's proud of their...assets...so to speak, but truly, can we see the rest of the avs up close?)

And this is...charmingly disturbing, is the best thing I can say about that.

Now, onto other news. I did a little personal reconnaissance this afternoon. Just as a cursory overview, here's what I found.

(Nota bene: Because there was some confusion over this point, when I say private estate, private sim or private land, I mean island, not mainland.):

The Dark Side Clubhouse in Odie is on the mainland. One is presented with a list of rules, and while there are nudes in the foyer, they are mostly artistic nudes. How'ver, it would be difficult at best to find the Clubhouse were people not actively searching out sexual terms.

The entire Clubhouse is--though not attractively so, I'll grant--entirely enclosed from public view on their parcel of land.

The Crack Den, an immersive dark RP community, now comprises five sims and can be found by first accessing Hathian. Rules are presented and they are a private estate. As far as I am given to understand, no private estates will need to move.

Necronom VI, by that extension is, yes, on a private estate named Desperation Andromeda. Rules are presented and they are, as previously stated, entirely enclosed anyway. The Doomed ship, by the same extension (both being space-themed dark roleplay areas, I can't remember if Doomed is above, below, or to one side of Necronom, but they're both on the same sim), is also on private estate land. Rules are also presented there, along with a general idea of what to expect, and Windlight settings to maximize your ship experience.

Beast Meadows, on a self-named private estate sim, is a Gangrel outpost in-world that is famed for bestiality, forced capture, rape and potentially vore, considering. (Note: I am not one of those who views anthropomorphic fur/human intimate activity as being "bestiality"; there are those who disagree with me. By that word, though, in this instance I mean four-legged "feral"-style animals attacking/raping/eating humans.) An introduction card is offered on entry, and a large section of the wall can be clicked for official rules.

The Bondage Retreat in Melodias is not entirely enclosed; on the other hand, they have high walls, a surprising amount of space, and there seems to be nothing else near them. Rules are presented upon entry, with owner names to contact in case of difficulty. They are on the mainland.

Slutville offers what they term "forced fantasy" in Hero; they are not entirely enclosed, but by the same extension, they are on private estate land. Rules are presented on entry, and there is nothing directly offensive at the port-in site.

Desade Lane Designs in Ahid does seem to specialize in equipment that causes the marks that don't leave--everything from branding to snuff devices, it's definitely not a place for the squeamish. However, it is in Ahid, a private estate, and there are warnings before entering their BDSM furniture floor. Everything beyond the courtyard is--though again, it does not need to be--enclosed from public view.

Interestingly, In For Life, next door to Desade Lane, is an immersive prison RP location that--also being in Ahid--is exempt from the need to relocate. A few steps forward automatically gives out their rule list, which is comprehensive. All but the main courtyard area is enclosed from public view.

The Angelcreep BDSM community (and Annex/e art gallery) in Deliquency is on a private estate. Though they have no direct need to do so, their display spaces are also entirely enclosed.

The "No Limits" Brothel in DeVine starts off with an open-air mall where everything from silks to unsettling devices (Desade Lane again) are sold; but the actual "brothel" itself is completely enclosed. To emphasize yet again, how'ver, they do not need to be, as they are on a private estate sim.

Shard's Sadistic Creations (I'm amused that the initials are SSC, I admit) is in Matriarch (just up the sidewalk from the Dictatorshop, another BDSM furnishings supplier (to date, the only provider on the grid of the white "kidnap van", complete with animations). The small shop (outside of an open door) is enclosed; Dictatorshop is enclosed, with full glass windows; how'ver, neither consideration matters, as they are on private estate land.

Dark Delights, in a self-named private sim, is pretty much one-stop shopping for the darker sections of the human (or fantasy creature, or tentacle demon) psyche. Their shop is now open-air, but mostly enclosed, and either way, it doesn't matter, it's a private sim. (Though the grounds surrounding Dark Delights are lovely to wander.)

Kidnapped! in Canfield is on the mainland, and, while the tinted windows can be seen through from outside, there's very little here that would be "unsafe" for people to view, per se--their specialty is kidnap gear, cloth gags, tape, bound limbs...nearly nothing that involves nudity, even, in their models. No notecard is given, but the wall panels are self-explanatory.

To that end, their store had a link to a "kidnap roleplay" sim called Deadend City--they're on a private sim called Honeysuckle Island, and are completely enclosed, and in a skybox to boot--though, again, noted just for the sake of it, they're on a private sim and would not have to move.

The Sanctum of Illyr? Private estate. Toxia? Private estate. Yggdrasil Castle? Private estate. Krull? Private estate. Nefarious Wonderment? Private estate.

Sensual Stoneworks, the home of virtually every inanimate/non-human object that can possibly be made capable of sex (think statues that entice, robots that actively engage, insects that force their fluttery attentions upon's one...*coughs*...helpless person), is on a private estate.

Legacies 1891 (that lists as "extreme dark Victorian roleplay") is on a private estate. SVU (hardcore animations) is on mainland but has a drop-down menu warning of content inside their entirely enclosed (save for the front door) store. JohnC (a Dolcett shop) is on private estate land. The Crypt of Despair? Private sim.

Hard Alley? Oddly enough is on mainland...but again, in a skybox, entirely enclosed from public view. In another skybox, entirely enclosed, is the Grunge & Puppy Paradise; but that's also on mainland.

To be absolutely fair, there's also one business who could be doing much better than they are now. OmniPotent Animations, for instance, who sell poseballs of a rather more violent nature than some would wish to partake in, or know about. They are situated in a terrifyingly translucent pink and purple building that is partially open for public view (and yes, on the mainland), with a porn film that starts up with the expected moaning (if one has media settings on auto-play, at least).

Now, do I think this is comprehensive? Of course not. There are vast numbers of sexually-themed businesses, parks, and entire sims, and some few "extreme" locations; note also, I didn't cover any weapons sims, because really, the only reason I know which end of a gun is the wrong one to be on is from being fired upon and trying to dodge.

But from this? I found so few mainland businesses--and of those, one business which was not concealed from external view!--that didn't already take reasonable precautions.

From this, I can only conclude that people are complaining in the main about businesses who do respect their surrounding neighbors' privacy, and their own; who do offer their services with rules and warnings; who do what they can to ensure that no one under eighteen engages those services, even supposing an eighteen-and-over grid. They are complaining about businesses they have gone into, and then been "offended" by; businesses they have sought out in search, businesses they patronize, by and large.

Talk about a double standard.

Again, inescapably, the question must arise: what's really motivating the adults-only continent?

outside, and they lead us out quietly

The corporate language they're choosing to use is anything but clear for the casual bystander; but the Lindens are now working towards working towards development of adult continent rules.

Here's some of the highlights from that link:

Q: What laws are going to be applied/quoted to support what is considered Adult Content? It is a very thin line you guys are trying to walk. It would have to be challengeable and be supported.. cant be simply an Opinion surely?
A: Sexually explicit likely the largest piece - not talking about private, talking about what is publicly advertised to public; another category intensely violent activity, not simple shooting more like beheadings and torture; third category actual photographs nudity, pornography
Will need to allow for exceptions for artistic display, educational components, health; some definitions in place being honed with input included

So they're still working on defining, albeit fuzzily, what "adult" versus "extreme content" is, but this is a fairly solid step--they're not going to evict everyone who has a sex bed, unless we move it out to public spaces and advertise what's going on. Private interactions should remain unpoliced. Emphasis on should.

Q: Nude beaches?
A: Simple nudity alone hard to regulate

They're admitting they're going to have problems in this area. Considering that not a large portion of the grid chooses to walk around nude in public--I hate to be harsh, but that's not my main concern. SL nudists only allowed to be nude in their own private spaces, I personally am fine with that, and don't necessarily see a problem with an edict not to shop nude. (While of course understanding that people will do what they want anyway, just to push the limits, if nothing else.)

Q: What about pictures of naked skins?
A: Tough area to get right; search filters may apply here; e.g., genital words go to adult category; still thinking it through

So art gallery displays, skin shops, makers of prim bits, and the like may need to follow this development closely; so far, it sounds like they're in the clear (at least the galleries and skin makers), but will have to be clear about what and how they offer access to nudity.

Q: If someone uses words like Essex (valid UK location), or watch our play Dick Whittington, they could be parsed into Adult Content?
A: Probably not; lean toward conservative side

This one, I admit, is a problem for me, if only because I know how many problems occur with students in the world beyond who need to turn in health class reports and a) find things they absolutely shouldn't have to deal with, or b) find access to everything concerning the term "breast", say, for breast cancer, blocked and filtered out by their school's auto-blocking software. Both ways have implementation difficulties.

Just as a search for "breast cancer charities" in SL, you want to show up as some branch of the RFL, and not some balloon-sized prim breast shop with protruding prim pierced nipples; but watching the search terms for what is and is not "adult" is going to be three shades of headache right there.

Q: Is this a precursor to incorporating the Teen grid?
A: Nope

Finally something connected to the Lindens comes back with a quantifiable answer. So okay--unless there's been another breach of faith, sequestering "adult" activity has nothing to do with eventual reunification of the Adult and Teen grids.

Q: Multinational platform and opinions could result in a flood of complaints; you will have to tenfold your support team
A: It's true will get many reinterpretations; happened with gambling - still get reports about games that are not games of chance; similar misinterpretation on age play
Have a team who understand policies and only enforce where there is really a violation; will have to do same here; feel confident have learned how to do that and can do it

Maybe; I still say I can name ten places that use so-called "games of chance" that haven't been touched by the gambling ban. How'ver, that's neither here nor there; what they are saying is that yes, they do understand this will require a separate "Adult" police team, for lack of a better phrase, to go through each complaint case by case.

Q: Re: policing/policies - the parameters being used to decide what is adult content, if not legal based, could be construed as being nothing more than discrimination, which in itself is illegal
A: Adult definitions are around sexually explicit activity and intensely violent activity; those are not 'strictly legal' based definitions

And this is a private company anyway; though I and everyone else forget that, they have no responsibility to provide game access to everyone in a way consistent with the provisions of the various gender/disability/religion laws enacted in RL. That they are choosing to operate within these strictures should be lauded as a good deed.

Q: Will the adult region SIMs be in the same price category than mainland (195.00 USD) or because it is now an adult content SIM which would attrack certain traffic will the price be raised
A: No intent to price differently from Linden Lab; on open market another story

In other words, parcels rated "Adult" may well rise dramatically in price, or plummet to below current mainland levels. They're saying they have no control over resale, and won't even try.

[Q]: Is content separation [motivated] by feedback from corporate enterprises?
A: Fair question; corporations are a small component of the resident groups that want more control predictability; they span from organizations to businesses to lots of residents doing lots of different things

In other words, Dude, everyone complained, chill, we're not selling out. Whether they are or not remains to be seen, but that's at least what they want publically perceived.

Q: Would having a red light mainland make the public and press think worse of SL as 'being like Amsterdam', i.e., ignoring what else it has to offer other than adult content; would creating a specific area for this kind of thing have a negative impact on the [brand's] value
A: The same content in SL now will be in SL after AO; it may be perceived as a red light district yes; everyone knows platform has broad creativity; so no, that's not a concern

This one confused me, sheerly on the count of, Second Life has an Amsterdam sim, which is pretty much a red-light district already. So I had a moment of head-tilt there.

What they seem to be saying, though, at least on the surface, is Yes, we know, this is going to increase our rep as being nothing but the game where the perverts are; we don't care, though, because we're able to mention so many other things our residents do that the media will follow up on those aspects of the game.

Even though, by and large, most media outlets never have...

More later, when I sort through more of the forums stuph, including the new thread unification thread (as redundant as that sounds, and is).

it's the hard-knock life

Whilst waiting impatiently for the chair to cycle around to E for an especially vibrant J-pop styled Black Maria hair, Miss Linda Poplin dropped by.



She is bruised, bloody, battered, there are skinned knees and bruised hips you don't see in this pic, she's got a bullet between her eyes, two black eyes and a split lip, and yes, those are drywall nails through her arms.

Her store--called, unsurprisingly, Blood & Scars--is listed in her pics. I had to check it out.



This place is...something. Stores in Second Life that contain things that creep me out are rare, and this place has a few. Miss Neome and I couldn't decide if the scalpel-version tic-tac-toe backwork or the words carved into bellies were more disturbing; but also, they have things which are just prime to own for my zombie collection of, err...bits and pieces. Like the stitched-all-over set, or the stitched finger gloves, or the eye scar...

Useful. Creepy, undeniably, but...useful.

There's a lot of these places, in various little post-apocalyptic corners of the grid. Bloody Hell, for instance:



which was my former wounds-and-claw-marks store of choice, a while back. They used to be the only one in existence (barring Ropeworx, which really always has been more about tie marks and shibari). Or Bloodline--not to be confused with the game of vampiric idiocy--whose specialty seems to be really disturbing eyes:



and very real-appearing welts, scrapes and rope burns:



In contrast, Bruised & Bloodied only has one vendor:



but it's in the middle of the Junkyard, a post-apocalyptic, damage-enabled, freeform wandering wasteland that is, all things considered, kinda neat.

If you're into the whole, post-apocalyptic, civilization-tottering-past-collapse motif for your woundplay, Aunty Entity--and oh, how I love that name--is really the place to go. But they're so much more than just wounds. They're really two hangers full of everything.



Plus? She has a razor-wicked sense of humor.

Finally, that brings us to Cruelful Cosmetics:



Cruelful is more expensive than any two of the others combined, but they do gunshots really, really well. Getting shot is not now, and never has been, my thing, but I can definitely envision certain settings where such might be of use. If so, that's your place to go, hands down.

We're still picking up things from Hallows, so our parcel is still all foggy and spooky in Morgaine--but I did have a moment of shocked confusion coming home a couple days back.



I admit, it was very much the "OMG WE'RE DROWWWNING" reaction, but on reflection, I calmed down, and asked quietly in ISC chat if they knew why we had rising water in Morgaine. Turns out, Duchess Edwina Heron bought the bulk of Morgaine that Miss Uni Ninetails owned, as she had to quickly sell parcels to reinforce land stability elsewhere. (I think of this as yet more fallout from the OpenSpace sim debacle.) So, she sold the parcels to Eds, and took everything she owned back, which pretty much dropped the center of Morgaine back to water for a bit, until Eds gets set up.

So, glad there's explanation, but still. Unnerving as hell at first.