1  |   Order by index

Nov 13, 2002, 5:54am

Hello friends,

I was following the discussion in the "Stop it now, ENZO" thread and thought
it might not hurt to start a new thread about world guidelines.

Might I humbly request that some sort of general guidelines be
posted/published defining what sort of content can be entered into a world?

In the following straw-man examples I am using Avatars as an <example>
item - a focus for discussion since AV's and sexual content seem to be one
point which others have brought up in some other threads in the NG.

For example:
G: No content showing nudity or expousing any acts which are not in 'Good
Taste' ie: a Family and Children friendly world - example AV's must be fully
clothed..

PG: might contain content suitable for older children and perhaps allowing
AV's with translucent clothing.

R: worlds which a a bit more free-wheeling with more open content. Again
using AV's as an example, say clothing might be Transparent or <with>
genetalia covered.

X: these might be worlds where the content is pretty wide open subject to
obeying national laws barring hard-core porno/discriminationaly
activities/etc... Again using AV's as an example... only allowing the
extreme AV styles there ie: totally naked ones...

I'm not trying to start a flame war here - I'm just trying to start a
rational discussion about these matters as a world owner who would welcome
some input.

Tckaija/Vishnu

Nov 13, 2002, 6:32am

Well put :o)) BUT

I thought those where pretty well the idea, any way?? In my opinion the
vocal few are WAY over reacting, and need for "review" is uncalled for . In
general nobody expects a "R" rated word to contain childish content and i
was not aware "CommununitY" meant "only childrens stuff" and that a
community event to congratulate those who have done a good job should
exclude certain members of the community even IF some feel that such an
event should include only those worlds that are worlds full of bunny
rabbits, lollypops and huggles.

Also some feel that a community newsgroup should also exclude topics that
are of public interest and are not personally offensive, merely
controversial. Again, it is my opinion that exclusion from "the community"
should be on the basis of racial or personal attacks, harrasment or criminal
behaviour......ONLY.

"Attack the opinion, not the person, but above all do not dispute my right
to voice that opnion"









[View Quote] I was following the discussion in the "Stop it now, ENZO" thread and thought
it might not hurt to start a new thread about world guidelines.

Nov 13, 2002, 8:17am

Extremely well put kelle, i wholehartedly support this sane view

"kellee" <kellee at my.activeworlds.com> wrote in
news:3dd20e37 at server1.Activeworlds.com:

> Well put :o)) BUT
>
> I thought those where pretty well the idea, any way?? In my opinion
> the vocal few are WAY over reacting, and need for "review" is uncalled
> for . In general nobody expects a "R" rated word to contain childish

Nov 13, 2002, 10:22am

I'm glad you're going towards specifics now and looking to prevent a
conflict like this from happening again by laying down what we all should
perceive. :) You know how different perceptions are here, after all. lol.

I think what really separates a G and PG world are the RPGs. I think when it
comes to anything closely related to violence, even in the minimalist of
senses (a knight av weilding a sword for example), it should be PG (hence
the PG in RPG. lol, jk). :) As violence or sexual acts become less alluded
to and more directly visible, you're topping R. And X is just full out
extremes. Really, there are huge spectrums in all 4 categories and it
shouldn't be hard for worlds to realize their ratings. :)
--
--
From the Newbie's Guide to the AW NG:

"Nornny11 - The original wishy-washy man, this one can actually insult you
and compliment you in the same breath, and in the end say absolutely
nothing! What a talent!"
[View Quote]

Nov 13, 2002, 10:32am

Sorry, kellee, but from now on, all threads will be deleted that mention:
a. rabbits
b. lollypops
c. huggles

:)

I wholeheartedly concur with your view on posting. And I love your
saying -- hope you don't mind if I steal it as my new signature line. Whose
quote is that?

Kerstin
"Attack the opinion, not the person, but above all do not dispute my right
to voice that opinion"



[View Quote]

Nov 13, 2002, 11:06am

As I submitted in another thread the point of discussion what is deemed a
rating for a world by members is irrelevant.

In the end it is what is rated by a professional body. I know all good
intent is meant by the thought's as to what a world should be rated. This
way a specific guideline can be applied to a world rating system.

There is some good site's on the Internet :

http://www.esrb.org/online_about.asp

And in a more simple explanation:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/misc/rateguide.htm

The later been a official Government site with easy to understand ratings
for web sites and games.

Hope this helps



[View Quote]

Nov 13, 2002, 11:40am

My fav is the rating system used by rsac. Full definitions and glossary
leaves little question. http://www.icra.org/_en/

Kerstin
"Attack the opinion, not the person, but above all do not dispute my right
to voice that opinion"


[View Quote]

1  |   Order by index