Teen Grid does not have to be merged - they can buy PG rated content from main grid, as well as sell theirs back
Events can choose the ratings on the content that can be worn on avs or rezzed to reduce griefing
Standalone Second Life grids run by corporations and educational institutions can buy the work of content creators all over SL
Standalone Second Life grids can have Second Lifers visit their grids and take a limited subset of their content with them - so they rez with hair, skin, clothes that they prefer to wear

It will make for an extended Second Life that allows many grids to function separately but with links to the others, without having to give up their individual characters

There will be no need for any adult or pg grids.

So, I quit producing concerts. (And quit Second Life for a long time.)

I don't see how the current ratings system proposed by Linden Labs is going to help that at all, because we were holding the events on a private PG sim.

This proposal would help keep objectionable material from being brought into protected areas.

PG sims should have a choice to toggle rez of mature and unrated content but should always block AO content by default, and block all avatars teleporting wearing AO content, with a choice to block/allow teleportation of mature and unrated.

AO sims would allow all rated content, but allow blocking of avatars wearing unrated content to control griefing.

PG sims could allow the optional forcing of underwear, and I submit that probably we should have a skin rating system - with normal skins rated mature, and allow for a PG rating of skins (minus genitalia).

I absolve all my rights in this idea. I will only be gleeful if someone does it. But its out here in black and white, so if anyone tries to patent it, I will point you to this JIRA that I said "anyone can use it, anywhere" (it's prior art)

Have a nice day!

http://minervan.wordpress.com/2009/04/30/jira-entry-create-a-content-ratings-system/

Please note, that I will cover further development of a general concept for ratings of user generated content along these lines, for the use in Opensim or other services under a BSD license.

Please, do not tell me that LL is unable to do this, while sites like Amazon can rate EVERY single book to make sure that they show up in an appropriate fashion. Because we all know its not true.

It's certainly a burden to those content creators who do not wish to rate their content, and then insist they have the right to sell unrated content and allow that content to rez into sims who do not wish to see it. Well, we call that the cost of doing business.

The problem in SL is too long, content creators got a free ride at the expense of sim owners and their own customers.

This is a noble idea, but it would not work in practice. - opinion - a priori, no basis in evidence.

This idea would depend too much on the honesty and integrity of content creators to properly and appropriately mark their content. - Wha - it would be LL doing the ratings. (more likely XStreetSL - because they need to kick off the crap that's not rated on their site) Not content creators. All content creators do is submit their stuff for rating. You can still make stuff and just not rate it.

Objects and content used specifically for griefing, as well as content created by the griefer him/herself would likely not be marked appropriately if at all. - more bogus - because content created for griefing would be UNRATED, and over time, evolve to obsolescence as more rated stuff comes into the system and more sim owners eventually shut down the teleportation of unrated content (the platform innovated, stuff gets obsolete) Avatars would be filtered by adopting the ratings of the items they are wearing, if they are wearing even ONE unrated item, they are "unrated"

In the end, this only adds to overhead burden being carried by honest, legitimate creators while doing absolutely nothing to deter griefers. - unsupported belief, because the system allows the sim owner to bar unrated content on a toggle in estate settings - so in the event of a griefing episode, all a sim owner has to do is flip the switch to bar unrated, and only rated content to the filters will be allowed to rez and/or teleport in. It should not affect items already rezzed - this can be handled by existing tools to return items or eject avatars. Content creators SHOULD have to rate their merchandise that they intend to send across to other sims and make a profit from, and a reasonable fee charged is certainly appropriate considering you will get more sales for rated items by those who realise the need to screen out unrated griefing materials

That handles the building issues. The ratings would affect those who are NOT land owners or who doesn't belong to the group owning the land. This rating system could devolve the rights set on the sim to the toggles on parcel rights level, giving land owners more flexibility as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Un-American_Activities_Committee

I'm one who will stop giving LL money if / when they start having bad word lists like "Net Nanny" or any of the other mindless thought police types of tools. Any automated system is going to be wrong enough of the time and require so much intervention as to be almost unmanageable. Unlike places like Amazon, SL has far more content being created every day than books added to the Amazon store. Amazon has procedures in place that allows them to check content before it is made public. That structure does not exist in SL.

I also think this will be just another challenge for the griefers to get something past the thought police.

I would rather LL spend their resources doing things like fixing the memory leaks in the viewer.

I find it interesting that MISC-2727 "Terminate All Installation of any "Adult Content" filtering, Relocation, Banning, Viewer Modifications, Server Modifications" has almost TWO ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more votes than this topic. That tells me this is a 1% problem (or way less, because many either don't care to vote or do not know how to vote.)

Or how about the Elastic Computing Cloud. You can run Opensim on that ...

http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/

Amazon is in the business of User Generated Content, and they are only expanding it.

The entire games industry uses ratings voluntarily to deal with the double pronged problem of piracy and adults who need to screen the games they buy for their kids.

I expect that once OpenSim has this, they will pwn SL, because people can set up sims for 7 year olds and with an idea like this, they can rate them, buy stuff for them, and keep the riffraff out.

And no, I don't think 2000 unverified accounts is quite equal to the size of even a handful of large land barons who deal with unverified griefers every day. At least not in the fees they pay, and the residents interests they represent. This idea would allow the unverified to remain unverified, while those who wish to pay for more get the service they have been asking for, for years.

And let me repeat.

No more demon cocks worn by avatars rezzing in PG sims... that's what the corps and big edus really hate, and why they like going off and doing their own platforms.

But hey Barbara, its ok, that kiddie pool is over there... and you never have to learn how to swim in an open 3d internet.

This is not about thought police

THIS IS ALLOWING EVERYONE WHO PAYS FOR LAND AND PRODUCTS IN SL HAVE CONTROL OVER THEIR EXPERIENCE

And not be at the mercy of avatars who don't respect them.

This is about allowing people who enjoy adult content not accidently take a teleport from a friend and end up in a PG sim while buttnaked in flagrante wearing their prim genitals.

This is about adult rated sims being able to stop griefers too. (note this proposal is value free - it allows ratings for all levels of content, including the unrated content)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFByZ9H0MTM

PEGI video on how the European ratings work - its worth looking at, learn!

There is already too much "government" involvement in SL; worse, that involvement is extremely inconsistent. This issue would rely on Linden Labs to rate the hundreds of thousands of new content that is created every day, do it right, and do it consistently, every time, without fail. The same entity that cannot even define what constitutes adult content in a consistent manner. The same entity that governs with a "suspend first, ask questions later" approach

Then there is the matter of sheer volume. Amazon's system works because they are not having to evaluate hundreds of thousands of books every day. LL simply does not have the manpower to pull this off in a consistent and timely manner. When I build a house, I'd like to be able to put it up on the market that day, not two months from now.

This is a noble idea, but has too many fundamental issues that need to be worked out.

I just believe that it is silly to think that no rating of any sim is a rational alternative to what LL is doing. We have always had ratings on sims, and we would lose a lot of biz in SL if LL went off and unrated every sim in Second Life.

This proposal allows the sim owner who set the sim rating actually enforce their own ratings. LL screens content submitted for ratings (which protects them from trademark and copyright lawsuits due to XStreet), and people who just like to build stuff can continue to do as they like on their land, without ever touching the ratings system at all. As unrated content would be allowed on that landowners land. It would simply be blockable in teleports or rezzing on other peoples parcels. Which is only fair.

Because it matters not at all what you think. It matters when some big corp goes and sues LL to death for profiting on the resale of Bugs Bunny and Mickey Mouse avatars doing the nasty on PG land, and slams them with multiple copyright and trademark violations. And then none of us will have a Second Life.

When LL bought XStreetSL, they gave up a lot of that safe harbor excuse.

Put "Taser" and "Second Life" into Google and see what I mean... the press is lovely, aren't they?

http://www.google.com/search?q=taser+second+life

I am a realist, and you are not.

This issue would rely on Linden Labs to rate the hundreds of thousands of new content that is created every day, do it right, and do it consistently, every time, without fail. - Without doubt there will be mistakes, but judging on the track records of countless sites which have dealt with user generated content and services that are worldwide, that argument fails.

The same entity that cannot even define what constitutes adult content in a consistent manner. The same entity that governs with a "suspend first, ask questions later" approach" - this proposal will force LL to make a decision on adult content which is a firm and fast rule because they will have to make the decisions, and they will have to do it consistently, because sim owners demand it of them and sim owners are who make Second Life profitable.

If LL does not take on enough responsibility of governing the content, the real governments will. And they will do it far worse than Linden Lab.

I am old enough to remember when Compuserve was raided by the German government, because Compuserve had Usenet access, and some dolts in the police and judiciary thought that meant that Compuserve was a child porn site.

At the time, I worked for the competition and I knew a lot of people working for Compuserve in both US and Germany. It destroyed a lot of careers and a lot of people lost their jobs eventually, because it was a hit the company never recovered from.

So, do NOT expect your real life government to be better than Linden Lab. Rather, expect them to try to put LL out of business. Getting raided means computers getting carted away, and that would be devastating to Second Life.

What this proposal does ... it does not unfairly track down and penalise the occasional individual who might upload something from google search for their personal use, but it does make them think twice about reselling it on XStreet. Because it will be very simple to just UNRATE all their content and remove them from Xstreet, banning their SL account. Sure they will be able to resell in SL if they roll an alt - but they will be marginalised when they are unable to rate. LL is pretty good at tracking the alts. You're not as anonymous as you think you are, here.

This also benefits sim owners, because they are at risk when resellers sell them and/or their residents stolen content. It will be double worse for them if they are on standalone sims. hence why my proposal states that standalone grids cannot buy unrated content, ever. They can make their own local content, it is unnecessary.

oh and –

better content creators will be attracted to XStreet because of the improved protections and selling beyond just the Main Grid (Teen Grid, and LL licensees). It will make XStreet far more spiffy... and more people will use it to shop for Second Life merchandise.

If spammers can hire people to solve captchas in seconds to post spam on websites, it's not impossible to screen merchandise here either. Really it won't take a whole lot of time. Maybe a few minutes with an item.

And as usual, unrated will still be salable via the usual methods, so you can still sell unrated items while you are waiting for a rating. You just won't get the added value (listing on Xstreet to sell across to the extended grids, and the ability to go into those sims with restrictions) till the rating comes through. This has a nice benefit for LL - people will buy land for a shop and not just throw it all on Xstreet.

People will be able to rez your unrated house on their land. As all land owners can rez unrated things on their land.

Remember its not affecting the mainland (although it could be possible for parcel owners to toggle rights that have devolved to them from the sim rating settings) - its for the private sim owners and standalone grids.

Firstly it is not very clear in some of Hypatia's posts whether she is talking about island sims or entirely separate grids.
Secondly seems the idea has morphed almost completely from being focused on giving land owners more controls over rezzed content to being more about giving content creators more protections (again).
Thirdly the idea is open to so much abuse that it is hard to know where to start.

For example: LL already has enough problems defining what PG, Mature and Adult means for other areas of SL, lets not give them another place to apply arbitrary and inconsistent rulings.

Many of us are not in favour of the content segregation that has already occurred or is occurring, why would we want to support more of the same?

Firstly it is not very clear in some of Hypatia's posts whether she is talking about island sims or entirely separate grids. easy answer - it is for anyone with controls over the estate tools, and a method for XStreetSL to clean up its act and start selling cross to the new customers on standalone grids. It cannot do as it is doing now. Do you think its better for Rivers Run Red to have a monopoly on that content sales? Because that is the current situation. Would you like to wear your skin to a standalone grid. You can't, heck you can't even enter a stand alone grid. This proposal sets up the ability for you to do just that. Visit other grids than the main grid, with access to some of your stuff

Secondly seems the idea has morphed almost completely from being focused on giving land owners more controls over rezzed content to being more about giving content creators more protections (again). I guess you don't understand the relation of XStreetSL and the massive risk it is exposed to, when corporations sue it for letting you upload Bugs Bunny and Mickey Mouse, and at the same time take anything you like from the content creators who are actually creative. The result is that the good content is hard to find in Xstreet, much of it NEVER gets submitted to Xstreet ever, while all the crap acts as noise to drown it out. All I am saying, you can't do this on XStreet. You can experiment to your hearts content on your own land, where you are not expected to send it across to outside grids or sim owners who cannot bear being exposed to your disregards of the risks. The sales tools inworld are available as usual - you'll just be unrated. Buyers will know you are unrated, and treat the risk accordingly

When you sell stolen content to builders such as stolen textures on XStreet, they use them unknowingly, rezzing them on the estates where they are then ARed. It is even impossible for a texture owner to ID the actual uploader of a texture, so the person who gets ARed is the builder and/or the estate owner, that is NOT fair. I have made content theft less profitable with this proposal, with more protections to honest estates and builders who buy content, I haven't made it less easy to steal/borrow/whatever.

Thirdly the idea is open to so much abuse that it is hard to know where to start. well, that's your unsupported opinion, again. Find some empirical evidence for that, because I doubt you will, aside from some pithy Lessig quotes out of context

For example: LL already has enough problems defining what PG, Mature and Adult means for other areas of SL, lets not give them another place to apply arbitrary and inconsistent rulings. Well, fine. Actually PEGI ratings would be better than what LL is proposing, because it actually says what content to expect in the software. This is only fair to the consumer. Remember, this is for the consumers who buy sims and the standalone SL software, as well as the customers of your content, and we content creators could make a huge amount of money if we catered to the folks who need a few more protections over what gets rezzed. So yeah, that means giving up some of your freedom to those who should have had some more freedom. Have you ever heard of the saying "your rights end where another's begin"?

Many of us are not in favour of the content segregation that has already occurred or is occurring, why would we want to support more of the same? because it's not segregation of content, the sim allows you granularity over the content that is rezzed or teleported into it. Landowners and sim owners should have full rights over rezzing on their land. Actually, it would make Mature rated sims most valuable, because they can allow any rated content into them, depending on how you set the settings. AS they are on toggles, you can decide for a moment if you need to stop the rezzing of unrated content (those goatse cubes you don't like rezzing into your sim, say)

Ah, Gabriele, good effort, but still fail!

Age verification is a cockup invented by the governments, including the one I live under, as a thin disguise to just try to make the internet content more controllable BY GOVERNMENT - not by companies who know their customers much better than some moronic bureaucrat. I understand most of you do not understand the language in my country, and if you did, you would be shocked at the things they are saying.

They do not like the sales of games. Period. And they include Second Life with that.

They do not like people having unlimited ability to write a blog, they don't want to let people date on the net, they want to censor the art you create (OMG, the statue of David is raping women?!) they have completely other agendas than "save the children".

What this proposal does, is it makes it unnecessary to combine the grids, it makes XStreet profitable to a wider open 3d internet, in the same way that sites like Renderosity and Turbosquid function. You will note that these sites are content sites, and their content does not have strict DRM controls (it can't, because these sites screen everything that is sold") So the DRM thing is pretty much out the window. The permissions system as it is currently implemented is enough.

What this does is it positions XStreet to be able to sell to sims that devolve to being hosted on your own hardware. It will help reduce the costs for users who host sims or rent them, it will expand the markets in which we sell content.

People come to SL for pleasure. Kaneva never got traction being Disney, neither did There.com. And SL will lose traction being Disney too. Most people do not want to risk verification because so many countries have so many bizarre laws on sex, they are afraid of being found out by the neighbors, etc. If we go forward with age verification, they will eventually stop coming and they will mean a lower conversion rate to actual customers in Second Life proper.

Age verification needs to be stopped. My proposal is an ALTERNATIVE to age verification. It will also allow you to drop all the "payment info on file" nonsense, because my proposal will make it unnecessary to limit your sims on the basis of Second Life payment status. This is in fact silly when you are in a sim that's unconnected to the Second Life grid. That feature is useless.

As my idea devolves the responsibility to the sim owner. They are responsible for what is in their sims, and what should or should not show up - they should have the control over it. LL should not be in the business of trying to decide it for them by "age verification" which is really impossible to do and solves nothing at all for those who actually trade honestly in content and those who buy content and land.

let me also add, that the current age verification is illegal in the country I live in. You need a USB dongle ?! to access adult sites.

That's caused a big flight of adult business to other countries - want to see the majority your adult business and customers go to other platforms? Age verification will do it.

The items should have to be rated by XStreet though. Give it a grace period to time out the rating if it hasnt been submitted. this lets Xstreet change the rating if its not correct.

Approval of content creators to rate content should be handled by an applications process, but not too onerous of one. That is, they give up some information about themselves - they enter a contract with LL to assume their risks when they create and sell content.

This could allow them to rate their content inworld, it would give them the status of being an "rated content creator" which will distinguish these people to customers from the usual copybotters.

It sets up the ability to allow LL to strip a content creator of their status as an approved creator, if they break the rules, and unrate all their content.

I really need to set up a flow chart plan to explain how this stuff works, will do that on a subsequent blog post and put it here.

Work with me or against me... but if we don't give an alternative to age verification, we might as well leave SL eventually. Because we won't have the audience of people coming to try it out anymore :/

LL let the party go on too long with no ratings. A great example of how total laissez faire failed. All other content creator intensive industries use a voluntary ratings system, these systems have all evolved out of the need to do something before the government did something much worse and put them out of biz. But we have to figure a way to extend them to the average individual content creator being able to use them, too. So the governments also can't put us out of biz.

We have adult verification taking over work on SL that would have benefitted many of us, and I realise that this is not entirely LL's fault - it's the fault of the government pressure that they are under. But I am saying, clearly, that accepting a government's solution (that is in fact, not wanted by most governments worldwide, for many reasons) is a fast track to bankruptcy. It doesn't address what the consumers are actually demanding, who want better controls on seeing adult content. They don't care if someone has a sex sim in a far corner of the grid, they care when it shows up on their doorstep in their own land or private sims.

There is no way anyone can age verify all over the internet. As other worlds come up, they will take advantage of the fact. And some other company will get their turn in the hype cycle. :/

Well, I guess all I have to say is "c'est la vie" ... it's this that makes me not want to bother with SL much longer. In many ways, this JIRA is my last stand to say what it is that I think that SL needs, and others who think like me. Soon enough I'll be out of everyone's hair here in SL, if nothing progresses. Others are listening.

When SL goes back to pre 2006 concurrency, I'll laugh my backside off, too.

http://www.asacp.org/page.php?content=news&item=278

It's what they want you to do - use payment information as age verification. When VISA and the rest of the credit card companies say, oh, no you dont... we don't allow it!

Many laughs will be had.

http://www.asacp.org/page.php?content=news&item=278
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bootleggers_and_Baptists

Now, Titan Media (big money porno) doesn't like any of those little upstart porn sites either. So, wrapped up in "save the children" they are hand in hand with the Baptists (the child protection agencies) to put out the little guy with a porn site.

That might work for them, because it doesn't matter if they murder the level of members of their services, the fact that they could put a damper on their competitors to benefit themselves was far greater.

Visa understood the damage of using their cards as age verification to their brands. So they said "hold the phone, NO"

Now, the diff is here... LL is not trying to dominate the adult 3d web as an adult site. They totally don't want that! They want to be the 3d internet! They want people to be able to use their Paypal and VISA to buy land. They can't afford to lose their merchant account when VISA decides one day that its too damaging to their branding.

And you know who will go - it will be the adult biz in SL.

So how does any of this really benefit them? It does not. It will just give their competition the opportunity to laugh, because they know full well that making yourself into a porn site is death to your branding and your merchant account.

Well obviously, because it seems if people don't want to do things your way you will take great delight in laughing at them should they fail. Really puts your supposed solution and help in perspective here doesn't it? It is all about what you want and not about helping anyone at all. That much has become very clear here.

If you see an iceburg heading someone's way, do you stand on the coast and say nothing when someone thinks they are the Titanic? Unsinkable?

Sorry, but if you cannot see that VISA is many many times bigger than Second Life, maybe I can't help your delusion about me. But you are suffering a delusion, because I am trying to give LL one last idea to change away from that course, with a solution that works for all of us.

Yeah, I do laugh at people with too much hubris. Maybe that's a bad thing, but most people don't usually think so. If I am somewhere on the coast with another company watching you sink, yep, I will laugh. No point in giving a free ride to scorpions

http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/imbeciles.htm

So yeah, I'm doing the same thing NNT did a few years ago, issue a warning. It's on you if you wish not to believe, that's ok.

But, if I am right, and you are wrong... I'll do exactly what NNT did right there.

Where did I say that? Really, you are the one having delusions, especially if you think you know what my position is about age verification etc.
I would advise that you stop assuming stuff about me as it is making you look stupid.

Also, WTF, You are LL's last chance?, OMG priceless - talk about delusions, of grandeur.

You think that your solution will work for all of us, not everyone agrees, it does not work for me.

"If I am somewhere on the coast with another company watching you sink, yep, I will laugh"

Funny because you claim you were about helping people? Seems not after all.

No, I'm not. This idea is not just my idea. It was hatched with some of their biggest land baron accounts, and I only posted it after quite a lot of private debate.

keep stinging... but I'm on the coast, and you're on the titanic Unreachable by your stinger

IF SL jettisons all the adult biz sweetie, I will be just fine It will just make SL a lot less richer, sadly.

Those other people who don't well... no it won't work for them. They will hate it. I know. It's ok.

I think this says it all really about credibility here.

An example: A bullwhip is a perfectly PG device used by a stockman. In the context of certain Robert Mapplethorpe photos, and for some (not all! BDSM activities) it has a VERY Adult rating.

Also what would a new prim be designated? Unrated I would think.
T ry explaining to someone you can rezz here in a rezz enabled zone because your prim is unrated. Or even you can't come into this sim because your wearing an unrated item and what if it is from a time before the rating system your proposing and they can't change the rating on it?

What I do think would be useful is to be able to rate items so that they can be filtered in search.

Content per sim should be monitored by sim owners and their staff and things not appropriate to that sim reportable as always. There is a reason why sim and land owners have kick and ban powers.

If your going to be holding a public venue, turn off all build/script/push ect for all but those who are involved in producing the show.

it's a great idea, I just think there are some things to consider that will make it impractical.

It also couldn't apply to no modify items that contain scripts (llSetTexture, llSetPrimitiveParams, etc could all change the original linkset into something very different).

that combined with more reliable parcel and state ban lists (I remember when I managed a piece of land that I couldn't trust the lists, names randomly were gone, specially after the list grew, but my guess it is just statistical, more items, bigger chance somthign will happen with one of the items in the list) and changes in policy and attitude that would make people feel safe (and not threatened) by the TOS would help a lot IMO

Notice that I don't use the word "rating", because SL's PG/M/A rating of "dodginess" (or whatever it is) along a single scale based on a kind of funny puritanism is nothing short of bizarre. In contrast, classification is simply informative without implying anything about cultural worldview.

I would therefore support content classification, generally. However, ...

Where I think there might be a problem with this proposal is in its relevance to other grids and worlds. You can't create a classification scheme that works worldwide and is accepted worldwide — the world is just too diverse in its peoples and cultures and philosophies for that.

Because of this, I think that the proposal needs to narrow its focus to what is actually feasible, which might be to treat all content from other worlds as unclassified on initial entry ito SL.

The suggestion that "unrated content be unable to be ported from grid to grid" is especially unworkable, indeed diametrically wrong, since you cannot force your rating on the rest of the world and hence you will know very little about most of the content that transits between worlds — the only strong guarantees are within individual managed domains.

What's more, the same applies in reverse. You may be happy with the "rating" that some item has obtained in SL, but on transfer to another world or grid such a rating would at best be advisary since that world will not necessarily like or respect SL's rating scheme in the slightest. As in the case of SL, a newly received item is best treated as not yet well classified.

In the Internet-size metaverse that so many people hope for, all bets are off except for items already seen previously and classified locally. On the web, we all know not to surf to random websites. Well in VWs, random content comes to us, so caution is advised.

I would support a general ability to rescale no-mod objects (the whole object, not its linked parts). I think this would work perfectly especially with mesh objects.

I think the current issues with needing to modify linksets is born from the fact that we are still using prims, and can't make an object that can be modified in minor ways.

Changing actual textures/sculpts/mesh should result in the object losing its rating, but changing small things like color chip and scaling should work.

Won't be perfect, but it's better than nothing, ya know?

At the moment, ALL sales of content for opensims transferred across grids is conducted over websites. Xstreet is a website and I would like to see a website commerce model to sell between grids, and allow that content to flow between grids. I want to see people be able to enter external grids with their avatars, and it's not gonna happen until grid owners can be reasonably certain that you're not going to have things that they can't have entering their domains.

I would also support an ability to remain connected to your rated SL inventory no matter what sim or grid you are in - that it doesn't need transferring to another grid's inventory system to be displayed.

The problem with so much of the suggestions for interop is that they are not trying to create any sort of inter-grid commerce model.

Eh, unrated means it doesn't have a rating. It's not forcing a rating on anything. It's never been submitted for a rating, hence it should not be able to leave that grid. This is the category for all that legacy content that has not been made with the knowledge that it would ever leave the Main Grid for any reason at all. Even if its full perms.

Forcing these people to have their content leave Second Life to other grids is flat wrong. Also as none of this content has ever been screened, it's also a security risk in all sorts of ways to other grids it might travel to.

What my idea does is allow oversight for trade to other grids, to deal with the content issues that bother both creators and grid owners. Lets not forget that many companies choose the standalone version because they don't like people rezzing the famous flying penii, walking around with a freenis, or sending thousands of Marios marching across their sim.

I think that this method would be viable with land-owners as it would be too costly to realistically abuse, and if you did abuse it you'd make a huge target of yourself in the process of accumulating land just to try and unfairly rate an item as something it's not =)

Likewise, if the root-object contains adult-terms, then it would be prevented from rezzing if it is un-rated.

*) Put control of judging content this way into LL's hands and it will be the same as all the other things that are not dealt with consistently. In addition to this they will not have the people available to mark the thousands upon thousands of new or modified items that will flood the system. The only way to handle that is to limit the amount of content being created by only allowing LL content or content from an "approved" few. I expect that advocates for this JIRA are also advocates for limiting content creation to "approved" creators only. This JIRA is then disingenuous because it relies upon another major concept to be implemented to make it work, one that it does not mention or acknowledge.
Limiting content creation to the special few or the platform owner alone didn't work for Sony whose @Home is seeing dwindling numbers it has never been proven to work for any system that comes close to accurately being called a virtual world. Even most games have hordes or eager people wanting to mod the game in some way to add content. It would be SL's death knell to go down this route.

*) Put control of judging content this way into a land owners hands to judge what is OK for their land and it becomes a system that is impossible to implement and not drag the SL into a quagmire of lag due to the land owner having to mark each piece of content he finds on his land with his content mark, then the viewer having to store his preferences to the server for each item and finally query against it every time an object of that type is rezzed, as it is rezzed.

*) Put control of judging content in the content creators hands and again it will suffer from inconsistency akin to LL doing it, look how some people still mark mature land with gamed adult keywords whilst others move to Zindra. In addition to this the content creator is going to mark their item according to how they think it will sell best, not by the most accurate content category it falls into.

All in all it adds up to a severely flawed concept that would bring far more problems to SL than it could ever possibly hope to solve.