Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class wpdb in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 57

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/cache.php on line 36

Strict Standards: Redefining already defined constructor for class WP_Object_Cache in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/cache.php on line 384

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Page::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 541

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_PageDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 560

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::start_lvl($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_lvl() should be compatible with Walker::end_lvl($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_Category::end_el() should be compatible with Walker::end_el($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 659

Strict Standards: Declaration of Walker_CategoryDropdown::start_el() should be compatible with Walker::start_el($output) in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/classes.php on line 684

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/query.php on line 21

Deprecated: Assigning the return value of new by reference is deprecated in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/theme.php on line 540

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_query_vars() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_posts_where() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_search_where() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_posts_join() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_search_join() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_posts_groupby() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_tag_templates() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 164
CP in SL: Honey Wendt’s opinion | VintFalken.com
Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_add_meta_keywords() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 164
VintFalken.com

CP in SL: Honey Wendt’s opinion

May 14, 2007 3:47 am

Strict Standards: call_user_func_array() expects parameter 1 to be a valid callback, non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::ultimate_the_content_filter() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-includes/plugin.php on line 59

Strict Standards: Non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::regExEscape() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-content/plugins/UltimateTagWarrior/ultimate-tag-warrior-actions.php on line 655

Strict Standards: Non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::regExEscape() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-content/plugins/UltimateTagWarrior/ultimate-tag-warrior-actions.php on line 655

Strict Standards: Non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::regExEscape() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-content/plugins/UltimateTagWarrior/ultimate-tag-warrior-actions.php on line 656

Strict Standards: Non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::regExEscape() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-content/plugins/UltimateTagWarrior/ultimate-tag-warrior-actions.php on line 656

Strict Standards: Non-static method UltimateTagWarriorActions::replaceTagWithLink() should not be called statically in /home/vintfalk/public_html/wp-content/plugins/UltimateTagWarrior/ultimate-tag-warrior-actions.php on line 660

Prove of utter cutenessI stumbled (actually, del.icio.us’d) over Honey Wendt’s blog yesterday, and although I don’t agree with her ‘crusade against child pornography in Second Life’ tactics - C’mon? Treathening to report someone for breaking TOS by copy pasting IM conversation in a notecard and spreading that as she herself does copy paste those convo’s and others on her blog? - she makes an interesting point in her blogpost ‘So I was right about the CP getting LL in trouble‘ when she says:

Dear LL, have you ever checked out the child skins that are being sold in SL? LL, you know very well what photosourcing is and that for the past two years there has been complaints from your residents that those skins are made from real children and have genitalia of real children, and used by these sick age-players to do whatever they do. You have been telling us the whole time that it’s simulated porn and not child pornography, I’m glad you are finally becoming aware of the difference between virtual and real.

For those who do not know, photosourcing is about using FL photographs as a base for creating skins, clothes, textures, … . So if you have a child’s skin with genitals in your inventory, better get rid of that before LL is fuly acknowledging this little problem and drops the ban hammer on everyoneavie that owns such a skin. Scared we won’t know which gender you are anymore? For the girls I suggest wearing a dress, for the boys dragging a football along will do. :p

She also reports on a ’school’ in Yongchon ran by Madame Lolita McAllistar and some IM conversations with child avies solliciting escort services and a pimp working for that Lolita Allistar. Strangely enough the school was reported to the Lindens already in December 2006 and is still open - although the age play sex thingie is way less advertised out in the open after Lolita got a temp ban - up to now.

But I still think it’s rather stupid we can murder child avies but not sleep with them. *still confused*

16 Responses to “CP in SL: Honey Wendt’s opinion”

DesertWolf Longstaff wrote a comment on May 14, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

I had run across her posts also, and thought it was an interesting double standard, that she threatened to report people for posting private conversations, then turned around and did it herself. She pretty much lost all credibility with me because of that.

Wrath wrote a comment on May 15, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

I agree, not entirely on Honey’s side of things (too many “I’m telling on you” type of comments in her posts gets repetitive for me), but wow, trippy update on that whole situation today - that Cala/Meta person seems quite bizarre to me. Or at the least, very unprofessional.

Vint Falken wrote a comment on May 15, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Yes and no. I can understand her interpretation of the TOS. The do not copy paste those inworld was created to match the first life ‘do not reproduce what someone write’s in a letter without prior concent’. And the idea behind it gets quite lost as you do post IM convo’s on blogs, as a quick google search on that Avie name will turn them on. And did you notice that Honey did blank out her friend’s name, but not those of the escorts? I still think that’s rather hypocrite.

DesertWolf Longstaff wrote a comment on May 15, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Well from my point of view she is walking a very thin ethics line, and is actually on the wrong side of it! She does not treat the people she is talking with the same respect she expects to be shown her. In fact her actions are worse, because she puts the conversations out on the internet for everyone to see, where as the people she threatens with reporting to the Lindens only passed the conversation on to other concerned parties, not where they can be seen by everyone.
I understand her stand on age play, and in some ways agree with her, but her methods are wrong, and in the end I feel will backfire on her.
If she suppose to be on the moral high ground, well she fell off the other side of it with her actions.

Daist wrote a comment on May 16, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

I read her articles, she is very consistent on how and when the SL TOS would apply.

She states (and as mentioned by Robin Linden this morning), that the TOS only applies within communications happening inside SecondLife, and obviously does not apply to anything that is outside the SecondLife services. This is how all Terms of Services work.

What this means is that, if you copy a conversation between you and someone else or some other party, and give that conversation to a 3rd party without prior approval of all, then it is indeed a violation of the SL TOS.

But, if that same conversation was taken out and posted on a website/forum (that is not *.secondlife.com), then it can be done.

(The above does not apply to researchers, if I’m not mistaken). But a duplicated work can be re-used by a researcher.

Thus she was correct in (age player promises to stalk) to notify the person that he was breaking the TOS.

And she did not break the TOS by posting all and every conversation on the net (blogspot owned by Google not Linden Lab).

Photo-sourced pictures taking of real life kids used as avatars are illegal under US laws. As this would fall under child pornography, since it’s derived from a real child. This is the same with EU laws. I do hope you are not using something like that.

Linden Labs is very inconsistent in handing out punishment, if not for high profiled cases, they would usually forget to punish someone. This is given with 6 mil customers. It was mentioned though that Lolita M was suspended from the game for taking part in the activities. Understand, that only in March of this year did Linden Labs make this new rule that said avatars could not advertise an age under 18 in a sexual situation. That’s when this was made illegal, prior to that this was something they brushed aside.

Vint Falken wrote a comment on May 16, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Daist: Submitting an actually working email adress for me to reply to would have been handy. :p

She states (and as mentioned by Robin Linden this morning), that the TOS only applies within communications happening inside SecondLife, and obviously does not apply to anything that is outside the SecondLife services. This is how all Terms of Services work.

Yeah, I know. Although I don’t write or speak it perfectly, I can read and understand English. But I can still call what she’s doing by it’s name: hypocrisy. No? No defense on her being a bit inconcistent by blanking out one person’s name in the conversation, but not the other? =d

I quote ‘Wolfie’: She does not treat the people she is talking with the same respect she expects to be shown her. In fact her actions are worse, because she puts the conversations out on the internet for everyone to see, where as the people she threatens with reporting to the Lindens only passed the conversation on to other concerned parties, not where they can be seen by everyone.

If she threatened reporting them ‘just because’, it’s just utterly lame. If she theatened reporting them because she felt like ‘concerned about her privacy’, well then she should have know better then to do the same to others by posting IM convo’s without removing the avatar’s name’s on her blog. Did I use the word ‘hypocrisy’ already?

Photo-sourced pictures taking of real life kids used as avatars are illegal under US laws. As this would fall under child pornography, since it’s derived from a real child. This is the same with EU laws. I do hope you are not using something like that.

If I wear such a thing, would I say that out loud on my blog and risk getting booted out of SL? Ok. Probably I would. But no, I do not own any child avie skins at all. Well, that is, as far as I know. I’ve already found strange things in my inventory before. Like that cage, no idea how that got in there. Same with the vibrator and some rather silly animations.

I agree on the fact that using photosourcing for child avies is ‘not done’, that’s why I quoted it here on the blog. Up to now I didn’t realise that they would use photosourcing for those too. Well, I don’t see why I child avie would need genitals in the first place, but peole have called me strange for less. =d

Ow, by the way, do you think I should be allowed to shoot and murder child avies, although I can’t sleep with them?

Vint Falken wrote a comment on May 16, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Honey Wendt wrote:
> [3:32] Honey Wendt: Here, even simpler example from Mysti.. the maker of Mystitool:
> [3:33] Honey Wendt: [3:32] Mystical Cookie: in my home, you do not wear shoes [3:32] Mystical Cookie: those are the rules of the home.. no shoes on your feet when inside [3:32] Mystical Cookie: does this mean you cannot wear those shoes outside of my home?
>

You don’t try, do you? At trying to understand what I’m saying? Let me go with the shoe example of you. You forgot there is a reason why it is not allowed wearing shoes in Mysti’s house: you would make the floor dirty (read: privacy matters). So you’re in Mysti’s house with the child avie. The child avie wears shoes and thus you say ‘hey, I’m going to tell Mysti that! It’s not allowed!’. Feeling rather good about yourself, you then go to the child avie’s house - that does not say you can’t wear shoes, but just assumes you’re polite enough to not do that -, enter with dirty shoes on, and make as large mess on the floor as you possibly can. (read: spread the IM convo’s not only in Second Life, but on the internet too)

See, in Europe we have the ‘privacy of correspondence‘ thingie, which also extends to electronic conversation. I am not arguing against you on the fact that she did breach SL TOS by copy pasting the message in Second Life. I do think that the conversations between you and those avies were private correspondence and you should not have posted those on the internet for all to read without the said avie’s prior consent, seeing the delicate subject you were discussing. You are in no position to question LL’s ethics it seems, as you have none yourself!

[3:22] Honey Wendt: No ToS applies to IM conversations posted in verbatim to my blog, since the ToS is only within SecondLife. :) I’m sure you understand this bit. I don’t mean to be rude but you come out very defensive, if you’d log into SL, we can discuss this more.
[3:23] Honey Wendt: This also was a matter I discussed recently (just yesterday), read through it and you’d understand how a corporation does not have that kind of power. If one did we can’t live in this world. The microsoft’s and Linden Labs would be taking over the world lol. Do you understand?

1. Please stop talking to me as if I were a little child.
2. Try to grasp that it’s not the TOS I’m talking about. And stop using ‘The TOS doesn’t say I can’t’ as an excuse for rather impolite behaviour. You ignored what I assume standard ‘netiquette’ by posting private conversations with delicate subject matter on the internet and including the avies name.

I even think if you did this with real people’s name you’d be breaking FL-TOS. Actually you might still be doing that. Quick search on wikipedia: ‘When applied to electronic communication, the principle protects not only the content of the communication, but also the information on when and to whom any messages (if any) have been sent…

PS. I know I’m copy pasting Honey’s IM’s here. But I’m not breaching TOS or anything, as I copied them from my webmail client. *rolls eyes (again)*

Vint Falken wrote a comment on May 16, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

In her reply Miss Wendt totally ignores what I was saying - the fact that she might has done something that was ‘not right’ either -, and just again refers me to the TOS. And then starts complaining about LL. I think we can just conclude she likes critisizing others, but does not handle being critisized herself all that well?

Ms. Vint, The ToS does not cover posting these information on a 3rd party blog. I was speaking of intellectual rights, rights to IP. How dare I question LL? LL was wrong, the Linden went out of bound, I’m sorry miss but your quite not getting what happend. Robin Linden, yesterday morning told us that the Linden in question was new and did not know the established policies, if you would like to read this please read her meeting yesterday. I’m sorry but here ends our discussion, I can’t debate this matter with you, have fun.

Vint Falken wrote a comment on May 16, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

And as this is my blog, so although I’m not going to reply anymore - clearly she doesn’t listen to what I say - I still would like to have ‘the final word’. :d

[5:17] Honey Wendt: I can’t speak with a person who cannot understand a simple concept as a ToS that’s valid only within the bounds it’s defined and not outside the bounds :) This is such a simple thing, I’ve tired to explain it to you multiple times, but it’s quite beyond your grasp. I welcome criticsim, but you need to gather your thoughts and read what others have written before jumping into an intellectual conversation. In other words, I’m tired of explaining to you a very simple concept. I only went after things that were illegal within Second Life (as defined by Linden Labs), the Linden in question was acting on her own behalf, and all this has been answered in full on May 15 post on my blog. Thank you and goodbye.

1. Last time I’m going to say this: I was not questioning your behaviour as seen through the TOS, I was questioning your behaviour as seen through my idea of ‘netiquette’ and FL ‘privacy of correspondence’.
2. You do not welcome criticism. You ignore it and just type ‘TOS’ a lot of times. :p
3. I did not jump upon what you call an ‘intellectual discussion’. For starters, there is not much intellectual about it and secondly, I posted this blog entry before you said anything about Meta contacting you (and probably even before she did?). So I’m not judging on if Meta Linden was wrong or right by what she did, as that has nothing to do with this discussion. I know this might be not intellectual enough to you, but try and grasp this, will you.
4. In other words, I’m tired of explaining to you a very simple concept. Same here.
5. You never answered to the question I raised in the first place: That the means you used to report on you going after SL illegal activities were - at least - questionable when looked at them from FL point of view (and as the web is FL, even if it’s about SL…)

DesertWolf Longstaff wrote a comment on May 17, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Vint,
You have more patience than I, as you said the woman refuses to to look at her own actions. Yes what she did was within SL TOS, but that does not make it ethically right. You already quoted the heart of my argument, so I am not going to repeat it. To be honest we have probably brought her more attention than she deserves. I had thought about commenting on her blog, but figured it would be a waste of time, and your follow up comments about your conversations with her prove it.

My conversation with Honey Wendt « 2nd Lifer sent a pingback on May 24, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

[…] I get an IM from Ms. Honey Wendt. Seems she wanted to talk to me about some comments I posted on a blog entry that Vint posted about her conversation with Ms. Wendt. So in order not to slant the conversation in any way by cutting sections out to use, here is the […]

Dal wrote a comment on May 24, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Vint, all,

there are so much better ways to spend the time than trying to fix all the interestingly behaving people :-)))

I almost enjoyed DesertWolf’s patience :-)

Very good conversation.

I will feed the inbound part of it as a seed to my random number generator.

:-)

DesertWolf Longstaff wrote a comment on May 24, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Dal, are you sure you want to? That just might crash it….

MyAvatars 0.2

[…] right! I can shortly summerize the whole conversation: Honey Wendt telling me about the TOS, me saying I couldn’t care less about the TOS as it […]

Dal wrote a comment on May 24, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

DesertWolf: Vint can confirm I am already crashing quite a lot, so maybe this is a recipe for the fix that I’ve been waiting for so long ! :-)

DesertWolf Longstaff wrote a comment on May 24, 2007
MyAvatars 0.2

Well then it is worth a try Dal…

Care to comment?