quiting

[LittleMe Jewell]

---

Manstan Beaumont wrote:

In the past year I have been on maybe 10 times. Each time to simply pay bills. Total time on may be 40-50 minutes. If the fps wasn't so bad I might find something to have fun with, but the way it stands it's a chore just to log in to pay bills. I still want to wipe most of my inventory out, I feel like I'm draging around a trailor lode of garbage.

I've done everything I can from my end to bring up the fps. Garphics is so low it looks like PS1 and I still can't get more the 7fps. Let some one walk in to frame with some 30 flexy prime hair and 40 flexy prime dress and it's down to 1/2fps. Just no fun to be had at that fps. I have the best band width avalible in my area so this wont get better.

---

I came to SL in 2007 and spent hours here for the first couple of years.  Due to some RL issues, my time drastically dropped in late 2009.  Since then, I only log in once or twice a month, and over the intervening years, as SL has evolved, my performance has dropped a lot ............ which further decreases my time inworld.  In my case, I've no doubt that I need to update my computer, especially to handle the mesh viewers as it seems that that one advance in SL has decimated performance and stability of viewers on my computer.  I can still get pretty great performance when I log in with my 1.23 viewer, but then I don't have access to many new featurs - primarily multiple attachments and alpha layer.  Once of my problems is that in years past I had always had extremely good performance, so if my fps drops below 30, I feel like I'm suffering and it becomes no fun.  So, due to that extreme performance degradation that I've experienced over those years, I don't have as much fun inworld as I used to, which makes it less desirable to log in more often...... so I do understand the sentiment. 

[Rival Destiny]

...don't forget to turn off the lights before you go.

 

[Boudicca Littlebird]

I have read these comments since you posted this thread, it seems to me you are distressed as to your experience here, some of the replies have been less than sympathetic, I can feel that you feel you should take some redress as regards your investment here, I don't think you should delete your inventory but invest in second inventory to save it on your hard disk, some here have very little aims or standards so they will find it hard to understand you, I have noted you have not reacted to these people, you must remember that this world is made of many different types, try to imagine heroin addicts that only connection to life is other heroin addicts, they will shun any that wish to give up the drug as it means you are rejecting them.

[Manstan Beaumont]

Thanks, been on forums long enough to know how it goes. 

I've removed all my listings from the store here but can't find any way to actually delete them. I haven't gotten on to clear my inventory in SL, but have deleted 30gig of backup copies of textures off my comp. With a Tbite I didn't need the space but I am trying to delete everything off my comp I haven't used in a while; games I haven't plaied in ages including the SL viewer{once I am done there}.

I think the SL mesh thing is hillarious, got to jump through more hoops to get a cube on SL then to get a rigged animated figure in to the unity game engine lol

[Deltango Vale]

Gambling was removed due to LL, NOT US federal law:

http://deltango.wordpress.com/2007/08/10/linden-lab-gambling-policy-2007/

[Peggy Paperdoll]

Are you sure Deltango?

------------------------------------------------------

[edit] Legality

[edit] United States

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled[9] in November 2002 that the Federal Wire Act prohibits electronic transmission of information for sports betting across telecommunications lines but affirmed a lower court ruling[10] that the Wire Act "'in plain language' does not prohibit Internet gambling on a game of chance." But the federal Department of Justice continues, publicly, to take the position that the Wire Act covers all forms of gambling.[11]

In April 2004 Google and Yahoo!, the two largest Internet search engines, announced that they were removing online gambling advertising from their sites. The move followed a United States Department of Justice announcement that, in what some say is a contradiction of the Appeals Court ruling, the Wire Act relating to telephone betting applies to all forms of Internet gambling, and that any advertising of such gambling "may" be deemed as aiding and abetting. Critics of the Justice Department's move say that it has no legal basis for pressuring companies to remove advertisements and that the advertisements are protected by the First Amendment.[12] In April 2005, Yahoo! has instigated a restrictive policy about gambling ads.[13]

In July 2006, David Carruthers, the CEO of BetonSports, a company publicly traded on the London Stock Exchange, was detained in Texas while changing planes on his way from London to Costa Rica.[14] He and ten other individuals had been previously charged in a sealed indictment with violations of US federal laws relating to illegal gambling. While as noted above, a United States Appeals court has stated that the Wire Act does not apply to non-sports betting, the Supreme Court of the United States previously refused to hear an appeal of the conviction of Jay Cohen, where lower courts held that the Wire Act does make it illegal to own a sports betting operation that offers such betting to United States citizens.[15]

The BetOnSports indictment alleged violations of at least nine different federal statutes, including 18 USC Sec. 1953 (Operation of an Illegal Gambling Business).[citation needed] Carruthers is currently under house arrest on a one million dollar bail bond.[16]

In September 2006, Sportingbet reported that its chairman, Peter Dicks, was detained in New York City on a Louisiana warrant while traveling in the United States on business unrelated to online gaming.[citation needed] Louisiana is one of the few states that has a specific law prohibiting gambling online. At the end of the month, New York dismissed the Louisiana warrant.[17]

Also in September 2006, just before adjourning for the midterm elections, both the House of Representatives and Senate passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (as a section of the unrelated SAFE Port Act) to make transactions from banks or similar institutions to online gambling sites illegal. This differed from a previous bill passed only by the House that expanded the scope of the Wire Act. The passed bill only addressed banking issues.[18] The Act was signed into law on October 13, 2006, by President George W. Bush. At the UIGEA bill-signing ceremony, Bush did not mention the Internet gambling measure, which was supported by the National Football League but opposed by banking groups.[19]

In response to Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, a number of online gambling operators including PartyGaming, Bwin, Cassava Enterprises, and Sportingbet announced that real-money gambling operations would be suspended for U.S. customers. PartyGaming's stock dropped by 60% following its announcement. Other operators such as PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, Bodog, and World Sports Exchange announced their intention to continue serving customers in the U.S.

The regulation called for in the UIGEA were issued in November 2008.[20][21] The regulation does not define "unlawful Internet gambling."[22]

In April 2007, Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) introduced HR 2046, the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, which would modify UIGEA by providing a provision for licensing of Internet gambling facilities by the Director of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. Several similar bills have been introduced since then in the House and Senate.

In June 2009, the U.S. Department of Justice seized over $34 million belonging to over 27,000 accounts in the Southern District of New York Action Against Online Poker Players. This is the first time money was seized from individual players as compared to the gaming company. Jeff Ifrah, the lawyer for one of the account management companies affected, said that the government “has never seized an account that belongs to players who are engaged in what [ifrah] would contend is a lawful act of playing peer-to-peer poker online."[23]

On December 3, 2009, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing on UIGEA and Rep. Frank’s Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act of 2009 (H.R. 2267) where experts in the fields of online security and consumer safety testified that a regulatory framework for Internet gambling would protect consumers and ensure the integrity of Internet gambling financial transactions. On July 28, 2010, the committee passed H.R. 2267 by a vote of 41-22-1. The bill would legalize and regulate online poker and some other forms of online gambling.[24][25]

On November 22, 2010, the New Jersey state Senate became the first such US body to pass a bill (S490) expressly legalizing certain forms of online gambling. The bill was passed with a 29-5 majority. The bill allows bets to be taken by in-State companies on poker games, casino games and slots but excludes sports betting, although it allows for the latter to be proposed, voted on and potentially regulated separately in due course.[26] However, a Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind poll in April 2009 showed only 26% of New Jersey voters approved of online sports-betting.[27] On a national level, two-thirds (67%) of voters polled by PublicMind in March 2010 opposed changing the law to allow online betting. Men were more likely than women (29%-14%) and liberals more likely than conservatives (27%-18%) to approve of changing the law to allow online betting.[28]

On April 15, 2011, in U. S. v. Scheinberg et al. (10 Cr. 336), three online poker companies were indicted for violating U.S. laws that prohibit the acceptance of any financial instrument in connection with unlawful Internet gambling,[29][30] that is, Internet gambling that involves a "bet or wager" that is illegal under the laws of the state where the bet is made.[31] The indictment alleges that the companies used fraudulent methods to evade this law, for example, by disguising online gambling payments as purchases of merchandise, and by investing money in a local bank in return for the bank's willingness to process online poker transactions.[29] The companies argue that poker is a game of skill rather than a game of chance, and therefore, online poker is not unlawful Internet gambling. There are other legal problems with the government's case; and, interestingly, the indictments did not mention the Wire Act.[32]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_gambling

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Somehow I don't think many businesses who value their busines would interpet the law as you have.

 

[Brenda Connolly]

Just to add a little insight on the New Jersey angle. last year Sports betting besides horse racing was approved by our legislature last year, but was pending lifting of federal bans on sports wagering in all but 4 states. Governor Christie said this week, that NJ will begin to allow sports betting at casinos and horse tracks in the fall, regardless of what the feds say.

As far as online wagering goes, the bill passed by the legislature was vetoed by Christie citing constitutional and regulatory concerns. He is awaiting the submission of a new bill.

[Deltango Vale]

Linden Lab never claimed that such a law applied to SL.

see: http://deltango.wordpress.com/2007/08/10/linden-lab-gambling-policy-2007/

Linden Lab chose to initiate its own policy based on its own interpretation of the legal ambiguity of the situation. It was an LL policy decision from start to finish.

[Melita Magic]

---

Marigold Devin wrote:

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

The easiest way to quit SL is to go to your dashboard > Account > Cancel Account.  Let LL do the deleting...they can most likely delete everything in your inventory as quick as it takes to call up your account and hit the delete key (poof it's gone in an instant).

I'm sorry, I'm not going to be as nice as everyone else.  Why did you feel it necessary to spend the time and effort to post an "I'm leaving" thread?  A final mini rant?  To gain some sympathy?  To make others feel bad for you?  Maybe as a dig to LL?  Instead, why didn't you just inform your friends in SL of your decision and make arrangements to keep in touch in other ways besides SL?  I can tell you right now that I don't (and won't) feel bad for you, nor will I miss you.  I don't know you and if I did, I probably wouldn't be much of a friend....complainers and grousers are not my cup of tea.  All I will say is

"Good-bye.  Have fun and be careful out there".

---

You were still as nice as everyone else - in the end :matte-motes-big-grin:  Wish you'd been the first poster then just that first paragraph would have covered it all and no one else would have bothered to waste their time.

 

---

Everyone else was wasting time? Why do you feel that way? 

When I answer a topic in which I am asked for my opinion or experience, that's what I give. Each person's input is valuable as far as I'm concerned, because this is a community. It isn't only for the OP that people answer, but for all the other residents reading as well. And each answer has its own slightly different spin, or content, on top of all that.

For instance some of us asked why he's leaving; Peggy didn't. (She did ask why he posted. Lol)

 

[Melita Magic]

---

Boudicca Littlebird wrote:

I have read these comments since you posted this thread, it seems to me you are distressed as to your experience here, some of the replies have been less than sympathetic, I can feel that you feel you should take some redress as regards your investment here, I don't think you should delete your inventory but invest in second inventory to save it on your hard disk, some here have very little aims or standards so they will find it hard to understand you, I have noted you have not reacted to these people, you must remember that this world is made of many different types, try to imagine heroin addicts that only connection to life is other heroin addicts, they will shun any that wish to give up the drug as it means you are rejecting them.

---

Wow - pretty harsh.

You felt his OP was indicative of a sensitive flower? Who couldn't stand a simple question "why are you leaving?" I think you tend to stir the pot. We're heroin addicts, SL addicts who have no social lives, simply because we took time to answer this man's question? Bit dramatic, don't you think?

To the OP: Why do you feel you are "dragging a load around" if you don't delete your inventory? You do know that the inventory is not stored on your computer, right? It's stored on their servers. So if you don't intend to log in again, and you delete the viewer, you're done.

[PeachJubilee]

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Are you sure Deltango?

------------------------------------------------------

[

edit

]

Legality

[

edit

]

United States

The

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

ruled

[9]

in November 2002 that the

Federal Wire Act

prohibits electronic transmission of information for sports betting across telecommunications lines but

affirmed a lower court ruling

[10]

that the Wire Act "'in plain language' does not prohibit Internet gambling on a game of chance

." But the federal

Department of Justice continues, publicly, to take the position that the Wire Act covers all forms of gambling

.

[11]

In April 2004

Google

and

Yahoo!

, the two largest Internet

search engines

, announced that they were removing online gambling advertising from their sites. The move followed a United States Department of Justice announcement that, in what some say is a

contradiction of the Appeals Court ruling,

the Wire Act relating to telephone betting applies to all forms of Internet gambling, and that any advertising of such gambling "may" be deemed as aiding and abetting. Critics of the Justice Department's move say that it has no legal basis for pressuring companies to remove advertisements and that the advertisements are protected by the

First Amendment

.

[12]

In April 2005, Yahoo! has instigated a restrictive policy about gambling

ads

.

[13]



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Somehow I don't think many businesses who value their busines would interpet the law as you have.

 

---

 

 

 

 

Somehow I don't think any vigilent populice who value their freedoms would put up with a Justice Department that obviously thinks it is above the law as interpreted by the courts.

[Peggy Paperdoll]

"...

Somehow I don't think any vigilent populice who value their freedoms would put up with a Justice Department that obviously thinks it is above the law as interpreted by the courts."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure if that comment was supportive or not on my post.......either way you are way off base.  I wasn't talking about any populace valuing freedoms, the Justice Dept or whether or not the law is good, bad, indifferent, or just just bunch of words strung together to make some complicated statement.  It's the law concerning online gaming (gambling) that is in effect in the United States (I quoted a portion of the law concerning the Legality of gaming and gambling and a link to the entire Wiki article so that you can read the whole thing for yourself).  That's all.......it's the law of the land until it's changed, amended or thrown out the the US Supreme Court (but someone has to challenge it to get the Supreme Court to even look at it......so far any challenges to the law haven't gone far).

I do take exception to the implied admonishment concerning "value of freedoms".  I'm not quite a Libertarian in my views of the US but I fall well right of center politically.  I've read the Constitution of the United States (more than once).  I happen to be pretty good at conprehending the English language.......I know what words mean when put into sentences.  My take is that my country (the US) is very much in danger of losing more freedoms than we've lost in the last 50 years or so.......many laws passed by our Congress and signed into law by our Presidents that are unconstitutional.  I do my part every two years to try to rectify that major problem.  Until recently I was just one of the "silent majority" people........but I've become a Tea Party supporter and have participated in several Tea Party rallies.  And I intend to continue in that direction for the foreseeable future.  I'm doing what I can to rectify some of this stealing of freedoms that is getting near rampant in our government today. 

What are you doing?  Complaining?  Sitting at home on election day?  Vote for Mickey Mouse because you can't support any other candidate?  Sometimes you have to take the lessor of two evils...then keep working to fix this mess we (the citizens of the US) have allowed to get to this point.  It's easy to complain and criticize.  It's easy to just go with the flow.  It's hard to think and research and pick a direction that may not be the one you want but the best available at the time.  I held my nose and voted for McCain 3 1/2 years ago......I lost in my efforts.  But it wasn't because I didn't try.  I can't imagine this country being in any worse shape (as far of individual freedom is concerned) if John McCain was elected instead of Barrack Obama.

[Marigold Devin]

---

Melita Magic wrote:

---

Marigold Devin wrote:

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

The easiest way to quit SL is to go to your dashboard > Account > Cancel Account.  Let LL do the deleting...they can most likely delete everything in your inventory as quick as it takes to call up your account and hit the delete key (poof it's gone in an instant).

I'm sorry, I'm not going to be as nice as everyone else.  Why did you feel it necessary to spend the time and effort to post an "I'm leaving" thread?  A final mini rant?  To gain some sympathy?  To make others feel bad for you?  Maybe as a dig to LL?  Instead, why didn't you just inform your friends in SL of your decision and make arrangements to keep in touch in other ways besides SL?  I can tell you right now that I don't (and won't) feel bad for you, nor will I miss you.  I don't know you and if I did, I probably wouldn't be much of a friend....complainers and grousers are not my cup of tea.  All I will say is

"Good-bye.  Have fun and be careful out there".

---

You were still as nice as everyone else - in the end :matte-motes-big-grin:  Wish you'd been the first poster then just that first paragraph would have covered it all and no one else would have bothered to waste their time.

 

---

Everyone else was wasting time? Why do you feel that way? 

When I answer a topic in which I am asked for my opinion or experience, that's what I give. Each person's input is valuable as far as I'm concerned, because this is a community. It isn't only for the OP that people answer, but for all the other residents reading as well. And each answer has its own slightly different spin, or content, on top of all that.

For instance some of us asked why he's leaving; Peggy didn't. (She did ask why he posted. Lol)

 

---

I've slept since posting, Melita. Has the OP quit yet?

I felt everyone was wasting their time, because it became apparent at this thread's post 15 where the OP came in and said, among other things ...

"And if I had wanted any more advice then how to do a mass deleting of content I would have asked."

I realise I should not have spoken on behalf of the others in the thread, as I obviously seemed to be doing in my post. Thank you so much for putting me right. I'll return the favour soon.

Giving advice where it isn't asked for or wanted or giving misinformation is worse than staying silent.  

[Boudicca Littlebird]

Try to understand that others maybe more sensitive than you and hurt by different things.

As for heroin addicts, I have observed them and their interactions with each other in RL, the reaction by some here to the OP, is identical to what I have observed in RL.

As for the OP, the OP only seems to require empathy as they are sure that they can make their own decisions.

This is the first and last time I will explain myself.