An appeal to intellectual honesty.. call it a TAX.

[Innula Zenovka]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Nope. I don't. I don't have to. I enjoy Second Life for free, besides what my computer has cost me and my share of the electricity bill. I'm sorry if you feel some need to pay for Second Life when you don't have to. I'm not sure why you feel like you have to though. I guess you must have convinced yourself somehow of that. Or maybe someone convinced you of it because you're gullible. I don't know you beyond this forum so you'll have to answer that question for yourself.

 

---

You said earier in the thread that you've "mostly lived on sims that are squares out in the middle of what looks like the ocean."     Someone's paying for those sims, at the rate of US$295.00 a month, plus VAT if they live in the EU.

They might not be asking you to contribute, but the only reason you don't have pay is that someone else is paying.  Otherwise the regions wouldn't be there.   

[JeanneAnne]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Nope. I don't. I don't have to. I enjoy Second Life for free, besides what my computer has cost me and my share of the electricity bill. I'm sorry if you feel some need to pay for Second Life when you don't have to. I'm not sure why you feel like you have to though. I guess you must have convinced yourself somehow of that. Or maybe someone convinced you of it because you're gullible. I don't know you beyond this forum so you'll have to answer that question for yourself.

 

---

You said earier in the thread that you've "

mostly lived on sims that are squares out in the middle of what looks like the ocean."     Someone's paying for those sims, at the rate of US$295.00 a month, plus VAT if they live in the EU.

They might not be asking you to contribute, but the only reason you don't have pay is that someone else is paying.  Otherwise the regions wouldn't be there.   

---

I contribute when I can Innula. My sisters make enough $L in one or two DJing gigs to cover rent. I make $L in various ways, inworld. I help them at their gigs, win contests, do this or that to earn a few $L now & then. My husband would KILL me if I spent real money on a computer game.

Jeanne

 

[Sassy Romano]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Banlines don't allow people to engage in illegal sexual age-play......

Yes they do. By being able to secret your sick lifestyle behind banlines you're able or "allowed" to get away with it.

---

Well no they don't.  They faciliate "privacy", as does the following NON exhaustive list:-

 

• A skybox or platform at some arbitrary height
• Parcel privacy settings such that you don't even appear on the map
• A private region that nobody can access
• 100% alpha layers
• Using IM only
• Skype for chat

People generally like privacy.  I definitely don't assume that because I can't see it, it must be the reason that people choose privacy.

Wow. 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Banlines don't allow people to engage in illegal sexual age-play......

Yes they do. By being able to secret your sick lifestyle behind banlines you're able or "allowed" to get away with it.

---

Well no they don't.  They faciliate "privacy", as does the following NON exhaustive list:-

 

• A skybox or platform at some arbitrary height
• Parcel privacy settings such that you don't even appear on the map
• A private region that nobody can access
• 100% alpha layers
• Using IM only
• Skype for chat

People generally like privacy.  I definitely don't assume that because I can't see it, it must be the reason that people choose privacy.

Wow. 

---

Yeah .. all these thing facilitate privacy all right. And there are going to be some who exploit this privacy in order to engage in sexual ageplay and otherwise break the law and violate Linden Lab's Terms of Service.

Wow. Is this only now dawning on you?

Jeanne

 

[Sassy Romano]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Banlines don't allow people to engage in illegal sexual age-play......

Yes they do. By being able to secret your sick lifestyle behind banlines you're able or "allowed" to get away with it.

---

Well no they don't.  They faciliate "privacy", as does the following NON exhaustive list:-

 

• A skybox or platform at some arbitrary height
• Parcel privacy settings such that you don't even appear on the map
• A private region that nobody can access
• 100% alpha layers
• Using IM only
• Skype for chat

People generally like privacy.  I definitely don't assume that because I can't see it, it must be the reason that people choose privacy.

Wow. 

---

Yeah .. all these thing facilitate privacy all right. And there are going to be some who exploit this privacy in order to engage in sexual ageplay and otherwise break the law and violate Linden Lab's Terms of Service.

Wow. Is this only now dawning on you?

Jeanne

 

---

No, as I said, I don't have the mindset that assumes that everything I cannot see must be hiding evil.  My point being, that regardless of banlines, it would happen anyway, with or without banlines.  Banlines have absolutely nothing to do with it, in fact SL has nothing to do with it.  Skype, Twitter, MSN, Yahoo!, you name it, any form of communications will be a facilitator.

Ban everything.

[JeanneAnne]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

---

No, as I said, I don't have the mindset that assumes that everything I cannot see must be hiding evil.  My point being, that regardless of banlines, it would happen anyway, with or without banlines.  Banlines have absolutely nothing to do with it, in fact SL has nothing to do with it.  Skype, Twitter, MSN, Yahoo!, you name it, any form of communications will be a facilitator.

Ban everything.

---

It would be paranoid to assume that everything you cannot see must be hiding evil. I don't assume that. I only assume that when people intentionally hide what they're doing they might be hiding evil. Who knows?

Yeah, I agree with you. Sexual ageplay and other evil doing would happen anyway, with or without banlines. Banlines only make it easier for it to happen. Sure, any form of communication has the potential for facilitating evil doing.

Ban everything?

Ban nothing, I say.

Jeanne

 

[Peggy Paperdoll]

"...And there are going to be some who exploit this privacy in order..."

to enjoy SL completely free of any monetary output on their part. 

Tha's freeloading.  It's perfectly okay for anyone to do that.........what's not perfectly okay is to demand that LL make the norm.  You enjoy SL for free because of those limitations, such as banlines, that people who support SL in a monetary manor can protect their part of SL for themselves.  If I want banlines on my land, I can put them up.......if not, I have a choice not to.  What you want is to take away a choice for me........all for your seffish reasons.

BTW, even if you were nice I would not open my doors to you for you to do as you please.............I don't even do that for my sister.  She can come and visit........but she visits at my pleasure (not hers).  All I have is your say so that you are nice..........from the posts I've read from you I'm not convinced.

 

[Solar Legion]

To assume that those using any means to keep your nose where it belongs are doing so for foul reasons is the absolute height of paranoia.

I'll use a very adult example here: I have no problem with people watching me and my partner engaging in more intimate play where such things are within the purview of the setting. On any server space I rent or own however? I get to decide who comes and who goes. I get to decide who has the potential to visit and catch us in the middle of a bit of playtime.

And the whole while, nothing foul is going on behind that "firewall" which keeps you in your place.

[Peggy Paperdoll]

"...

Sexual ageplay and other evil doing would happen anyway, with or without banlines. Banlines only make it easier for it to happen. Sure, any form of communication has the potential for facilitating evil doing...."

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

By that line of thinking child avatars should be banned too.  I mean, afterall, a child in an grown up invironment faciltates sexual age play (BTW, why not call it what it is?  Pedophilia). 

You keep backing yourself in a corner.........it's getting comical now.

[JeanneAnne]

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

"...And there are going to be some who exploit this privacy in order..."

to enjoy SL completely free of any monetary output on their part. 

Tha's freeloading.  It's perfectly okay for anyone to do that.........what's not perfectly okay is to demand that LL make the norm.  You enjoy SL for free because of those limitations, such as banlines, that people who support SL in a monetary manor can protect their part of SL for themselves.  If I want banlines on my land, I can put them up.......if not, I have a choice not to.  What you want is to take away a choice for me........all for your seffish reasons.

BTW, even if you were nice I would not open my doors to you for you to do as you please.............I don't even do that for my sister.  She can come and visit........but she visits at my pleasure (not hers).  All I have is your say so that you are nice..........from the posts I've read from you I'm not convinced.

 

---

Tha's freeloading.  It's perfectly okay for anyone to do that.......

Then what's your issue with me?

..what's not perfectly okay is to demand that LL make the norm.

Second Life couldn't survive if my approach to it was the only way anyone ever played the game, could it? At least not according to Linden Lab's current business model. So long as LL's current business model remains in effect, I don't want the way I approach SL to be the norm. If it was, LL would go out of business. I appreciate all of you who pay for Second Life. I really do! Without you there would be no Second Life. So keep up the good work!

I won't even ask you to consider a different business model. There'd be no point.

You enjoy SL for free because of those limitations, (my emphasis)

I'm glad that you consider such things as banlines to be "limitations." Indeed they are. They limit freedom.

If I want banlines on my land, I can put them up......

Of course you can. What I really have to question, though, is why you'd want to. What are you hiding?

What you want is to take away a choice for me........all for your seffish reasons.

LoL So you turn my argument around on me. You're secretiveness and exclusivity is all well and good, and my call for openness is what's selfish. Good job! Have you considered going into politics Peggy? What with your talent for twisting reason you'd go far! :cattongue:

BTW, even if you were nice I would not open my doors to you...

Somehow, this does not surprise me.

All I have is your say so that you are nice..........from the posts I've read from you I'm not convinced.

Good point. I probably don't come across as all that nice in the forum here. But, then, I mostly only respond to the posts of others. It's difficult to be as nice as I should be in the face of so much bitterness, paranoia & sarcasm as is displayed here. Sorry. You're still welcome to come on over though. I bet you're nicer, too, inworld & in real life, than you've came across as being in some of your snarkier posts. :womanwink:

Jeanne

 

 

 

 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

I contribute when I can Innula. My sisters make enough $L in one or two DJing gigs to cover rent. I make $L in various ways, inworld. I help them at their gigs, win contests, do this or that to earn a few $L now & then. My husband would KILL me if I spent real money on a computer game.

Jeanne

 

---

 You don't have to defend yourself to me -- it's none of my business.    

All I'm saying is that you can't infer that no one need pay for SL  from the fact that you personally don't have to pay anything to enjoy SL.     Almost all the places you enjoy exporing, or clubs you enjoy going to, are only there because other people pay for them.  

I'm not trying to tell you what you should or shouldn't do -- I am just stating what seems to me the completely self-evident fact that if it wasn't for people paying almost US$200 a month for a mainland region or almost US$300 a month for a private region, most of SL wouldn't be there for you or anyone else to enjoy.

[JeanneAnne]

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

"...

Sexual ageplay and other evil doing would happen anyway, with or without banlines. Banlines only make it easier for it to happen. Sure, any form of communication has the potential for facilitating evil doing...."

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

By that line of thinking child avatars should be banned too.  I mean, afterall, a child in an grown up invironment faciltates sexual age play (BTW, why not call it what it is?  Pedophilia). 

You keep backing yourself in a corner.........it's getting comical now.

---

Good call! It IS pedophilia. And it goes on in Second Life behind banlines. So should Linden Lab ban child avatars? Naw, I don't think they should. After all, most of the pedophiles are adults running child avatars. If they should ban anything I'd think it should be actual children lying about their age.

I'm not sure what corner I've backed myself into Peggy. What's comical to me are your typos as you proceed to get drunk. :smileywink:

Jeanne

 

[Peggy Paperdoll]

Naw...........I'm out of beer.  Drank it all last Sunday evening watching the NASCAR race. 

I typo a lot.........you should see me when I'm mad and try to type fast. 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

I contribute when I can Innula. My sisters make enough $L in one or two DJing gigs to cover rent. I make $L in various ways, inworld. I help them at their gigs, win contests, do this or that to earn a few $L now & then. My husband would KILL me if I spent real money on a computer game.

Jeanne

 

---

 You don't have to defend yourself to me -- it's none of my business.    

All I'm saying is that you can't infer that no one need pay for SL  from the fact that you personally don't have to pay anything to enjoy SL.     Almost all the places you enjoy exporing, or clubs you enjoy going to, are only there because other people pay for them.  

I'm not trying to tell you what you should or shouldn't do -- I am just stating what seems to me the completely self-evident fact that if it wasn't for people paying almost US$200 a month for a mainland region or almost US$300 a month for a private region, most of SL wouldn't be there for you or anyone else to enjoy.

---

You're absolutely correct Innula. Under Linden Lab's business model there would be no Second Life if everyone played the game the way I do. No argument!

Before I got banned from this forum I argued for Second Life being wrested from the clutches of a greedy sociopathic corporation, and for the game to be run as a user owned cooperative. That idea went over like a turd in the punch bowl among those inculcated with corporatist loyalties. As things currently stand, I appreciate those of you who buy into Second Life's toy economy; the content creators, the vendors, those who run the venues.. Without you folks I couldn't have as much fun as I do, under the prevailing circumstances. Does this make me a parasite? Perhaps. But I guarantee you that I'm a very small parasite compared to Linden Lab corporate executives and major shareholders. If you want to dis SL parasites go after them, not me.

Jeanne

 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

Naw...........I'm out of beer.  Drank it all last Sunday evening watching the NASCAR race. 

I typo a lot.........you should see me when I'm mad and try to type fast. 

---

LoL 'K

Love you Peg!

Thanks for disagreeing w/ me..

Jeanne

 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Before I got banned from this forum I argued for Second Life being wrested from the clutches of a greedy sociopathic corporation, and for the game to be run as a user owned cooperative..

Jeanne

 

---

 How did you propose to wrest SL from LL's clutches?   I'm baffled.   I mean, how did you suggest this change of ownership might best be achieved?

 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Before I got banned from this forum I argued for Second Life being wrested from the clutches of a greedy sociopathic corporation, and for the game to be run as a user owned cooperative..

Jeanne

 

---

 How did you propose to wrest SL from LL's clutches?   I'm baffled.   I mean, how did you suggest this change of ownership might best be achieved?

 

---

late here Innula .. just let me say.. tier boycott !! for now .. ill be back 2morrow .. ~huggzzz~~

Jeanne

Later: ok .. heres what i propose: i propose that ppl who actually love SL & are involved inworld set up a members-owned nonproft organization based on food or babysitting coops or on members-owned credit unions .. we would elect representatives from among our peers to serve as treasurer & secretary etc .. & NO i have no interest in being one of these ppl ~i lack the inclination & experience for it~ but once we have our consortium set up we start collecting membership dues or user fees or whatever you want to call it .. then we make LL an offer to buy SL from them .. heck even LL employees could join our group! so what if LL refused our offer? well.. wed negotiate but if they were stubborn wed call for a TIER STRIKE !! we would force them to accept our fair offer or go outuv business .. the way that SL is in decline i have a feeling that LL would jump @ our offer

once we owned SL we would collect just enuf from each player or resident to pay the bills & keep SL online .. we would have to pay salaries to technicians of course .. & pay for electricity & maintenance & upgrades on the servers .. but we WOULDNT have to pay exoribtant executive salaries & dividends & capital gains to shareholders .. WE would be the shareholders .. hence overall operating costs for running SL would be reduced .. WE would set the ToS .. not have them imposed on us from "above" like they are now .. we would attempt to reach consensus & if this was impossible .. wed put it up to a vote .. i would hope that once we owned SL we would abolish the $L .. abolish private "ownership" of "property" ~which is only an illusion anyway~ & make all content available to everyone for free .. but all of this would be open for residents & members to decide ... this is what i propose & it will probably get me banned again but i dont care

Jeanne

 

[Qie Niangao]

You're pretty much describing an OpenSim grid.

If you like the Second Life grid better than an OpenSim grid, it may be because Second Life succeeds at things that aren't possible with a radically different business model.

Two other observations:

Customers do not pay capital gains. Capital gains are only generated by other investors (a.k.a., the Greater Fools) willing to pay more than an earlier investor's original cost.

Also, whether in SL or another grid or (especially) RL: "If you're not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product."

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

Before I got banned from this forum I argued for Second Life being wrested from the clutches of a greedy sociopathic corporation, and for the game to be run as a user owned cooperative..

Jeanne

 

---

 How did you propose to wrest SL from LL's clutches?   I'm baffled.   I mean, how did you suggest this change of ownership might best be achieved?

 

---

late here Innula .. just let me say.. tier boycott !! for now .. ill be back 2morrow .. ~huggzzz~~

Jeanne

Later: ok .. heres what i propose: i propose that ppl who actually love SL & are involved inworld set up a members-owned nonproft organization based on food or babysitting coops or on members-owned credit unions .. we would elect representatives from among our peers to serve as treasurer & secretary etc .. & NO i have no interest in being one of these ppl ~i lack the inclination & experience for it~ but once we have our consortium set up we start collecting membership dues or user fees or whatever you want to call it .. then we make LL an offer to buy SL from them .. heck even LL employees could join our group! so what if LL refused our offer? well.. wed negotiate but if they were stubborn wed call for a TIER STRIKE !! we would force them to accept our fair offer or go outuv business .. the way that SL is in decline i have a feeling that LL would jump @ our offer

once we owned SL we would collect just enuf from each player or resident to pay the bills & keep SL online .. we would have to pay salaries to technicians of course .. & pay for electricity & maintenance & upgrades on the servers .. but we WOULDNT have to pay exoribtant executive salaries & dividends & capital gains to shareholders .. WE would be the shareholders .. hence overall operating costs for running SL would be reduced .. WE would set the ToS .. not have them imposed on us from "above" like they are now .. we would attempt to reach consensus & if this was impossible .. wed put it up to a vote .. i would hope that once we owned SL we would abolish the $L .. abolish private "ownership" of "property" ~which is only an illusion anyway~ & make all content available to everyone for free .. but all of this would be open for residents & members to decide ... this is what i propose & it will probably get me banned again but i dont care

Jeanne

 

---

You really don't think that people in your "brave new world" wouldn't want privacy and the ability to keep strangers out of their homes?

You really think the general populace of SL could buy out LL?

you  honestly believe the teir paying people of SL would go on a "teir strike" because you said so?

You're nuttier than a fruit cake.

So tell me, since you think it should all be free in SL, who would be paying out of their own pocket for these servers, tech support, and maintenance?

[Sassy Romano]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

So tell me, since you think it should all be free in SL, who would be paying out of their own pocket for these servers, tech support, and maintenance?

---

No I read it that it should be owned by "us" as a cooperative.

Hypothetical back of a postage stamp sums.  Lets say LL want $10,000,000 (a ridiculously LOW figure for SL)

Lets say that there are 250,000 active users who would be willing to pay (a ridiculously hugely optimistic figure)

That's $400 EACH and that's before the running costs.

All of a sudden it's not very "free".

Open Grid is over there...

[Innula Zenovka]

It's a well-known fact that mathematics is all a plot by the bourgeoisie to hoodwink the workers!

[JeanneAnne]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

---

---

You really don't think that people in your "brave new world" wouldn't want privacy and the ability to keep strangers out of their homes?

You really think the general populace of SL could buy out LL?

you  honestly believe the teir paying people of SL would go on a "teir strike" because you said so?

You're nuttier than a fruit cake.

So tell me, since you think it should all be free in SL, who would be paying out of their own pocket for these servers, tech support, and maintenance?

---

why would they? i have plenty of privacy where i live .. no1 ever comes there unless i invite them .. if someone showed up id chat w/ em .. my sisters & i dont have ban lines up or any sortuv 'security' nonsense set up .. its paranoid .. ppl cant make messes in other ppls spaces .. they cant steal anything .. so what difference does it make if others hang out? why even consider it "mine"? this possessiveness & paranoia is ridiculous .. its just a game remember ??

 

yes! why not?

yes! what do they have to loose besides an expense? by boycotting tier the People could bring the corporate ogre to its knees ..

you think im nuts because you cant see beyond the very mindset or socioeconomic paradigm that oppresses you .. youre so thoroly inculcated to the dominance/submission culture thats collared you that you think that freedom is nuts .. whats nuts is people like you submissively accepting your subordinate status to your corporate overlords .. you have had your thinking so utterly twisted by your socialization that you think that life on your knees is freedom and that freedom is nuts .. & i say THATs "nuttier than a fruitcake"

all of us who play SL would pay .. in an earlier thread i very roughly estimated that it would cost each of us ~$15 per month to pay tech salaries & cover electricity & other expenses .. each of us would pay a monthly user fee & the toy economy would be abolished .. each resident would be equal, thered be no private 'ownership' of 'property' & no L$

thats my proposal .. mock it if you will .. but remember if you do that your reactionary objections only mark you as someone so abjectly submissive unto your oppressor that you appear pathetic to your free minded peers

Jeanne

 

 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

So tell me, since you think it should all be free in SL, who would be paying out of their own pocket for these servers, tech support, and maintenance?

---

No I read it that it should be owned by "us" as a cooperative.

Hypothetical back of a postage stamp sums.  Lets say LL want $10,000,000 (a ridiculously LOW figure for SL)

Lets say that there are 250,000 active users who would be willing to pay (a ridiculously hugely optimistic figure)

That's $400 EACH and that's before the running costs.

All of a sudden it's not very "free".

Open Grid is over there...

---

i have no idea how much SL is "worth" .. i actually think that LL could be induced to GIVE SL to an user owned cooperative .. it might be a better option for them than bankruptcy .. but even if we had to contribute $400 each to buy SL .. thats not bad .. id pony up 400 bucks to be a co-owner of SL along w/ all the brothers & sisters who love it .. as is .. im not contributing one CENT to the corporate vampire

as for running costs .. a very rough estimate made months ago in this forum came to about $15 per month each .. some assumptions went into that estimate & i dont know how reasonable those assumptions were .. but i think that $15 per month is in the ballpark

no .. SL wouldnt be expense free if we owned it .. techicians salaries & electricity bills must be paid .. but overall operating expenses would be reduced when bloated corporate salaries & shareholder dividend payments were eliminated .. as is tho .. SL IS free for me .. i dont contribute one cent so long as a parasitic corporation imposes the terms .. i would be willing to pay tho .. if WE were the ones making the decisions

Jeanne

 

[JeanneAnne]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

It's a well-known fact that mathematics is all a plot by the bourgeoisie to hoodwink the workers!

---

its true Innula! or rather .. the keeping of the proletariate intentionally innumerate via piss poor public mathematics education is the plot .. i have a Bachelors of Science in Applied Math / Stats & i appreciate you recognizing one of the myriad ways in which the ruling economic class exploits the working class by depriving them of mathematical competency

Jeanne

 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

JeanneAnne wrote:

some assumptions went into that estimate & i dont know how reasonable those assumptions were ..<snip>

overall operating expenses would be reduced when bloated corporate salaries & shareholder dividend payments were eliminated 

Jeanne

 

---

What assumptions did you make about "bloated corporate salaries & shareholder dividend payments" that Linden Research may or may not be paying?    I don't think that information is publicly available.   When do you say they last paid a dividend to shareholders and how large was it?