Direct Delivery Migration For Dummys

[Tari Landar]

---

Porky Gorky wrote:

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Are you saying we're not? I'm of the belief that at some point, we all have our dumb moments.I sure as heck do, and I read instructions, quite thoroughly. I still sometimes need something that spells things out for me a bit more clear. Even if it's been posted or explained a milllion times by a million other people.

I probably wouldn't have chosen the words for dummys, either. But that doesn't mean anytime it's used it was intended to be offensive and nothing more. Of course we don't all share the same sense of humor, so it may not be funny to some. It's certainly not worthy of the attack it got, though. That was a tad over the top. I mean if we're going to complain about something being offensive, I'm pretty sure that being offensive with our complaining isn't going to accomplish the goal any quicker either. The whole tit for tat thing is a bit silly once we've reached adulthood. My kids can't even get away with that, lol. I don't think focusing on that one word was really all that important. But, I can't decide for others what is and isn't. So I don't think there's anything wrong with being offended, but I do believe there's a much better way of conveying that.

---

When a person is referred to as a dummy, it is the equivalent of calling them stupid or mentally retarded.

If you want to publicly admit you are a dummy then that is your prerogative.

If you think the mods should leave offensive thread titles in the forum then that is your prerogative.

Just because you are not offended by a word does not mean others should not be offended. 

Just because you do not think others should challenge the use of the word through discussion, does not mean I cannot.

Not much offends me but due to personal circumstance the use of the world "dummy" or the equivalent word "retard" greatly offends me. 

If you don't want to see me complain about it then I suggest you direct your eyes somewhere else because it is going to go on until this thread title changes or until the thread dies..

 

 

---

I did say I can understand why some people are offended by it, even if I am not. I didn't get the impression I bolded up there at all. Me not getting that impression doesn't mean others will view it the same as I. But hoenstly I think your comparison, at least part of it, is pretty darn harsh and a bit more offensive than the word dummy. You used a phrase I would never associate with that word and frankly really don't like the fact that people use it to describe something offensive at all. Again, just my opinion, and I don't feel others must always share mine. You're as free to use the words you want to describe something, as much as the next person. But, as you said, you shouldn't be surprised when people challenge that.

I also didn't say you shouldn't complain at all, or challenge terminology people choose. I said there is always a better way to do it. I don't think being offensive in kind will accomplish much. It rarely ever does.

 

[Deja Letov]

---

Porky Gorky wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

When I ask for help, as I do, say, in the Mesh forum here, I often specify I am requesting "the Dummies version" or some variation on that theme. In fact Drongle euphemisticaly will  dumb down his explanations  saying "I know you don't like math" LOL. 

---

So when requesting help, would you consider asking for "the retarded version" as opposed to "the dummies" version? They are both tantamount to the same thing and equally offensive. Or would you not have an issue referring to yourself as a retard?

This is in no way meant as an insult as you are obviously not a dummy/retarded.

---

No they aren't the same thing at all. There is no famous brand name of books that practically everyone knows about "for retards". Besides at least from my perspective...calling someone a dummy is a sound term used to describe a person who lacks knowledge. Calling someone a "retard" would be offensive because it's a slang term and is used to describe a handicapped person. In fact, it should offend someone who is mentally handicapped. The term dummie, isn't used to described a mental handicap. Not even in the caliber of insults (if you want to call them that).

Honestly, if something offends someone the best thing to do is stay away from it. Kinda like all those people who say they are so offended by seeing or hearing certain things. Offended by adult TV...don't watch it. Offended by porn on the internet?...don't search for it. Offended by the use of "God" in pledge of allegiance...don't say it. Offended by the title of this thread?...don't read it. 

[Alicia Sautereau]

Discussion over a moot point

Dummy version: click A, click B, do C = done, who cares how it works
Forum version: bla bla bla = ??? dummy version, please!

 

:matte-motes-wink-tongue:

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Deja Letov wrote:

---

Rya Nitely wrote:

There must be so many insulted people out there. I'm surprised the success of all these books :smileyfrustrated:

 

---

I couldn't agree more with your sarcasm

. Having grown up with these books since they first came out, I'm really surprised anyone got offended by the title of the thread. I mean you'd have to be living under a rock to not know what the OP's intention with the thread was. The "For Dummies" series has always been a great book to use to learn something when you want to get down to it and learn something quick. I don't look at those books or this thread as insulting my intelligence at all. Why? Because one random thread on the internet, not even directed at me specifically, does not concern me, it's not even about me. I know what my intelligence level is and I don't have any insecurities about myself that I would let a random thread title dictate what that level is. Ok, if someone made a thread that say "Deja you dummy this one is for you" then ya, I might get a bit put off by it. But that is a direct insult to me personally. And I wouldn't be offended, I would just think you're a @sshat.  But it's not directed at any one person, and it's a national and well known brand for informational titles. I can look past it and see it for what it is...information. I guess you need a sense of humor to get over the title. 

---

Ditto!  I immediately took the thread title to be a reference to the "For Dummies" series of books.  I own quite a few on various topics and find them to be great references.  To assume this was some kind of personal insult says more to me about the ones who were insulted than the OP.  *Just shakes head*

[Dirtnap Mumfuzz]

Once again I find myself in the uncomfortable position of agreeing with Porky Gorky about the sensationalist approach this posting used, the intention of which clearly after five pages of garbage was not to provide any form of support, but only to create yet more controversy.

---

Rya Nitely wrote:

There must be so many insulted people out there. I'm surprised the success of all these books :smileyfrustrated:

(INSERT APPROXIMATELY 60 COUNTS OF TRADEMARK/COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT HERE)

---

I'm really not surprised that you would think so, as you quite blatantly post up multiple images of trademarked and/or copyrighted material that you do not own, or are licensed to distribute.

The numerous trademark logo's are quite evident in all of the images, you posted in a badly conceived scheme to prove to yourself how completely righteous you are. Now THAT'S offensive. 

Do you know who is probably insulted? The people who own those books, whose images you have essentially stolen.

There is at least one person in here who should have read 'Trademarks and Copyrights for Dummies'. Twice.

---

Rya Nitely wrote:

 And I love instructions for dummies with anything at all. Even stuff I know.

some people are just 

dumb

, what you can you do?

---

My sentiments exactly.

It is interesting to note that elsewhere, progress is not usually measured in regressive steps.

 

And in other news: How special! Another buttsore fascist follows me from one thread to another like an unwanted puppy. 

---

ImaTest wrote:

So you're offended 

---

Show me where in the posting you are quoting that I used the word 'offended', dear blatant spin doctor.

 

 

You probably think that, based on their review, a movie critic is offended at the shows they watch.

 I recommend a copy of Passive Aggressive Baiting and Switching for Dummies.

---

ImaTest wrote:

someone dared to take tips you posted, which of course you were not the first to share anyway

, and added them to tips of their own. But you dislike how they worded it, so that makes their thread bad and yours fine. When you did the very same thing, by posting your own tips, most of which you know because others already shared them.  

---

For about a minute I wondered why you feel "that makes their thread bad and yours fine". Again, I never actually said that. Could this then be your own Freudian slip showing, perhaps? OR a clear desire to attempt to be typically instigative instead of contributive. Again. And then I noticed you talking to yourself.

And now anyone who can read knows why: another spin doctor fail.

I write for a living. That being said, it really has nothing to do with whether or not I 'dislike how it was worded'. This entire posting is a grammatical failure, based on the fact that it reads like a second grade book report. It has nothing to do with my preference, it has to do with the quantity of errors and a lack of quality, which I can understand why you are unable to appreciate after reviewing your own tired half efforts at note-scriibbling. You can never miss what you never had.

Let it be known however, that I state in my first posting:

---

Dirtnap Mumfuzz wrote:

On my journey I gathered a few seemingly pertinent tips, tricks, and theories clutched in the bony fingers of the withered corpses that marked the unfortunate who had fallen on the path before me 

---

See, despite my application of creative writing prowess, I aknowledge that I gathered these ideas, I don't start out by saying:

---

PhoebeDesmons wrote:

I am getting tired of seeing pages, and pages worth of "instructions" when it's a simple process. There's little know hows that are also not easily made available. Thought I'd put down my experiences so far and what to NOT do when dealing with the DD migration. 

---

..only days after saying:

---

PhoebeDesmons wrote:

So, yeah one issue after another, marketplace is teeming with people with similar issues with no answers and now... THIS. 

---

At no time did I lose my lunch over the process, and declare no answers could be found, then a few days later come on as the one-stop source of all Direct Delivery success. I also never attempt to impress upon anyone that the world was void of answers until I came along.

I also did not essentially jack someone else's tutorial, and try to borderline plaigarize it by rewriting it as my own. I gathered information from a variety of places that required multiple searches, and formed some of my own theories, for the record.

Also, this 'original poster' appeared in my thread, and made a claim about additional relevant content, then never came back to follow up, instead starting a new thread 'for dummies'.  

After you review a few thousand postings by people stating that over-duplicity is a hindrance and disservice, go read the definition on the word arrogant and see how well the shoe fits.

---

ImaTest wrote:

Seriously "demanding your own spotlight". That gets you a great big wth were you thinking when you said that, from me. 

---

Same here, as I watch you demanding your very own: did you happen to have ANYTHING to contribute at all to the Direct Delivery discussion, or did you really think no one would notice your non-contribution and posting merely because you think you are some sort of authority.

You would make quite the politician...but the last thing we need are self appointed forum cops who found their badge at the bottom of a box of CrackerJack.

Watch your mailbox for my gift to you: your very own copy of Forum Grandstanding and Douchebaggery for Dummies.

---

ImaTest wrote:

Forget the fact that these tips have been around since DD first came into play and many others have shared them long before you. Both on these forums and many other websites. Isn't that exactly what you're doing by pointing out you "posted the tips first"?

---

Forget the fact that you are oddly responding to your own misinterpretations, I get the distinct impression you weren't held much as a child.

Are you going to stick to the original position that sharing of more information through duplicity is the way it works, or are you going to continue to predictably swap faces between that and chastising/lecturing for the sake of faux superiority. 

 I will mention that two weeks prior to you deciding you are my internet daddy, I already advised:

---

Dirtnap Mumfuzz wrote:

(I posted this as a service to the desperate masses being led to the consumer slaughter. If it is a duplicate effort or some other such federal offense, just sue me. No really, sue me; I get bored easy.)

---

 Which you would know, if you made even half the effort to read anything prior to playing head referee of obtusity. But I understand better than you, that you lack any semblance of impulse control. I'm pretty sure there's a book for that too, with your name on it.

---

ImaTest wrote:

The title of the thread is clear, as is the subject.  

---

You are correct; it is for dummies. Which really explains the quality of the conversation taking place, as well as your participation and offensive/defensive posture game.

However as noted, some people find the term 'dummy' to be derogatory, as compared to the use of 'retard'. And I completely agree! Which is why I invented the term BOTARD; because people with retardation can't help how they are, usually due to genetic disposition.

Botards on the other hand are the way they are by choice, and people WITH disabilities should not be discriminated against or lumped together with people who ARE disabilities. Case in point:

 

---

ImaTest wrote:

 That's pretty arrogant if you ask me. 

---

Which no one apparently did, your highness.

Might I recommend Trolling and Butting In Unnecessarily for Dummies?

 

I know you think I'm not giving you enough attention in another thread where you probably got your ass handed to you on a silver platter, with a garnish of parsley and mint jelly. Don't worry, you'll get over it. I know I did.

You know what is really arrogant of me? Being proud of the fact that not only did I not reiterate anyone else's tutorial effort (like this thread does) but also that at only five replies (two of which are mine) and being posted two weeks prior to this fallacy, my effort to share Direct Delivery tips (without calling anyone dumb in the process) has garnered 343 (correction: 348) views currently, while simultaneously NOT generating five pages of arguing and mob-mentality grandstanding by the chit-chat superfriends. Pamela Galli is the only person in this waste of space that even made an effort, the rest of you seem to just gang up on Porky for thinking for him/herself, and act like angsty children fighting over who owns the sandbox.

I will mention that the only thing for dummies that I had to read during this endeavor was your poorly planned  post.

Take that for whatever you want, my petty little friend.

[Ciaran Laval]

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/creating-your-own-second-life-group.html

[Ava Rage]

Thanks, this was all very helpful. I'd been putting it off but migration was a lot more straightforward than I feared!

A couple of follow-up questions:

Tips:
a. Edit the OLD listing, then click "EDIT ASSOCIATED OBJECT" then select the new item.
b. Update the item title.
c. Don't forget to switch the useage requirements to fit the product.

A) I've done that, but now all of the folders I imported are sitting there as "Unassociated Inventory Items." How can they be unassociated? I clicked my old Magic Box listings and changed the associated item to the newly imported folders. Since I also updated my landmarks in each item and tested delivery, I know it's using the right ones.

Can I just delete the Unassociated Inventory Items from the MP?

B) I have not updated my item titles. Why do I need to do this?

C) It seems to do this automatically; it now indicates no unpacking required.

[WADE1 Jya]

 

i have a bit of free time today so am trying to stumble through a bit of this. there's no way i can get all my items converted on time. annoying process is making me hate LL even more, something i thought was impossible. leave it to LL to design a process with a billion steps (all broken of course) to do something that could have been one click, so inconsiderate.

:catmad: rage :catmad: rage :catmad: rage :catmad:

:catmad: stomp :catmad: stomp :catmad: stomp :catmad:

:catmad: HATE IT :catmad: :catmad: :catmad:  MEOOOOOWWWWWWWW!!! :catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad::catmad:

 

[WADE1 Jya]

***TRANSFER FAILED***

No folders were sent to the Marketplace because of a system or network error.

Please try again later.

lame it is this busted but we're supposed to somehow just do it anyway :catsad::catsad::catsad::catsad::catsad: why Lindens why are you doing this to us :catsad::catsad::catsad::catsad:

 

[Deja Letov]

Check your listings. I see that message all the time but they actually got sent anyway. I think it's just a bad message but it does go through.

[WADE1 Jya]

:catvery-happy: thanks i got that part, its failing a ton (or not), cant tell, its so clueless.

i have about 60% done for this avatar's shop, but the other bunch is stuck  theres a message LL sloppily placed half under a banner ad (*sighs* how non-pro) that i copypasted out to a text file so i could it read which says:

 

"You currently have at least 100 unassociated inventory items stored in the Marketplace. You will not be able to add any new inventory items using Direct Delivery until you list or delete some of your items."

 

Really I am totally lost, should i delete these? no idea what it means or what this is doing i have way too many items to figure it out :catsad: :catsad: :catsad: :catsad:

[WADE1 Jya]

can't delete required items to continues. requires deleting 279 items one by one with 20 seconds pause between each item. site so slow it feels like 90s dial-up even though i got massive bandwidth. total linden fail ;(

 

So sorry to keep you waiting. We'll be right back!

We've been notified about this issue and we'll take a look at it shortly.

:catmad: continue shopping? :catmad:

but... i wasn't shopping *facepalms*

gosh this is annoying, did they really have to leave bugs in every step