"Standard Sizes"

[Perrie Juran]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

Well sure, YOU want smaller sizing; you're a little green man after all.

Thank you for that archive link - I love reading older posts - they're lots of fun, great memories and brings to mind people that have sadly left SL.

---

I assure you, I am sufficiently sized in the part that counts.  :matte-motes-evil:

 

And, you're welcome.  Sometimes understanding the history brings a bit of perspective to the discussion.  This was not just some evil Linden plot.

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

Very true.  I have yet to meet someone "in the wild" - meaning not from the forums - who has ever complained about realistic sizes.  I *have* heard a lot of complaints about lag, being Ruthed (yes, it's still happening here and there), gesture spam, receiving unwanted IMs offering teh sexxies, etc., etc. so I don't think the average SL user (who is likely not representative of the average SL forumite) honestly even thinks about this issue.

I, for one, enjoy being tall in SL; I'm tall in RL and enjoy that as well.

---

I know of at least 2 places in SL that will spam you in chat every few seconds if you enter them with an avatar shorter than 5'11"... Both with threats of ejection and banning. One claims it will AR you as well.

I don't think I even know anyone in RL that tall...

Oh, and folks who like being tall, ought to appreciate more if sizes went down. If eveyone else is 8' tall, then you are just average or even short.

But this issue will adjust over time as more people use mesh furniture. I use a script that reduces the size of anything I put it into by a percentage I say in chat. Toss the script in, say my number in chat, and down it all goes (*) - and for mesh, I usually cut the 'land impact' from 10-50% as a result. That kind of savings is something that gets very hard to resist.

 

(*) Most of the time 0.83 - the common size of furniture is not even right for the common size of giant avatars, but reduce it by that and it tends to be about right for 'to-scale', if not, until I pull out my script it remember the original size, so I just try other numbers.

 

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Ok. Forget gravity. It was just something that occurred to me when I was writing a post to Coby. And I only mentioned it to show that SL is not the same as RL.

This bit of your post stopped me from reading the rest:-

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

I don't think things 'must' be equivilent to RL sizes, size is not the issue,

scale

is.

.

---

The rest of your post qualified that statement, so I didn't read it because the statement is wrong. Size IS the issue in this debate. Scale never was. It's only been about size. Hence Coby's argument about the length of the meter being identical in both worlds. So you're arguing about the wrong thing here. I don't have any views about scale so, if you really want to discuss it, I'd really appreciate it if you'd start a seperate thread for it.

---

'kay well, I'm gonna take another run at this. I was moving quickly, and it's entirely possible that I gave a poor or partial explanation. If you still think it's irrelevant then whatever, I'll chalk it up to 'I tried'. This is a long post, because it's probably the only time I'll feel like going into this in any kind of detail.

Maps have a scale applied on the side, where one inch (for example) represents 10 miles. Objects in SL have sizes, where an object that takes up 1/2 the lateral space of the sim is equivilent to 128m. An object that takes up 1/256th of lateral sim distance is 1m long. It doesn't really matter how many meters a sim has inside of it, but the Edit window tells us the physical size of objects. I can assume we all agree on this.

Objects are rendered by the sim according to the vanishing points, and this creates perspective. Server perspective in SL is fixed, which is why we can never have sims larger or smaller than 256m^2 without LL having to do a lot of re-working (it also affects the map, but carrying on...). Graphical issues are immediately made apparent when someone defeats the vanishing point system (ever been orbitted?), the SL viewer can't render it accurately. You can test this yourself by changing the FOV or zoom level to less than 100% (Ctrl+8 to zoom out, past 100%, and then Ctrl+9 to reset your view)

Why is this important

Well, as I proved in my earlier posts, gravity (and many other laws of physics) react in SL exactly as they do in RL. Velocity works in m/s and obeys the appropriate science, optics too also works as you would expect from RL (light doesn't bend for no reason, etc.). Meters are obviously used by SL within the rendering process, because they represent distances from vanishing points, from viewable distance, velocity and for all other kinds of physics calculations by the server. One meter is one meter in every other possible sense where it is relevant within SL, without exception.

It makes no sense to detach meters from SL just for the sake of 'but it looks right from where I'm standing' - that's not how LL designed 'our world'. As I say, it doesn't matter if people want to invent their own sense of scale. but bending the rules of size should always be a concious act. It should be done because people want to look like giants (or ants), not because they don't understand how it affects the way things are being viewed by either the server, or other users. Removing consistant scale prevents anyone from being a giant (or ant) because no-one can guarantee that they are tall - they might meet an avatar that identifies as 'short' and still find them to be well over six feet tall. Unfortunately, poor tools and views within the SL viewer make it seem like there is no consistancy in Second Life. This, in my opinion, is a bad thing.

I guess the bit that fits it in with what you're saying

Sure, ceilings are low and stairway arches can bump the camera, this is entirely due to RL being designed for first-person view. Second Life is designed for third-person view, so some structural elements may have to move around to enable this. It doesn't stop 1 meter being 1 meter, it doesn't invent a new scale, and it doesn't mean people should be taller or shorter - it just means you need to design your spaces with third-person perspective in mind.

Oh and @Pussycat, you missed the context of my comment. I've typed enough though.

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

 

I know of at least 2 places in SL that will spam you in chat every few seconds if you enter them with an avatar shorter than 5'11"... Both with threats of ejection and banning. One claims it will AR you as well.

I don't think I even know anyone in RL that tall...

 

---

Waidaminute!!!!  You don't know anyone in RL that is 5'11"??????????  I'm 5'10", my father is 6'4", all my male cousins are that height, even my grandmother (who was born in the early 1900's) was 5'9".  My mother at 5' 7" is considered the "short one" of our family.

Edit: Typo

---

Average height among one of my two dominant ethnic roots, the Native Amerian side is 4'8". Not much taller in the other side. Combined that's 3/4ths of my ancestry, and I don't take after the remaining fourth. Sure I may 'know' impersonally people that huge (5'11"), but among my circle - can't say I can think of any. Even among the few caucasians I know. So it throws me when a place sets it as their 'minimum.'

 

[Phil Deakins]

I don't mind an SL meter being seen as an identical measurement to an RL meter. It makes no difference either way. The only reason I ever suggested that SL meters be seen as not being the same as RL meters is because of the very few who want avatar heights, etc. to match RL heights. I suggested that, if they don't think of the SL meter as an RL meter, but think of as a different measurement, say a 'leter' (Linden meter), then all that is left is making things look right together. Actual meters aren't needed at all for that. Just suppose that LL had designed sims to be 256 leters by 256 leters, and avatar and prim measurements in the same units - leters.. This whole debate about making stuff RL-sized would never happen. Or suppose they called the unit something else - like 'unit'. We'd never have this RL-size debate. It would never come up. That's why I suggest thinking of the SL meter as not being the same as the RL meter.

Your long post was interesting and no doubt accurate, but what you wrote doesn't make any difference in this debate. Meters aren't the real issue. They only became an issue because of the that word - meter - but they have no bearing on it whatsoever, except that because the word exists in SL, a few people want everything to be sized in RL meters.

I don't care about meters. I only care about things looking and working right together. And that's what we do have in SL - furniture fits the general avatar and rooms fit the general furniture. We could still have things looking right by sizing everything according to the RL meter, but it doesn't work right in SL. That's the whole argument. The camera and the lack of head movement won't allow it to work right. Even Coby says that rooms do need to be bigger - even with an optimally positioned camera.

So meters are irrelevant to this debate. Only avatar heights are relevant and from those we arrive at furniture sizes, and from furniture we arrive at room sizes.

 

ETA: It was shown earlier that the original, LL created avatar was oversized as far as RL and meters are concerned. But it wouldn't have made any difference. If users were the first to make avatars and not LL, we would still have larger-than-RL avatars, and then furniture and rooms, because of the default camera position. LL probably tried various cam positions etc. before deciding on the one we have now - the one for the original avatar. And it works well.

[Coby Foden]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

SL != RL. It's plain old common sense, and that's all there is.

There is no reason to suppose that the SL meter is the same as the RL meter and, even if it's seen as identical, there is 

absolutely

no reason to insist that things in SL are sized the same as things in RL. Simples

If it helps, I'll go along with RL and SL meters being identical, even though it is a totally unnecessary consideration. As I've been saying, meters don't a look in when sizing furniture and buildings. It's only general avatar heights that count.

---

The statement "SL != RL" does not do away the importance of definite reference for size, the meter.

Nor does stating "only general avatar heights count". General avatar height is moving target as each designer has their own idea of the general height - and the general avatar heights in general are not fixed, that will vary over time.

 

 

You are again forgetting mesh. Things are not so "Simples" as you may think. I can inderstand this as you have built only with prims and you might have not much interest in mesh. However there will be more and more mesh in SL as time advances. And then the importance of size increases.

 

Let's play an imagined situation:

There is a store. Everything sold in that store is made of mesh. For each object there are two sizes:

 

Size 1. Made exactly according to the same dimensions (in meters) as it would be in RL

Size 2: Each object would be 1.5 times bigger than the same object in size 1.

A customer comes in, they do not have big land, the LI limit is quite small, so they must be carefull not to go over the limit of the land. They will notice that if they buy everything they need:

Size 1 objects = 70 LI

SIze 2 objects = 115 LI (the land limit was reached)

I'm pretty confident that the customer will choose the size 1 objects. If their avatar is too tall for those objects they may well decide to make additional smaller shape to be used with the RL sized objects at their land and house. Happy end.

 

Phil, questions:

- There is no reason to suppose that the SL meter is the same as the RL meter?

- Absolutely no reason to insist that things in SL are sized the same as things in RL?

- Absolutely no reason in building to RL scale?

- The meter has nothing to do with virtual world - only general avatar heights count, that's all?

 

Are you serious with those statements?  Really?

Why land and objects are measured in meters - why not in so convenient "general avatar heights" instead?

 

PS.

The equation 1 SLm = 1 RLm does not mean that SL = RL.

It just states that meter is a meter. The meter does not come in varying sizes.

 

No need to keep repeating that SL is not RL. Of course we all know that, don't we?

Nobody is trying to convert SL into RL.

Not even me with my view that meter is a meter everywhere and that sizing things according to RL would be very beneficial concerning land impact and general consistent scale of things.

 

[Freya Mokusei]

I'm pretty happy to live and let live at this point. You clearly have your reasons for using only a perceptual set of measurements and as you've said they work for you.

I think meters are an important part of public / commercial development as they provide a useful 'standard' - if I buy an animation designed specifically for avatars 1.6m tall, I know my feet won't hover. Obviously an avatar of two meters or more would sink underground but the pressure here is on the creator to be clear and consistent. That's more or less the 'joy' of SL in action, the market decides what works.

There are inherent problems with the SL camera, these problems result in creations that look bad and those with a sense of proportion can choose to shop elsewhere. I don't think I'd ever suggest forcing anyone to adopt a specific standard, but this doesn't prevent standards (and meters) being a very useful tool in the creative process. My concern mostly is that without any standard for size, everything kind of turns into a guessing game. Mistakes in the implementation of size (incorrect height in the viewer, inability to tell scale during shape creation, blahblah) in the SL viewer result in accidentally 'bad' creations that would be less of an issue if we had better (more accurate, more useful) tools.

Meters are used in SL for very important reasons. They don't stand alone as a useless layover from SL's past, they're interconnected with SL's physics engine in a deliberate way, to show that physics DOES parallel with reality.

Of course though, the third person perspective of Second Life is a major factor in design - it should be - ignoring it would be foolish even for the most entrenched 'realist'. It doesn't mean we should abandon meters, it doesn't mean that sizes in SL can't have a consistent sense of realistic scale (if people choose it), and it also doesn't make creating in SL any more likely to result in attractive content.

It just means that - when content is designed to a standard (be it leter or meter) - people know what to expect. Giants who want to be giants can be, without people accidentally destroying this effect by setting their height to 100 and not knowing any better. And creators selling commercially can have a relatively universally understood unit of measurement with which to advertise and demonstrate against.

The answer, as usual, lies somewhere in the middle. The trick is making sure people understand the 'global' perspective of their creative choices properly, with objective and useful tools.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

 

I don't care about meters. I only care about things looking and working right together. 

 

---

Here, here!  To personalize the above, for me, I enjoy dancing with men who I am not towering over and in 6+ years of SL and dancing with a broad spectrum (in avatar looks, not height) of men, there is only one that is shorter than the shape I wear 99.9% of the time and he is from India so perhaps the race/culture thing plays in there.  And even then, he's not exceptionally shorter; in fact he is likely my avatar height but I wear heels most of the time.  I created a shorter avatar to wear when I was with him but, thus far, he's the only dance partner with whom I've had to do that.

---

That really is my basic attitude also.

SL should be, at least in my opinion, fun.

It shouldn't be about sweating over "do I look perfect."

[wesleytron]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

That really is my basic attitude also.

SL should be, at least in my opinion, fun.

It shouldn't be about sweating over "do I look perfect."

---

The above reads somewhat like a non sequitur to me.

Making and presenting an avatar that looks "perfect" is what some of us consider to be fun.

 

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

wesleytron wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

That really is my basic attitude also.

SL should be, at least in my opinion, fun.

It shouldn't be about sweating over "do I look perfect."

---

The above reads somewhat like a non sequitur to me.

Making and presenting an avatar that looks "perfect"

is

what some of us consider to be fun.

 

 

---

Then all the more power to you.

But when I get In World, I don't **bleep** about undersized Ava's and I don't want to hear biatching about all the gargantuan Ava's.

Me, if I don't like the way something looks, I just derender it.  If someone doesn't like Martians, they are free to do the same to me.

[Phil Deakins]

Coby. You can argue until you're blue in the face but you'll never succeed. SL users have decided - a long time ago. Furniture, and rooms are designed to fit the general size (height) of avatars. You can argue that avatar heights vary, which they do, but they are generally within a small range and furniture is made to suit them. Furniture makers do not generally cater for those who prefer to be tiny compared to the average. It's the way it is so get over it. Even you have said that rooms need to be bigger, which means unrealistically large. You are an exception in SL. You have no right to have furniture and house makers make things to suit you personally. So get over it.

You don't have any arguments to show that SL sizes should match RL sizes - no arguments whatsoever.So there's no need for me to reply to every part of your post. Everyone is happy with things as they are - bigger than RL - except a tiny number of people of whom you are one, so accept it that you are out of step with the rest of the SL users. By all means, be a small avatar and find stuff that suits your size - it is your world and imagination, after all - but stop arguing that everyone should be like you. It's their world and their imagination, and a long time ago they decided that SL stuff is bigger than RL stuff - if you pedantically cling to the SL and RL meters as being identical.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

I'm pretty happy to live and let live at this point. You clearly have your reasons for using only a perceptual set of measurements and as you've said they work for you.

---

It works for everybody, except a tiny number of people who pedantically insist that SL sizes of stuff should be the same as their RL counterparts. It's silly, I know, but there are a tiny number of people who actually have that attitude.

As I said, I don't care about meters. They can be the same in each world, in which case things in the SL world are generally bigger than things in the RL world. The population decided that many years ago, and it remains that way. There's no point in anyone arguing against it because it will change nothing. LL created the first avatar which was significantly taller that the RL average, but so what? SL is a completely different world so it really doesn't matter.

I've read in this forum that there's a trend towards shorter avatars and I've accepted it whether or not it's true. It may be true but I haven't actually seen any evidence of it. I haven't shortened my avatar and I don't look any different in the midst of a group of avatars to how I always looked in the midst of a group of avatars. I don't look significantly taller compared to other avatars than I used to do, and I'm wondering if there really is such a trend, or if it's just a bit of wishful thinking. Nevertheless, if over time avatars do become generally shorter, and mesh may be a reason for it, then furniture and home creators will no doubt follow suit. But until then, things are as they are, and the tiny number of people who want RL sizes remain exceptions.

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

It's

their

world and

their

imagination, and a long time ago they decided that SL stuff is bigger than RL stuff

---

It'd be fine with me if this were the case. As I said in my post, if they're making this choice as a concious decision then great, let the market decide.

Unfortunately however, a typical conversation with someone who's set their height to 100 goes like this:-

 

• Giant: Hi, why are you so small?
• Me: I'm not, I'm taller than average for my body type.
• Giant: I see you as really small.
• Me: That's because you're about 8 feet tall.
• Giant: No I'm not.

I'd put forward that the size discrepancy in SL is almost entirely accidental, the majority of the larger sizes having simply set their height that way so that they didn't appear short against other people, and the cycle continues. Or they see an oversized chair or bed, or just 'eyeball' it. This has definitely been my experience, and that's why I think it's somewhat important that the height differences are made clearer.

At the moment, it's almost certainly not a case of people deciding anything, many just don't know any better because comparative scale is difficult to find.

(Obviously this post is made with the full admission that third person perspective is still an important consideration during design.)

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

As I said, I don't care about meters.

They can be the same in each world

, in which case things in the SL world are generally bigger than things in the RL world.

---

They are the same in each world. Why would they be different? As I've shown and spoken of there is clear evidence to show that the meters we use in the edit window correspond to RL meters, it's a function of motion and physics. Making statements like that bolded above is why frustation is caused by this issue.

People can make things bigger (or not), people can and probably should design considerations for third person perspective, but this is not the same as sizes being magically different. Meters exist regardless of peoples' desire to build things to RL scale (which should always be a choice, but ideally an informed choice).

Stop with this nonsensical and completely unfounded imaginary separation between SL and RL meters, and just say "I build stuff larger than it would be in real life, because it fits better with the view and the environment", you don't need to rationalise it by distorting or denegrating the laws of physics.

[Phil Deakins]

It doesn't matter whether or not it was a conscious decision. The fact is that it was decided long ago - blindly or otherwise. Perhaps 'evolved' is a better word to use. The current average avatar heights evolved to what they are now, albeit they evolved right at the very start. Mesh and LI might cause them to evolve again but it hasn't happened yet.

Incidentally, I've only ever come across one person who set his height to 100, and I only know that because he said so - "everything is set to 100". I don't think I've ever asked anyone, which, of course, is why he's the only one I ever came across  My avatar has never been set to 100 height and never even as high as 90. It's always been in the 80s and, for height, I've always fitted nicely in crowds.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

As I said, I don't care about meters.

They can be the same in each world

, in which case things in the SL world are generally bigger than things in the RL world.

---

They

are

the same in each world. Why would they be different?

As I've shown and spoken of there is clear evidence to show that the meters we use in the edit window correspond to RL meters, it's a function of motion and physics.

Making statements like that bolded above is why frustation is caused by this issue.

---

I would have thought that, by now, you would have understood exactly what I meant. But if you want to argue it, they are not the same in each world and they never can be. SL is pixels as in no way relates physically with RL. An RL meter is represented physically. They are not the same at all. But you knew exactly what I meant and, for some reason known only to you, chose to argue about it just for the sake of it.

What frustration? You feel frustrated about it? Me saying that RL and SL meters can be the same frustrates you? Be serious!

[Freya Mokusei]

You keep saying things like "Even if they are the same" and I don't know why. It makes no sense to me to phrase your sentences in this way. Frustration was mostly a general term (I'm not frustrated, I just don't 'get' it ), because it sounds like you're deliberately complicating this issue (by saying SL meters are/can be different to RL meters - if they 'can be' the same, they also 'can be' different. can vs. are).

SL isn't pixels. It's rendered on your screen as pixels. SL sizes are stored in vectors and vectors for size are defined in meters.

The measurement for RL meters is of course derived from the speed of light. Light in SL doesn't travel at any speed, so you're kind of correct that it's going to be difficult to accurately measure a meter by this definition. This doesn't mean that meters in SL are any different, the case for meters is made in the database definitions of the simulator.

We could go further, and recreate the old definition for meters (if memory serves, it has something to do with pendulums), but I'd imagine this to be a mostly pointless exercise.

[Phil Deakins]

Inasmuch as my question in the OP about standard sizes for mesh clothes was answered fully on page 1 of this thread, I see no purpose in continuing the thread. It currently has about 130 posts in it and yet the question was fully answered in the first few posts.

Regarding the discussion on the sizes of things in SL as compared to their counterparts in RL, which accounts for almost all of the posts in the thread, and was not the topic of the thread, nobody has changed anybody's mind, and nobody will. So can we agree to differ (again) and leave it at that?

Hugs all round :matte-motes-big-grin: and a big kiss to Coby :matte-motes-kiss:

[Freya Mokusei]

Oh absolutely. I don't even know if we're still disagreeing, it's been a valuable exercise to see how people imagine SL to work and where people absorb their definitions for scale and perspective from.

I mostly continued the thread out of curiosity, and because you seemed happy too continue the thread in this direction (despite the typical end-state of size threads). I don't think people can change other peoples' minds, if you want to change you have to want to.

We disagree a fair bit you and I, but I'm glad we could hammer on beyond the trading of insults and actually exchange perspectives. It's usually good times, as I said earlier you are a capable thinker.

Thanks for the thread!

[Coby Foden]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

- Coby. You can argue until you're blue in the face but you'll never succeed.

- It's the way it is so get over it.

- You have no right to have furniture and house makers make things to suit you personally. So get over it.

- You don't have any arguments to show that SL sizes should match RL sizes - no arguments whatsoever.

- So there's no need for me to reply to every part of your post.

- after all - but stop arguing that everyone should be like you.

- if you pedantically cling to the SL and RL meters as being identical.

---

Hi Phil, thanks for telling me in effect:

"Shut up Coby, you're totally wrong!"

Yeah, that's how I see your above post. :smileyindifferent:

I have shown arguments but you just dismiss everything by saying "you have not shown any arguments whatsoever". Or something similar. About meter, you say it comes in different sizes, but you don't have any evidence to support your view. You are just stating it like an absolute truth.

Have I said that everybody should be like me?

Have I asked that furniture makers should make things to suit me personally?

I think I'm done with this thread by now. It has transformed into a word twisting game. :smileytongue:

[Phil Deakins]

I enjoyed the debate, and I learned from it - particularly the origin of the tall avatar. I'd never come across that before. But all the reasonings on both sides were no different to what they've been in the past (except that gravity was never mentioned in the past - not to my knowledge anyway ), and nobody was going to change anyone's mind so I thought the debate had run its course.

[Phil Deakins]

Oh I really don't want to get into continuing this because nothing will change. I'm very sorry if the extracts that you quoted were read as you said they were. I certainly didn't mean to rub you up the wrong way. We were debating, that's all. It was nothing personal. I do think you are "totally wrong" on this subject. That's why we've been debating it. I could address each one of the extracts but that would just lead to a continuation of the debate, and I think it's run its course already. The very last thing I want is anything negative between you and me.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

It's

their

world and

their

imagination, and a long time ago they decided that SL stuff is bigger than RL stuff

---

It'd be fine with me if this were the case. As I said in my post, if they're making this choice as a concious decision then great, let the market decide.

Unfortunately however, a typical conversation with someone who's set their height to 100 goes like this:-

 

• Giant: Hi, why are you so small?
• Me: I'm not, I'm taller than average for my body type.
• Giant: I see you as really small.
• Me: That's because you're about 8 feet tall.
• Giant: No I'm not.

 

---

I ran into very similar conversations my first two years in SL - because my avatar had paler skin than the majority of avatars that looked liked they had spent way too much time in a tanning booths.  Now there are a much broader spectrum of skin shades but in 2007-2008, even finding a lighter skin that I wanted was difficult.

Finally found one and loved it.  Then began all the "You need to spend more time in the sun" - "You look like a ghost" - etc., etc. comments.  Some from complete strangers, some from friends.  One male friend who enjoyed helping new people in SL handed a freebie skin to me and said, "Here.  This will look better than that skin until you can afford a nicer one."

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I had searched high and low for my skin and paid $1500L for that ONE skin.  When I informed him of this he said, "Oh, well, ummm..." and clearly thought my skin was ugly.

---

If you're still wearing that skin, I've seen it and commented on it. As for getting more sun. I've had two melanomas removed in RL. Don't do it! Wear big hats, wear long sleeves and pants/skirts.

For years, I've had the thought that I should blotch up my overtanned skin (a web freebie I've been painting on for years) to reflect my RL vitiligo. I'd enjoy watching people trying to decide if I should get more sun, or stay out of it.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

I ran into very similar conversations my first two years in SL - because my avatar had paler skin than the majority of avatars that looked liked they had spent way too much time in a tanning booths.  Now there are a much broader spectrum of skin shades but in 2007-2008, even finding a lighter skin that I wanted was difficult.

Finally found one and loved it.  Then began all the "You need to spend more time in the sun" -

"You look like a ghost"

- etc., etc. comments.

And then she wrote:

When I put the beloved skin from 2007 on now, compared to my current skin, I find myself saying,

"ACK, I look like a ghost!"

lol  But that was the best I could find for my purpose back then.

---

Wait a minute! Is this a redhead thing?

We blondes (summer's ending, I'm no longer strawberry blonde) are never bothered by people telling us we look like ghosts when we think we look like ghosts.

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Coby Foden wrote:

Have I said that everybody should be like me?

Have I asked that furniture makers should make things to suit me personally?

I think I'm done with this thread by now. It has transformed into a word twisting game. :smileytongue:

---

 

Apologies for not getting back to this post, I had meant to but obligations keep me busy. It is unfortunate, Coby, that the thread scope was reduced in the way that it was. The backpedalling from trying to understand, to trying to justify concepts Phil clearly doesn't understand (I admit, I am surprised to have needed to explain how basic physics work) made it very difficult to actually post anything particularly informative. Once Phil decided he wasn't interested in dealing with the misconceptions he has about Second Life, I figured this thead was headed towards the trash.

This thread (after being 're-purposed') was narrowed from perception to scale to some ambiguous concept of 'eyeballing size', which doesn't really help anyone or provide any understanding of Second Life as a creative platform, or as a distributed online service. It's unfortunate, but these are the hurdles faced by people seeking to educate and inform others - opinions, as the saying goes, are much like rear-facing excretionary orifices. Some people love to present them at every opportunity, and they all stink. 

I don't think it's a bad thing that anyone can create in SL, to any standard they wish to adopt. I think you and I can agree that no-one should be forced to build in any specific way, but it is unfortunate that people with clearly no technical understanding of the methods involved (both regarding reality - perspective, scale and physics and Second Life - Havok, simulator operation/definitions, spatial mathematics, OpenGL, 3D visualisation and rendering) will attempt to confuse and scuttle people to such an extent that knowledgeable people end up tearing their hair out or walking away, rather than seek greater understanding. This is the tradition in SL - those with knowhow, know how to keep to themselves.

Second Life has always had a skills deficit, and Phil is correct that nothing about this will change. People will continue to say such nonsense as 'meters are irrelevant', 'scale has nothing to do with it' and 'meters are bigger in SL than they are in RL'. This is true for just about every technical aspect of SL - I still hear people wearing >20Mb of scripted attachments complaining that the sim is too laggy, and telling people off for using small bursts of particles rather than addressing the terrible flexi/alpha chaos that is their chosen hair. Heck, yesterday I had to explain very patiently that making a list of 'bad people' on a notecard and advertising it for sale is not a smart idea. I don't hold anything against these people personally, it cannot be helped that SL tends to reinforce such opinions by surrounding them with many people who probably also don't understand rudimentary physics or optics, let alone network latency or TCP/IP. SL is quite deliberately non-authoritive, LL would rather leave a couple of answers vague than tell everyone what to do (this is mostly a good thing, except when it comes to performance). The posting style used on these forums is often harsh, and it hardens people to defend their viewpoints, no matter how many hundreds of pages on the SL Wiki may prove otherwise.

Congratulations on choosing to want something better for yourself, and I hope you can at least rest safe in the knowledge that you can accomplish great things without needing people who would only seek to hold you back or tie up your good sense into complex knots. I'm sure other people can find the value in your words.