Jump to content
Darrius Gothly

Where Is Your Line - SL vs RL

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

Apparently, some people here believe that if someone is able to see the difference between a virtual representation and the real thing, she's an exception. And worst of all for them, if she does see that the representation/picture/avatar of someone is different that the real thing, that means she's dissociating them.

Different means different, not equal. It doesn't mean disconnected (hint : I even called it permeability).

Following their logic that their weakness forced to put behind my words, they should consult a therapist. And don't ever try to tell to them that "the universe is finite but not limited", they might want you straight into an asylum.

That's nice and does nothing more than add a layer of truth to my assessment.

Since your initial response in this thread you have attempted to paint yourself as having some truth which the rest that have responded simply refuse to see or admit to. Your quoted response is no different and in fact goes so far as to make an ad-hominem attack instead of countering the summation that was made.

Yes, you are an exception to the rule. You presented your thoughts and views in such a manner that your later attempts to erase/alter what you stated ring quite hollow. There is a difference between recognizing that a virtual representation is not identical to the person behind the screen and treating that representation as a whole (image combined with what they say/type and how they do so/react to others) as somehow not being genuine/real.

But then what would I know. After all according to you anyone who does not think as you do requires therapy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

defend a position.

Defend a position?

20 minutes ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

Redraw your line with the understanding that my opinion being in opposition to yours only has the meaning you give it.

I didn't draw this line between me and them. I don't think you're adressing to the correct person for this argument.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Madelaine McMasters It's not unusual at all for people to draw such a line or to have it meander to and fro, I do it myself. It is a whole other kettle of fish to draw an incredibly stark line as was described.

Edited by Solar Legion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

@Madelaine McMasters It's not unusual at all for people to draw such a line or to have it meander to and fro, I do it myself. It is a whole other kettle of fish to draw an incredibly stark line as was described.

Oh, I quite agree, Solar. I both have it meander to and fro, and experience it moving too and fro without my consent! In this particular case, I'm holding the line... I think.

Edited by Madelaine McMasters
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Oh, I quite agree, Solar. I both have it meander to and fro, and experience it moving too and fro without my consent!

Heh the latter happens often enough as well. I've found I have to be very careful these days as I have run into some for whom such a line either simply doesn't exist of that line is so blurred that it may as well not exist.

I have also found that the more visual nature of SL makes it far easier for some to fall into that category and as such I rarely RP these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:
20 hours ago, Darrius Gothly said:

BTW: I haven't seen anyone saying they have the same intensity and "feel" riding a virtual horse as they do riding a real horse (or any similar SL vs RL experience).

Then why are you talking about it here? Are you ok?

Quite possibly because of this:

21 hours ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

I can't. I've ridden a horse in rl and it's totally different than in SL. I just can not put these experiences on the same level. It's not the same.

That's where the original mention of horse riding comes from, which is why Darrius mentioned it. Asking "Are you ok?" infers that you think he's imagining things (well, actually, it infers that you think he's possibly gone a bit funny in the head, but I'm being generous in assuming that's not what you intended to convey to everyone reading this thread, right?) when he's actually just responding to something you said a few posts previously.

As a side note: I once had a notorious forum troll make the inference that I was mentally unstable because I "hadn't taken my medication". (I had that particular little nerk blocked and never responded to him, but someone kindly quoted his post.) Anyone randomly coming across that post might have assumed that I was not taking medication that was necessary for my mental health. In fact, what said troll and I both knew was that the medication I had mentioned in another thread... was for allergies. But he didn't feel the need to mention that when he tried to make me look as if I was having an unstable moment. Quite the unpleasant trick to pull, but he'd earned a reputation for doing things like that.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

Do you know the difference between a gun and a gunner?

Do you know the difference between friendship and real friend?

A gunner uses a gun to perform a task. One is a person, the other is a machine. A real friend is someone who will do his or her best to be emotionally present for me when I need him or her and for whom I will do my best to be there for as well. Since emotions and conversations are the key factors, it can and does happen over the internet. Sharing physical space at least occasionally is a good addition but far from a requirement.

Casual friends have less of a commitment to be there emotionally for each other. The relationships will be based on other things, which can include but does not require physical proximity.

Friendship is a state of relationship between people.

Now that I've answered your questions, will you answer mine please? The questions you posed above didn't explain anything.

9 hours ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

So some people speaking more openly percludes real friendship with them for you? Could you explain how that works please? I don't understand it.

Thanks. :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Skell Dagger said:

That's where the original mention of horse riding comes from, which is why Darrius mentioned it.

Did you read my original post? This is what I said : "I just can not put these experiences on the same level."

This is how it's turned into Darrius post : "I haven't seen anyone saying they have the same intensity and "feel" riding a virtual horse as they do riding a real horse"

I've precisely and clearly writen that indeed, they have not the same intensity for me. So...? So He had not seen anyone saying there are of the same intensity... But nor did I.

So yep I'm asking if he's ok because... what's that?

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

Did you read my original post? This is what I said : "I just can not put these experiences on the same level."

This is how it's turned into Darrius post : "I haven't seen anyone saying they have the same intensity and "feel" riding a virtual horse as they do riding a real horse"

I've precisely and clearly writen that indeed, they have not the same intensity for me. So...? So He had not seen anyone saying there are of the same intensity... But nor did I.

So yep I'm asking if he's ok because... what's that?

Words have meanings both implied and explicit. You can not places the two experiences on the same level therefore there exists someone out there who can.

Darrius responded to this inference by stating that he has not encountered such a person.

Not that difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

So some people speaking more openly percludes real friendship with them for you? Could you explain how that works please? I don't understand it.

Where did you read that in my words?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Solar Legion said:

Heh the latter happens often enough as well. I've found I have to be very careful these days as I have run into some for whom such a line either simply doesn't exist of that line is so blurred that it may as well not exist.

I have also found that the more visual nature of SL makes it far easier for some to fall into that category and as such I rarely RP these days.

The visual nature of SL helps, but it's not necessary. In my experience as an introvert, the most alluring aspect of online/anonymous text communications is the very high signal-to-noise ratio, and my control of the channel. That allows a kind of focus that's hard to achieve face to face where the incessant crunch of you chewing on a stalk of celery while speaking drives me so batty I want to reach over and shove it up your nose. It's not much better over the phone, but at least I can hang up. In SL I can't hear you. And, in reverse, you've no idea I'm cleaning paint from under my fingernails with a kitchen fork (the one I'm using to eat my spaghetti) while whispering sweet nothings to you. I have good control over my experience, as you do of yours.

Morgan does illuminate the peril of not realizing that we replace missing RL noise with beautiful signal of our own invention, but many of us are aware of that and can use it to mutual satisfaction. We've been doing this forever, SL is just another method for our madness.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

Where did you read that in my words?

Page 3, half way down. I quoted it when I asked you those questions originally. Do you not look back? It really isn't hard to find.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

Page 3, half way down. I quoted it when I asked you those questions originally. Do you not look back? It really isn't hard to find.

"Same with some people I'm meeting in SL. They speak more openly than they would in rl. I can't put it on the same level either."

There's no notion of exclusion nor incompatibility so I repeat : where in my words did you read that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morgan Rosenstar

  • Advanced Member
  •  
  • Morgan Rosenstar
  • Resident
  • 338
  • 199 posts
On 9/4/2017 at 8:02 PM, Luna Bliss said:

I never said we did not experience the world around us... build, shop, go to parties, visit beautiful landscapes, or participate in any of the myriad of lovely external manifestations within SL. But through all our travels I always felt I was experiencing the virtual world with a real person in the same way I would in RL. I always keep a sense there's a real person behind the avatar.

I can't. I've ridden a horse in rl and it's totally different than in SL. I just can not put these experiences on the same level. It's not the same.

Same with some people I'm meeting in SL. They speak more openly than they would in rl. I can't put it on the same level either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2017 at 1:30 PM, Morgan Rosenstar said:

Btw, the real psychopath is the one who see real friends in a fantasy world (SL).

Plus the ongoing theme of SL friends not being real somehow, as exemplified by the above.

(Apologies for having to spread this across two posts. The copy paste in the one above didn't allow for additional quoting or adding my own words.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Morgan, you said:

Quote

Btw, the real psychopath is the one who see real friends in a fantasy world (SL).

I'm assuming you mean psychologically disturbed instead of 'psychopath'?

In any case, you are hurting these people who choose to open up to you about their life. They feel you are a friend, and your response to their opening up in vulnerability is to <MODERATOR: PROFANITY REMOVED> in their face by calling them names. I think the main issue is, why are you choosing to do this to people? Why don't you find people like yourself who play SL like it's a cartoon game or TV program?

Edited by Dakota Linden
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Community_Participation_Guidelines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/09/2017 at 2:30 PM, Morgan Rosenstar said:
On 03/09/2017 at 2:16 PM, Darrius Gothly said:

Yes, you can work carefully to moderate them, but I don't believe you can turn them off. Unless of course you have psychopathic tendencies and your emotions are never genuine in the first place.

I've already met people who're logging in SL for their works. Login, take pics, logoff and I assure you that you don't need to import your emotions into a tool.

Btw, the real psychopath is the one who see real friends in a fantasy world (SL).

This is the full context.

I'm assuming you mean psychologically disturbed instead of 'psychopath'?

In any case, you are hurting these people who choose to open up to you about their life. They feel you are a friend, and your response to their opening up in vulnerability is to sh*t in their face by calling them names. I think the main issue is, why are you choosing to do this to people? Why don't you find people like yourself who play SL like it's a cartoon game or TV program?

 

So now let me retell it again :

the real psychopath is the one who see real friends in a fantasy world (SL).

Then I believe that I've tried to say that for me, there's a difference between the Avatar (in world) and the real person and that I don't confuse the Avatar for the real person.

Felt hurted that for me, your Avatar is in a fantasy world and therefore not my real friend, if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Morgan Rosenstar said:

This is the full context.

I'm assuming you mean psychologically disturbed instead of 'psychopath'?

In any case, you are hurting these people who choose to open up to you about their life. They feel you are a friend, and your response to their opening up in vulnerability is to sh*t in their face by calling them names. I think the main issue is, why are you choosing to do this to people? Why don't you find people like yourself who play SL like it's a cartoon game or TV program?

 

So now let me retell it again :

the real psychopath is the one who see real friends in a fantasy world (SL).

Then I believe that I've tried to say that for me, there's a difference between the Avatar (in world) and the real person and that I don't confuse the Avatar for the real person.

Felt hurted that for me, your Avatar is in a fantasy world and therefore not my real friend, if you want.

I'm not so sure you, or anyone really, is a good judge of who is and is not a psychopath, but I do suggest that you try to use words where they might be more applicable. You literally just told everyone that has made friends with anyone in sl, a psychopath. This coupled with other posts you have made, which, clearly, attempt to define thing for everyone, yourself included, leads me to believe that it is not the rest of the word which has psychological issues.

Now, my interpretation may be completely  off base, and in fact, I would prefer that it is, but you seem to make a habit of defining things for everyone, including yourself, while leaving little room for others to define things for themselves and share that with you(or, rather, their reasoning for said definitions).

I can, completely, understand that for *some* folks, things are different, they look different, they feel different, they are defined differently...whether or not I agree with them. I can understand that, from *their* point of view, as it applies to *them* and *them alone*...those differences exist. One thing I cannot understand, however, and you, nor anyone else for that matter, is doing a very good job of explaining...is WHY on earth others can't accept the very same thing, others cannot accept that they absolutely *cannot* define everything for everyone...and why it is anyone who thinks differently than them, that is a "psychopath"(which, btw, you're using entirely in the wrong context..though that is another thing I don't understand, and probably never will, people like to use words interchangeably that actually aren't).

 What is with people attempting to offend as many people as possible on these forums lately.  Perhaps it's simply my perception, but I think I've gotten more angry, or at least not happy, lol,  at/with people on these forums in the last two weeks than I have in the last ten years. So, yeah, it probably is just me, lol. Maybe I am reading everything absolutely wrong, even when I ask for clarifications and people simply say the same thing over and over, never really clarifying anything at all, and likely adding even more insults(intended or otherwise) in to them in the process.  Though I can't blame others for my own mis-perceptions, I DO often ask for clarifications and expplain what it is I see in their words..still..some people have gotten to the point of being ridiculous in the "my way is right, yours is wrong, because I say so..and if you don't think, feel, and act like I do, you have mental issues". If that's not the message some folks are trying to convey..they're doing a very terrible job, lol. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My apologies for weighing in late; RL issues have kept me away against my will. I have read through every post though and really don't have much to contribute except for perhaps this one small clarification:

When I used the phrase "psychopathic tendencies" I was not intending to infer that anyone was mentally defective or dangerous. As i understand the science, Psychopathy is a spectrum of affectations that are measured in the level of a subject's emotional responses. In common use "psychopathic tendencies" has come to mean "lesser emotional response than is normal." But again the level of emotional response is a spectrum, not an on/off switch. Even the definition of "normal" is a matter of current interpretation.

I am quite willing to accept that people who fall instantly in love in a virtual environment are as equally normal as those who cannot develop any level of attachment under the same conditions. Where I personally draw the line is when the lack of emotional response allows one to visit harm, derision or emotional distress on others simply because they have no concept of how others might feel.

'Nuff said.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Darrius Gothly said:

My apologies for weighing in late; RL issues have kept me away against my will. I have read through every post though and really don't have much to contribute except for perhaps this one small clarification:

When I used the phrase "psychopathic tendencies" I was not intending to infer that anyone was mentally defective or dangerous. As i understand the science, Psychopathy is a spectrum of affectations that are measured in the level of a subject's emotional responses. In common use "psychopathic tendencies" has come to mean "lesser emotional response than is normal." But again the level of emotional response is a spectrum, not an on/off switch. Even the definition of "normal" is a matter of current interpretation.

I am quite willing to accept that people who fall instantly in love in a virtual environment are as equally normal as those who cannot develop any level of attachment under the same conditions. Where I personally draw the line is when the lack of emotional response allows one to visit harm, derision or emotional distress on others simply because they have no concept of how others might feel.

'Nuff said.

I honestly didn't take your words as meaning anything otherwise. Then again, I also see a massive difference between "tendencies" and actually *being something, or, rather, being called something..if that makes any sense. One can have tendencies, or actions, that fall in line with some type of behavior, or definition while not actually BEING that(make sense?). Tendencies are a temporary(typically) state, while being, isn't. 

I take more issue with someone outright saying people who see people they meet in sl as friends *are* psychopaths, than someone saying that perhaps *some* of those people may have psychopathic tendencies. Though, I'm still not certain psychopath is really the correct term here, I'd much rather use psychological dysfunction or simply psychological issues(with the qualification of "might display", rather than "actually is"). I think it's likely that most people-the world over, depending on current knowledge available, fall into the category of having psychological issues at one point or another in their lives. Though I still don't believe most, if any, of us are really qualified to offer such a diagnosis, we certainly do here and there make mental diagnosis of people based on our current knowledge and experience. Mine tells me some folks replying here are nuttier than a fruitcake..and in some cases, that's what makes them awesome..in other cases, it reminds me of that kid who turns serial killer later in life because he's so narcissistic and disconnected with the world around him he can find no wrong in committing such heinous actions. Though I'd likely never tell most people which category they'd fall into, it would be rude of me, AND(most importantly) my guesstimations are quite likely to be way off base, because I'm no more qualified than anyone else to say these things to people.(ok maybe some folks know they're nuttier than a fruitcake as it's part of their charm and wouldn't be insulted if I said such things to them, but the latter group, would definitely not like being told I thought they were narcissistic potential serial killers disconnected from fellow human beings)  Hence why I don't tell people they're psychopaths ;) 

The same people that separate av from human running av, and can find no link between them-but seem to believe they are completely different entities, also must find disconnect between av account posting on a forum and the person behind the screen..and my own opinion is that those folks aren't qualified to define anything, for anybody, because they're too disconnected from the world around them to actually understand connections to begin with, let alone how anyone else can make connections between two entities. (and my opinion about them is likely way off base, according to many..but I'll still maintain it until someone gives me reason not to, or reason to reconsider it anyway. I'm always open to being wrong about something, no matter how long my posts are :P ). 

 

Edited by Tari Landar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...