Is this a griefer or just a plain idoit?

[fuzzypanda109]

Hello,

Earlier today was relaxing on the Davinci Gardens sim when a guy on a dragon kept shooting fire on me. I observed that he did not do this action to anyone else on the SIM.

IF we were to compare this to real world attacking anyone would be termed as a violent act, so why not on SL?

Maybe there should be the option to not only block someone's voice/text but also their actions?

Kindly look into this individual, I don't know if he will be dumb enough (or troll) again to try this on me using another avatar. I have had previous incident in the past being "caged".

I tried talking to him in messages, asking why he was doing this but he didn't respond.

The avatar's name is now edited due to violation of said terms.

 

I hope this is considered as a serious matter, sometimes what may be fun trolling by sick-minded persons are actually annoying to peaceful residents.

 

Thank you!

Edited September 19, 2017 by fuzzypanda109

[Klytyna]

16 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

That there is no proof for something does not mean there is no evidence for it.

I've spent almost my entire life, listening to theists and thir 'agnostic' whipping dogs, claiming there is 'evidence' for the bearded sky daddies...

Unsurprisingly, they have still failed to actually show any of this so called evidence to anyone, and evidence thats never seen... isn't evidence.
 

[Pamela Galli]

51 minutes ago, Klytyna said:

I've spent almost my entire life, listening to theists and thir 'agnostic' whipping dogs, claiming there is 'evidence' for the bearded sky daddies...

Unsurprisingly, they have still failed to actually show any of this so called evidence to anyone, and evidence thats never seen... isn't evidence.
 

That's why I say some truth is subjective.

[Klytyna]

9 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

That's why I say some truth is subjective.

Ahhh...  So you can't provide any of that 'evidence' you claimed existed, either, what a surprise, when will you theists learn... If you can't present your evidence, it isn't evidence..

Always the "same old same old", you have 'evidence' but, it's inside your head! It happened while you were asleep or drunk or whacked out of your skull on sacred toadstools, or [insert excuse here].

No facts, no evidence, means it's NOT 'truth', 'subjective' is just another excuse to hide behind.
 

[Pamela Galli]

4 hours ago, Klytyna said:

Ahhh...  So you can't provide any of that 'evidence' you claimed existed, either, what a surprise, when will you theists learn... If you can't present your evidence, it isn't evidence..

Always the "same old same old", you have 'evidence' but, it's inside your head! It happened while you were asleep or drunk or whacked out of your skull on sacred toadstools, or [insert excuse here].

No facts, no evidence, means it's NOT 'truth', 'subjective' is just another excuse to hide behind.
 

I am guessing you must be very young Klytina, to be so sure of truth. That's probably not unusual for someone in their early twenties, and uneducated in philosophy and theology -- you confuse truth with facts.

In any case, if ever there was a time not to cast pearls before swine, this would be it. 

Edited October 3, 2017 by Pamela Galli

[Love Zhaoying]

2 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

I am guessing you must be very young Klytina, to be so sure of truth.

Some achieve self-realization at a young age.

[Madelaine McMasters]

2 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

I am guessing you must be very young Klytina, to be so sure of truth. That's probably not unusual for someone in their early twenties, and uneducated in philosophy and theology -- you confuse truth with facts.

In any case, if ever there was a time not to cast pearls before swine, this would be it. 

I'm in my late forties and not terribly certain of anything. But my education in philosophy and theology, such as it is, did less to reveal any truths to me than to show just how much humans prefer answers to questions and see truth (patterns, causality, etc.) where none exists. It is my nature to be drawn to rational natural explanations based on evidence and repelled by irrational supernatural explanations based on feeling.

The trick for me is to avoid confusing the two.

[Pamela Galli]

13 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

ut my education in philosophy and theology, such as it is, did less to reveal any truths to me than to show just how much humans prefer answers to questions and see truth (patterns, causality, etc.) where none exists.

My understanding of the purpose of these disciplines, and many others, is at a basic level to acquaint one with the questions. 

[Nalates Urriah]

On 10/1/2017 at 9:46 PM, Klytyna said:

As I said, your arrogant ivory tower academia institutionalised ignorance is showing...

1

Klytyna: As I said, your arrogant ivory tower academia institutionalized [sic] ignorance is showing...

Now that is just projection…

Klytyna: Here's a fact... Atheism is NOT a religion.

Well, I can make a good argument that it is, based on the definitions of ‘religion’, the philosophy of atheists, and the unprovable concepts espoused. Since you feel ‘logical debate’ isn’t founded in reality, is there any point?

For others, atheism fits the 3^rd and 4^th definitions of the word ‘religion’ in most dictionaries. Whether any belief system is a religion or not is very much a matter of opinion. But, the definition of the word religion is clear enough. So, it is not a difficult debate/decision on what is or isn't a religion. When using ONLY the single narrow definition of a religion being a belief system about a supernatural being does atheism appear to not fit the definition. But, atheism is a belief system about the lack of a supernatural being, which is kind of still about a supernatural being. There are other factors we attribute to religions and atheism fits several of those too. So, it is debatable opinion far more than a fact.

Klytyna: The only people who ever claim that it is are the intellectually dishonest liars

That one is easy to disprove. Read the definitions in dictionaries. Then show me/us where the publishers are trying to suck people into a cult or are being intellectually dishonest. You can’t. Defeated again… aaw.

Klytyna: The various lawsuits that have attempted to have Atheism officially classified as a 'religion' 

I doubt that. Can you show me even one lawsuit that was to have Atheism classed as a religion? I’m betting you can’t.

Klytyna: You are the one divorced from reality.

Now THAT is projection. I use commonly accepted definitions to prove my points, you don’t. I point to and accept several generally accepted world views, you don't. I see many places in this conversation where I am much more grounded in reality than you.

You just deny most of what I say based on your opinions and those vary greatly from accepted norms. Not exactly the exemplary model of a rational person.

While I’m willing to listen to rational arguments, your quotes at the beginning of the previous post prove that, you don’t seem to even understand what I’ve written, nor do you address my points. You deny and attack me, basic Alinsky strategy. (But, then you don’t seem to understand Alinsky’s relevance in this conversation.)

Klytyna: …without any actual experimentation,  as 'the founders of scientific method' clearly showing that you don't actually understand what 'scientific method ' is, …

I am truly amazed you can’t see the development of the Scientific Method through early society’s philosophic explorations or how current day scientists first philosophize a hypothesis and then move to experimenting and testing. Especially for one likely to believe in Darwin style evolution.

As most of the rest of the world can and does attribute ancient philosophers with development of ideas and processes that lead to and make up today’s Scientific Method and you don’t, that is a classic example of mental issues, a departure from reality when claiming it is a fact they didn't.

Klytyna: You ignore the role played by philosophy in the origin of some very nasty socio/political ideas...

How would you know?

Klytyna: You wouldn't know a fact if somebody carved it in base relief letters a foot high... 

I’ve pointed to facts, like definitions in dictionaries, and called them facts, meaning the definitions are there – not that they are correct. So, your statement is false.

Klytyna: Not ONE of your posts has contained any factual information, examples of 'logical thinking' or any degree of 'intellectual honesty'. And now you are resorting to fraudulent accusations of 'Religion'.

Now you are repeating points I have repeatedly demonstrated are false.

On religion, above I mentioned the dictionaries provide broad definitions of what a religion is. Merriam-Webster 3 & 4. They do. That is fact. You could make a rational argument for why atheism shouldn't be classed as a religion. But, you try to present it as fact.

Conclusion

At this point I am convinced you cannot provide rational conversation nor even understand what I am saying. Your statements that I disprove or show are not accepted as established knowledge are ignored. No intellectual rebuttal is offered. You are stuck in denial and personal opinion which you state as fact and personal attacks.

It is pointless talking to you.

PS: I suspect you are compulsive enough you will have to have the last word. So, please... let's see.

Edited October 3, 2017 by Nalates Urriah
PS

[Kristin Linden]

Since this thread has veered vastly off-topic, I'm going to go ahead and close this thread.

To address the original question:

In the future, if you feel that you have encountered a violation of the Second Life Terms of Service in-world please feel free to report it by filing an Abuse Report. When completing the report, please provide as much detail as you can and include a screen shot if possible. If an account name is not available, please file the report as using the account name of "Governor Linden" and include an explanation in the details. 

For more information on Abuse Reports, please read our Guide to Filing an Abuse Report in the Second Life Knowledge Base. 
http://community.secondlife.com/t5/English-Knowledge-Base/Filing-an-abuse-report/ta-p/700065

If you have already filed an in-world Abuse Report, we thank you. For privacy reasons, we're not able to update you as to the result of the report once it's been actioned, but you will receive an email confirmation that the report has been received by our Governance team.

 

[Pamela Galli]

14 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Some achieve self-realization at a young age.

I said it is  "not unusual" to be confident one knows truth at a young age, not that no one achieves self realization at an early age.

[fuzzypanda109]

2 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

You're speaking to other residents here, Fuzzy, we have no superpowers to address this and it's unlikely Linden Lab would consider your situation worth a response.

If setting people on fire were a punishable offense, I'd have been banished from SL long ago...

One of the people in that group of incinerated souls is our own Ms. Loon, who is still very much alive despite my best efforts.

Do remove the name of the dragon as suggested by Klytyna, it is a potential breach of the Community Standards to air personal negative commentary here.

No actual harm came to you from the dragon's fiery breath. Acting as if otherwise will only invite more harassment from people who understand this. Second Life, like the rest of the Internet, is filled with people who push other's buttons for fun. The best way to deal with that is to ignore it. You are (so long as you protect your privacy) physically invulnerable here. Enjoy that superpower!

P.S. Do use the spellchecker when posting anything containing words like "idiot", "stupid", "spelling", or the like. Some invitations are just too hard to decline.

You should be banned if you think that setting people on fire makes you happy. Thanks again for the link to the Community Standards' rules that I wasn't aware about. It has been removed. I don't think in the real world you should ignore violent acts so similarly in the virtual world it's the same. The people who push for such agendas that make the virtual world violent, in forms of intimidation and bullying are the ones that worry me. But you know how it goes, "those who make the rules, win the game".

I don't think that my inability to perfectly use spellcheck undermines the points raised in my posts.

Enjoy the superpower!

Edited September 19, 2017 by fuzzypanda109

[fuzzypanda109]

3 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

 Some people's sensibilities are just too delicate for Second Life.

Yes, i'm a sweetheart, I'm against online bullying and intimidation, love me or hate me, darling

Edited September 19, 2017 by fuzzypanda109

[fuzzypanda109]

9 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:

don't ... do not... keep silent, just mute and derender.

This people want attention.. ignore them and their fun will get even boring for themself soon.

They should be removed and banned based upon lacking to follow initial disciplinary measures. In my personal opinion.

[fuzzypanda109]

2 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

Because it is not a violent act.  It's annoying and juvenile, but it does you absolutely no harm.  You are being "assaulted" by a picture of a flame that does nothing to you at all.  Just walk away and pretend you didn't even notice.  Don't talk to the person, don't waste Linden Lab's time with an Abuse Report, and certainly do not retaliate.  As soon as you do something, you will escalate a childish nuisance into a greater incident and you will find yourself with a disciplinary sanction.

Someone shooting fire on you isn't violent? I think that I explained how it can be understood that way. I'm sure everyone who has been trolled online and told to kill themselves etc also it did nothing to them, oh wait, some people actually did commit suicide after being blackmailed and harrassed by a virtual person....oh look at that! how non-effecting it was

Edited September 19, 2017 by fuzzypanda109

[fuzzypanda109]

Clearly some of you are too technical with Grammer and Spellchecks to understand beyond this.  I do realize and sympathize with real worldly matters such as victims of hurricanes, crimes and such. But it's really the little things that matter and eventually lead to the bigger things. If we make these changes it will have a positive impact.

Notwithstanding that I was a bit hot-headed when I began writing my post, not one person has addressed it sufficiently rather ignore it, use diversionary tactics in comparing a person peacefully on a non-gaming sim, a garden no less, relaxing not involved in any from of RP, not knowing another person and being the only one attacked/targetted. Does it feel like playful comics being acted out to me?

There is a zone between friendly and aggressive, once you cross that there's no going back. How about someone creates some form of weapon to nuke some of you? Is that all fun and games. Rather, you will be looking for the alligator that swallowed his hand after Peter Pan cut it off.

I can only hope (for a miracle) that the magic beans (of good sense) planted will sprout into a stalk and then a giant tree.

Until we meet again fellow residents,
Farewell. *waves*

 

 

Edited September 19, 2017 by fuzzypanda109