Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Anti-peeve: When a thread has a successful conclusion.

Peeve: When it takes too long.

3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

oh, it's gone.   Must have been really bad.

It was about a variety of "roleplay" that's very bad and which we've seen alluded to in the forums before. This OP was a little more specific about why it's his "kink".

Peeve: I missed the last few posts, which are often the most dramatic ones before a thread is locked and/or removed.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Peeve: I missed the last few posts, which are often the most dramatic ones before a thread is locked and/or removed.

I'm not at all surprised the thread was nuked, but I also didn't think it was a particularly nasty ****show. I've seen a lot worse.

I mean, he was roundly criticized by everyone, and not in a friendly way, but no one actually called him a Poo-head.

(I wanted to, but as a Canadian, I'm not allowed.)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

It was about a variety of "roleplay" that's very bad and which we've seen alluded to in the forums before. This OP was a little more specific about why it's his "kink".

Peeve: I missed the last few posts, which are often the most dramatic ones before a thread is locked and/or removed.

The last few posts were not dramatic at all. The OP changed the title of his thread to something innocuous, and was in the process of editing all his posts, removing all the content, when the thread got removed.

Edited by Marigold Devin
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Marigold Devin said:

The last few posts were not dramatic at all. The OP changed the title of his thread to something innocuous, and was in the process of editing all his posts, removing all the content, when the thread got removed.

As per one of my ongoing theories, I believe action was taken only after multiple Reports.

Peeve: Not knowing how to shut down a shytshow.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bottom line: That kind of stuff has no place on the forums. Not only according many of us, but also according the ToS.
It will be harder to weed such stuff out in world, not every single region, parcel or group can be monitored.
Thankfully moderation did what it had to do in the end here on the Forums.

Edited by Sid Nagy
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Peeved: For someone who is supposedly always on or mixed up in drama, I sure do seem to miss most of the drama.

It is good for your blood pressure that you missed those two threads.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

As per one of my ongoing theories, I believe action was taken only after multiple Reports.

Peeve: Not knowing how to shut down a shytshow.

Sounds like the pewp guys was back again.. hehehe

I remember the wedding one.. well not really well, but remember it was the pewp guys though.. He makes his rounds at really random times.. it might have been a few years since his last thread.. hehehehe

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I'm not at all surprised the thread was nuked, but I also didn't think it was a particularly nasty ****show. I've seen a lot worse.

I mean, he was roundly criticized by everyone, and not in a friendly way, but no one actually called him a Poo-head.

(I wanted to, but as a Canadian, I'm not allowed.)

My guess is that once moderation was alerted, they were looking for any excuse to delete that thread because the subject doesn't look good for SL. If the problem had only been snarkiness or going off topic, they would've locked the thread, possibly moved it to the Adult section, but not deleted it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

My guess is that once moderation was alerted, they were looking for any excuse to delete that thread because the subject doesn't look good for SL. If the problem had only been snarkiness or going off topic, they would've locked the thread, possibly moved it to the Adult section, but not deleted it.

That's probably a pretty good analysis.

My favourite moment was the complacent admission, as though this were really unproblematic, that, yeah, sometimes this involves racism.

Not a great advertisement for the place.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Not a great advertisement for the place.

Neither is some of what's lingering around in the Roleplay and Lifestyles forums.

I do tend to get more peeved, though, about running into these things in-world. SL is somewhat detached from the social media hellscape (somewhat), so it's always a bit more jarring to see it there whereas, ya know, finding it here on a forum is much like finding it over on Reddit (though funny enough, I actually never found it over on Reddit - I choose my subreddits very carefully).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Peeve: Even the so-called self-help/support groups discriminate against those who are deaf or have hearing loss. 

Haha...well ordinarily I might agree with you about disliking voice (though not due to hearing loss), but... I ate some wheat and suffered eye inflammation so enjoyed kicking back with eyes closed and just listening this week. We do have some in SL with pretty severe vision problems, as well as dyslexia, and so prefer voice over reading text.  Not easy to determine what is discrimination.

Peeve: We can't please everyone.

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peeve: People who do not take the deaf and those with hearing loss seriously when the deaf and hard of hearing are the ones being ostracized for the convenience of others. If they can accommodate those who are text impaired, they can accommodate those who are hearing impaired.

There are no excuses for deliberately excluding the hearing impaired.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Peeve: People who do not take the deaf and those with hearing loss seriously when the deaf and hard of hearing are the ones being ostracized for the convenience of others. If they can accommodate those who are text impaired, they can accommodate those who are hearing impaired.

There are no excuses for deliberately excluding the hearing impaired.

It's not a deliberate excluding, but rather a resource problem. In one group the leader had a device that translated her voice to text as she spoke in voice (I think the name of it is 'speak easy'), so when she's leading the group we do both see and hear her.  It's a bit confusing to use though and sort of detracts from her leadership.

But I have not heard of a device that will also automatically put into text what every other person in the group says in voice. People can, however, volunteer to type out the voice comments of others, as has happened. But it never was because some had difficulty hearing, so far, but rather because us oldbies tend not to like voice because we like how SL was from the beginning when we had no voice capability.

I do wish all groups could accommodate everyone, but sometimes that puts a strain on others in the group.

I imagine if there was a regular member in a group who had hearing loss that an effort would be made for the leader to use speak-easy and others might volunteer to type the voice comments of others.  I would not volunteer however as I couldn't keep track of my own thoughts then and what I need to say.

In my Heart Menders group I use text only, but that likely disadvantages those who are dyslexic and/or have vision problems. However, I don't feel I could guide as effectively in voice, and so I have to make a choice.

Peeve: I wish Silent did not feel so left out.

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Peeve: People who do not take the deaf and those with hearing loss seriously when the deaf and hard of hearing are the ones being ostracized for the convenience of others. If they can accommodate those who are text impaired, they can accommodate those who are hearing impaired.

There are no excuses for deliberately excluding the hearing impaired.

In the mental health support group meetings I've attended the group leader asks everyone to send them an IM at the start of the meeting with any trigger subjects they may have. This allows members to put a trigger warning at beginning of their text (or in voice) when we come to their turn. People are also free to either text, speak in voice, or text "Pass" if they don't feel like sharing. If someone needs to have either text or voice, they can tell the group leader this at the same time as when people tell the leader their triggers. Then the group leader would say, generally in text, "One of our members has requested text only" (or voice) at the same time that they ask for trigger warnings.

We've had group leaders with arthritis, who preferred to use voice, but usually the group leader uses voice and text, while each member uses either text or voice, depending on their preference. I find using voice is faster, but I use text if I have housemates pressent or if I'm in public library. If I plan to use text, I start typing up what I want to say when the person before me is spreaking/texting, which means I'm not paying much attention to their share. Then I hit Send and print a block of text all at once.

I find there is always time to catch up on what others have texted, while someone later is busy typing their text.

Edited by Persephone Emerald
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

In the mental health support group meetings I've attended the group leader asks everyone to send them an IM at the start of the meeting with any trigger subjects they may have. This allows members to put a trigger warning at beginning of their text (or in voice) when we come to their turn. People are also free to either text, speak in voice, or text "Pass" if they don't feel like sharing. If someone needs to have either text or voice, they can tell the group leader this at the same time as when people tell the leader their triggers. Then the group leader would say, generally in text, "One of our members has requested text only" (or voice) at the same time that they ask for trigger warnings.

We've had group leaders with arthritis, who preferred to use voice, but usually the group leader uses voice and text, while each member uses either text or voice, depending on their preference. I find using voice is faster, but I use text if I have housemates pressent or if I'm in public library. If I plan to use text, I start typing up what I want to say when the person before me is spreaking/texting, which means I'm not paying much attention to their share. Then I hit Send and print a block of text all at once.

I find there is always time to catch up on what others have texted, while someone later is busy typing their text.

That's great and it works well on an individual level but that isn't the problem.

If the main speaker is voice only (no "follow up" text) then those with hearing loss/deafness aren't going to hear everything said and likely miss something vital. Then they have to waste their time trying to find a transcript, putting them at a distinct disadvantage of not being able to keep up with the discussion and participate in it. If we can't keep up and can't participate there is no point in being there because we aren't getting the help we need.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...