Madeline Blackbart

Orca Flotta wrote: would work the same we do now. How? Our bosses would've never agreed to your contract if not by force thru strikes and laws. Oh wait, maybe in your case it's different: you're not by any chance USAmerican, are you? Well then, sorry, you don't qualify for this thread. Actually in the USA we would be working far longer and harder had unions not formed. Workers in the USA (Most notable Irish american immigrants) began forming unions because they were poorly paid, poorly treated, and working difficult back breaking jobs. I don't know where you got this assumption that employeers are not unfair when it comes to pay in the USA? As far as the general topic on the helpfulness of Unions Americans have as good an insite as pepole fromt he UK. Unions in the USA have some of the same faults it seems as well. They go to far but IMO are still nessicary.

Dresden Ceriano wrote: I neither fear nor hate child avatars. In fact, I much prefer them to the real thing, simply because I can mute them without needing to have duct tape handy. ...Dres If only kudos were allowed here This is hilarious and fairly true.. @ OP Personally nearly every child avie I've met is nuts. I think I met maybe one or two that talked like a real child and weren't a pain. I even had one IM me out of the blue to call me a erm..women of low morals so to speak. I mean...HONESTLY!? Also there's the high number of them who are dramatic beyond belief...and immature themselves. I mean there are some who roleplay it right mind you. Being a brat is fine if it's in the context of your rp with WILLING participants. I'm just not a fan of being forced to put up with it. I'm actually more then willing to participate in a good random RP and act like you really are a child. Not everyone is though...and if I say no thanks you should either except and act like an adult towards me or move along. But yeah My experiences with child avies...by and far not amazing...with some exceptions of course. I won't off the bat assume your bad as a child avie even despite this...but PLEASE don't give me a reason

Griffin Ceawlin wrote: Nielso wrote: As said before, it might be a cultural thing though. America is the land of possibilities. Everything is allowed, everyone is free. You can own guns, you can play GTA V and torture people to death etc. I must have missed where torture, even to death, was allowed. Me to. I was born here in NJ. Maybe NJ is just to liberal for the torture thing? But I live in PA now and I'm pretty sure torture still isn't allow here either. We do all own guns though. Hunting is rather popular. Though not hunting people....last I checked.

Still to expensive for my blood. lolz It's a over glorified air freshiner IMO no matter how well it works. Plus I sitll find it suspect when I comany feel the need to market essentially hte same product over and over under diffrent names.

I actually did some research on this. Since after I saw it on youtube ( to many damn commercials there) I was suspicious. Their sight was weird as when you went to it it immediatly redirects you from the main sight to a sub site...why? Seems like the changed it since then to be on the main site. Geuss they got rid of the old site then. If you google long enough you can (could?) find old versions of the site...with a CRAP TON of the same product marketed under various diffrent names. All of which are still available on amazon. They used to hide the main companies name on that sight to when I saw it last. Seems they changed that though... Anyways it is a funny commercial. The product is to expensive for my tastes though and I have my doubts on it not using chemicals like they claim. lol

I love how pies arguements lend nothing to the actual conversation at hand. Insulting people's intelligence doesn't actually prove your point. It only proves that you have no real defience of your ideas so you switched to name calling like a child. Troll harder pie.

steph Arnott wrote: So your a bully in RL too? Pretty much that's what he's saying.

Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Sorry, no Lindens here. This is a resident to resident forum. It's a mystery to us why LL has not changed this. It isn't like they haven't been asked to do this. Unfortunately it is now against the new TOS to offer suggestions for improvements or new features and the new Jira system no longer accommodates this. I don't think it is against TOS to suggest as far as I've seen. Only to go ahead and impliment them before defualt viewer does.

You can also see if it's high poly (which along with scripts cause more lag I think then textures...not that textures aren't an issue) by turning on wireframe mod. If you turn it on and it looks really dense...it's high poly. It's a misconception that mesh = more effecient...not always. It can be...but only if modelled right. I think the best way to see if it is is to view the build first. If the preview frops your FPS then owning it won't change things. lolz

Pie Serendipity wrote: Madeline Blackbart wrote: I don't have to be afraid because I don't treat people like crap for no reason. You on the other hand do. One day that may get you into trouble. Not my problem though. Have fun with you little attitude problem. And I always have excellent reasons for the way I treat people. And not once has my attitude got me into trouble in rl, maybe because I am bigger and nastier in rl than the delicacy of my words here might suggest. Not really you don't. Unless randomly spellchecking people and calling them morons unprovoked counts as havign a reason. Not sure in what world that is though... And I certianly hope that's true for your sake. Someday though there may be some one bigger and badder as often happens. Won't be me because even if I was big and bad I wouldn't care enough to do so but someone else? Who knows. Your words have never been "delicate". There's a big diffrence between overly wordy and pretencious and delicate. You are more like a bull in a china shop in that respect. You can't use flowery language to make being a jerk more delicate..sorry to break it to you. You do seem to follow me from thread to thread...even on ones I haven't spoken to you in to spell check me. It's almost flattering that your that obsessed with "proving" that I'm stupid. It's almost as if you think the opposite is true. I'm sure you'll deny it and call me stupid again...but that will only further my point really.

Here i've solved the mystery for you guys. Urban dictionary Your welcome.

Pie Serendipity wrote: Madeline Blackbart wrote: IRL you'd be afraid to try and start the **bleep** you start here. I know I would be. I'm not. I do. You should be. I don't have to be afraid because I don't treat people like crap for no reason. You on the other hand do. One day that may get you into trouble. Not my problem though. Have fun with you little attitude problem.

Using local textures on a tattoo is the same as for mesh. In edit click ont he texture space you want (head,body,etc.) this will open the dialog box and just do the same thing you did to get local textures for mesh. Go to either local for v3 viewers or computer for v1.

Griffin Ceawlin wrote: Madeline Blackbart wrote: wish linden labs would give a better introduction to new players. Yeah, me, too. Although, I thought I read somewhere recently that they redid the welcome area(s)? They also refer to a "new & improved welcome experience" in the video here. I thinkthe idea is there going to not that they have. At least that's the implication I got.

Well you can download the avatar model and attach parts to it...but that's not going to help you in game. lolz

Griffin Ceawlin wrote: Well, for starters, you appear to be wearing a box. http://community.secondlife.com/t5/English-Knowledge-Base/Opening-boxes/ta-p/700185 Yup it helps when you unpack things....and that's not immediatly obvious to new players. wish linden labs would give a better introduction to new players.

Yup it's me. I made you insult me when I had said nothing insulting to you. It was me that made you chase off that member of the forum who IMed me about your attitude. Yup...it's me that's the problem...I'm such a **bleep**. EDIT: Seeing at how you treat people here I'm doubting how "polite" your response was. But then maybe it was because IRL you'd be afraid to try and start the **bleep** you start here. I know I would be.

nce again you've proven What a jerk you are and how much you feel you are above everyone else. I can't imagine that I'm the only one on this forum who dislikes your attitude problem. In fact I know you've actually chased people away who were only try to be helpful to other forum members with your little attitude problem. I don't think you get it do you? People dislike you. People hate your "I'm better then you" attitude. Frankly I don't see how you are able to garner any other friends beyond crow (who may be your alt for all I know). But then I geuss some people like to be tuanted and insulted. Who am I to judge. Basically what I'm saying is F*&^k off.

Sommerland Starostin wrote: Coby Foden wrote: Varquell Blaisdale wrote: ... if im going to spend L$1,500 on a skin, i would atleast expect others to see the detail and how my avatar looks ... ... therefore, SL should have a light setting that is default and looks good when you download the game. You cannot expect anything how others might see you. Many turn off attached light rendering in their viewers. So they do not see you as you expect them to see you. Your facelight was wasted effort - if you expected that everybody will see you as you yourself do. SL has lots of different Windlight settings. Some are especially made so that skins look excellent. Then again if you adjust your Windlight setting to something where the skin looks perfect, others might have totally different Windlight setting on which your skin may not look so good. So much for the "shared same experience". It does not exist in SL because everybody can tweak their personal settings (i.e. how they see the world) at will. :smileywink: Well then might as well say dressing nice or having a nice avi is many times a wasted effort due to lag lol. A lot of time all I see are grey figures. I think we really do dress to please ourselves, otherwise nobody in my sphere would have big butz or butt cracks hehe.. A shared personal experience seems to be how others think you should present yourself, just sayin. I can agree with this. Though we partly dress for others. I think despite the slow loading it's always a delight to see someone with a unique or interesting avatar. I think deep down when we dress our avatars were all hoping to be that unique or interesting avatar that people like to see.

I'm surprised the peadophilia hasn't gotten them moving. They used to be big on that. Maybe because the media relating that to SL has died down they don't care anymore? Good luck. Sounds aweful I hope that doesn't take forever to get rid of.

AveryGriffin wrote: I think you're confusing form vs function. Let's take a simple chair, for example! This chair was created more for comfort than anything and has a simple yet pleasing shape. This chair is functional for its created purpose. However, it was still designed by someone, and design is an art. This chair, while still called such a thing, had moved on from its original purpose and is now more of a sculpture. This chair has turned into purely form design. You can't really sit on it. This was also designed, and is also art. Then we have this bench, which still very easily performs its intended purpose (you can sit on it), however it has still been elevated to something more of an art form than a simple bench design. It is both a functioning piece of furniture and also a sculpture. It is art. Your teapot, while unfortunate, was not designed as something with no function in mind. It may have been poorly designed, and therefore both useless and annoying, but it was still made with the idea that you can use it. A teapot made out of wicker, for instance, would be form and not functional design. However, both are still art. And who do you think makes the sketches for the good, yet ugly, cars? Just because they aren't up to current standards aesthetic wise (even tho all cars look the same nowadays) doesn't mean it was just poofed into existence. There was still design and thought put into it. And thus, the car is still a work of art. Very true also there is architecture. Which when done right is both functional and artistically beautiful. I think he's failing to see that art can exist for both the purposes of pure beauty (which has it's own value though perhaps not immediatly apparent) and function. Ergo art can (but is not always) functional. EDIT: as having pics repeated is redundent. Edit also art has done much to help with modern convience. There would certianly be no video games, television, movies, easily viewable webpages, BOOKS or MUSIC without art. Second life as a community is at least partially built upon artists. GUI which is functional does not design itself. It is an art to create good usuable webpages and GUI while still having it easthetically pleasing. Do artist sometimes fail at functionality when they meant for it? Of course. So do engineers fail. The only reason failed art makes it through is it still retains a value as an art peice to be looked at. I think your forgetting art encompasses a lot of things. Music isn't functional. Books that arn't instructional aren't functional. Does that mean they do not deserve to exist? Did you not profess to be an avid reader? Yet you look down on art of which writing is a part of?

Pie Serendipity wrote: Artists design stuff so that it looks good to them; engineers design stuff so it's functional. Very rarely is the former usable. I'd prefer a car that starts and stops when I ask it to than one that looks good, rolls when confronted by a deer in its tracks, and rusts to bits in one winter, which is what happened when supposedly good engineering companies allowed artists a say in developing a car. The "art" object I hated most in my childhood home was a supposedly wonderful tea set. The bloody teapot dribbled hot liquid all over the table, the floor and bare flesh. An artist must have designed it. As for doors that you have to push to open which have handles, because the designer artist likes handles . . . And don't get me started on unintuitive user interfaces emanating from Cupertino that think the whole world is illiterate! To say nothing of the Microsoft Start button which is actually how you stop the machine. ETA: I had a fight with the guy that curated The Design Museum in London because he put a 3B1 (The Olivetti/AT&T Unix PC) on display to exemplify information technology design - Olivetti didn't actually sell a single ONE of these in the UK, because, although they looked good in profile, they offered absolutely nothing that the customer wanted. There is such a thing as functional art. Part of good design includes functionality. A nicely designed webpage is no good is not functional. But it is still art. There is art that is meant to be looked at and is not functional. It still enhances the lives of the viewer in some way. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_and_Emotion (though wikipedia is not always the best source it is a starting point for research). There's a reason for graphic design, which is a form of art. It is because people buy things baised on suggestion. People buy things because they look nice. Weither you like it or not that makes art valuable in some way. People trust a nicely designed webpage over a shoddy looking one because it looks professional. Part of lookin professional has to do with ART. There's something to be said for that. Basically graphic design= art. Graphic design is functional ergo art is functional.

Perrie Juran wrote: Madeline Blackbart wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: Monica Querrien wrote: In elementary school, I learned it in second grade, and then after that we were required to write in cursive instead of print. I don't think it takes much time to learn at all. How do people sign documents without writing in cursive? Probably with an X - the way people who were illiterate did/do. My younger son has an autistic disorder, and he's never learned to write cursive. He's able to type though. He's far from being illiterate! He was reading at a high school level by 4th grade grade, scoring 99% on verbal national tests, and in gifted classes. This was a child who was never seen without a book in his hand! Currently a student at Purdue university. The ignorant commentary in this thread is quite astounding. I'm not suggesting anyone who cannot read cursive is illiterate nor did I suggest anyone with ANY type of disability is illiterate, especially considering that part of my professional background is as an advocate for those disabled in any way. What I *was* stating is that it has been customary for people who cannot write (cursive or otherwise) sign any documents with an X - addressing the population that is not learning disabled in any way. Someone who cannot not read nor write is considered illiterate which is simply a definition, not a denigration. I was also addressing the specific point asked - how would someone who cannot write in cursive sign a check. Maddy has given one example. I gave one from my own frame of reference. Using "ignorant" as a blanket term is well ignorant. Edit: Typo You may have not intended it but to the reader that is the way the comment comes off. I'm just saying. It didn't come off that way to me but regardless it is nice that she clarified. Very true.

I've seen your stuff on kitely's MP. It looks lovely. I hope you get this worked out as I'm sure it'll sell well here.

Czari Zenovka wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: Monica Querrien wrote: In elementary school, I learned it in second grade, and then after that we were required to write in cursive instead of print. I don't think it takes much time to learn at all. How do people sign documents without writing in cursive? Probably with an X - the way people who were illiterate did/do. My younger son has an autistic disorder, and he's never learned to write cursive. He's able to type though. He's far from being illiterate! He was reading at a high school level by 4th grade grade, scoring 99% on verbal national tests, and in gifted classes. This was a child who was never seen without a book in his hand! Currently a student at Purdue university. The ignorant commentary in this thread is quite astounding. I'm not suggesting anyone who cannot read cursive is illiterate nor did I suggest anyone with ANY type of disability is illiterate, especially considering that part of my professional background is as an advocate for those disabled in any way. What I *was* stating is that it has been customary for people who cannot write (cursive or otherwise) sign any documents with an X - addressing the population that is not learning disabled in any way. Someone who cannot not read nor write is considered illiterate which is simply a definition, not a denigration. I was also addressing the specific point asked - how would someone who cannot write in cursive sign a check. Maddy has given one example. I gave one from my own frame of reference. Using "ignorant" as a blanket term is well ignorant. Edit: Typo You may have not intended it but to the reader that is the way the comment comes off. I'm just saying.