Aethelwine

If the seller doesn't help or is involved in some sort of fraudulent activity you can report them through the flag item option on the marketplace page for the item. You can report for: item not as advertised, should be listed as moderate\adult, spam or disallowed listing practices, non-item listing, infringes my Intellectual Property rights. "not as advertised, or non-item listing" might be appropriate if you have been defrauded. I would raise a ticket too, just incase they can return your money for being defrauded if they decide to seize the sellers account, but I wouldn't bank on receiving anything.

Sexual ageplay is then prohibited using Linden labs own very narrow and specific definition. But using the common english definition, Linden labs doesn't prohibit sexual ageplay where for example a couple are sexually roleplaying an older woman with a toy boy partner in his twenties or thirties.

The TOS says: (viii) Post, display or transmit any material, object or text that encourages, represents, or facilitates sexual "age play," i.e., using child-like avatars in a sexualized manner. Note: "i.e.," - an abbreviation of id est (“it is”). That is; in other words; that is to say. It is almost like the TOS is providing a specific definition of "age play", for the purposes of the TOS and Linden Lab official speak. Age Play in common english refers to a much wider group of legal activities, including Granny sex, middle aged men in diapers and non sexual roleplaying of different ages to yourself. The clarification on age play the TOS refers you to starts off: "This article addresses questions regarding Linden Lab's policy regarding sexual "ageplay" (depictions of, or engagement in, sexualized conduct with avatars that resemble children). This practice is disallowed by the Community Standards due to complaints from Residents and international laws, so it's important to understand the definitions." and concludes: "If you are in doubt as to whether an activity may be interpreted as ageplay, we request you err on the side of caution and desist." By my reading of that in particular the use of the words "so it's important to understand the definitions" I think it is clear Linden Labs are legally defining "Age play" to specifically mean the small subset of general understandings of the term just with that involving sexual encounters with minors. Maybe there is some need for this kind of definition in legal documents, but it doesn't help with language or communicating what is being meant when they have decided to use the compound word in a much more limited way than anyone else does. (They switch between "ageplay" and "age play" too - maybe there is some additional meaning in that complexity.. or maybe not. I have assumed not)

KarenMichelle Lane wrote: I'm a huge fan of the HUDDLES EZ Animator Deluxe. https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/HUDDLES-EZ-Animator-Deluxe-version-130/97351? Henmations webpage and it's supporting database have been MIA for years now. I wish people would read the reviews before buying. The unchallenged [or corrected issues responses] negatives keep on piling up. It is more than 50 scripts though isn't it? Or did I just get carried away with mine adding dancer capacity to it?

I know a friend loved the zooby cat avatar, but I haven't seen them online for about a year. A quick search on MP, comes up with these which get reviews from people who have tried the zooby cat avatar and say these are a lot better. I can't give you anything from personal experience, I haven't tried any animal avatars.

helps if you spell Maitreya right ofc! (texting on my phone at the moment)

I just search for Lara and Maitrya and sort by date to go through the new releases.

I didn't mention appliers so a bit confused by your response. To be fair my post was a bit jumbled because I was in a rush when I posted it back. Appliers are good for undies or vest tops ( when you can get your pants or skirt to fit close around its top), leggings maybe on the legs, but anything more heavyweight or loose like jeans or slacks really needs to be mesh clothing rather than an applier to look good.

Pussycat Catnap wrote: I'm looking for more fitted mesh clothing designed specifically to fit the Belleza mesh body. So far I've found 4 places. Blueberry, Just Because, Absolut Vendetta, and DE Designs. Any more would be greatly appreciated. Looking to expand what I can wear that takes advantage of having a mesh body rather than just works acceptably on it. I don't have the Belleza body, but I have several of the others. I excitedly got the demos from absolut vendetta a few days ago when they released a few things rigged for different mesh bodies. And I really wanted to like their pants, but on the different mesh avatars i tried them on I still needed to use the alpha hud to hide alot of poke through from my legs. In the end I went back to wearing the standard sized mesh jeans from L&B as they looked and fitted better. The Blueberry fitted mesh pants are rigged very weirdly with the tight fitted ones are rigged for a zero foot size which is just wrong for fitted mesh bodies and leaves a horrible foot join and the Lara jeans had weird shelf ass problem too. A shame because I like both shops earlier fitted mesh and have working on mesh bodies so long as on the vendetta tops I keep boob size below 46 if memory serves right. I hope these are teething problems they will correct, as the fitted mesh skirt, pants and tops for the mesh project body really add a lot for that avatar and I am hoping the Lara dress is the start of a line of fitted mesh clothes for the maitreya body.

As to how secondlife has affected me. Well it is a big question and I am not really sure how to go about answering that, some answers are really a little too personal to want to share publically in a forum like this, but my life is definitely richer in many ways. Not least a more global and less insular perspective you get from having friends in all the major continents of the world, with very different upbringings, lifestyles and environments. Also the knowledge from those experiences that we have so much in common, focussing on differences to distinguish ourselves is part of human nature... but we shouldn't lose focus on just how much we also have in common.

Phil Deakins wrote: I'm happy to threadjack this one You may be right, Perrie, but it would still be inexcusable if they did because they thought that way. But I very much doubt that that was their thinking. I fully believe that they went to FB first because that's what they do at LL - ignore the user community and look elsewhere. Considering the article on the secondlife facebook page got 73 comments, and here the volume of contributors is much lower, it would seem they know very well how to best target their community.

RedStaar wrote: Hi, I just purchased Starr's Pin up complete avatar today 21.1.15, which I'm very happy about BUT there is a big problem. When I remove the pin up dress bottom, a patch of the bottom remains over the crotch area. I've tried everything to get rid of this but I cannot remove it, making the avatar unusable. Can you please help ASAP. Many thanks, RedStaar. I am not sure the avatar is mesh is it? I suspect what you are seeing is a dress prim that extends the texture on the body a little to make it look more like a dress. You will need to look for that attachment and remove it. Have you contacted the creator and got the problem fixed?, I note your review of it.

Phil, I do consider myself broadly Christian, but our views are so divergent it is for the best not to go further with it.

There were a few options discussed 3 months ago on this thread. Since then the mesh project and Kauna have both released male mesh avatars that have both generated quite a lot of interest.

Phil Deakins wrote: Matthew 6:14,15, "For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.," That does not negate the verse I quoted (1 John 1:9), and neither does the verse I quoted negate that. They work perfectly together. Put them together and we see that Christians forgive those who sin against them and repent of it. I.e. since God forgives those who confess their sins, so should Christians. It is a direct negation. You say there is a qualifier to the requirement to forgive, and yet there in Mark 6:14, the Lord's Prayer itself.. there is no qualifier. The requirement is to forgive those who sin against you, not only those who have sinned against you and repented. Relooking at your John passage I can see that through confession of sins, we are forgiven... therefore if we are unable to forgive something and confess that, then with faith we will be forgiven. But I am not clear that is what you were saying? If so then I misunderstood.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: While I think we should acknowledge other's opinions, I don't think we should feel obliged to respect them. Perhaps you meant that we should respect people's right to hold opinions different from our own, even if those opinions can be proven to be ignorant, hateful or crazy. I agree that promoting the common good should be the responsibility of everyone in equal measure, but that's not reality, nor is it the belief of a great many people. You're arguing from a position not shared by everybody on the planet, though probably not far from mine. I'd have less issue with your statements if you said "should" rather than "can". If I'm this much of a pain in the ass when I'm generally agreeing with you, imagine what I'd be like if I thought you were wrong. ;-). Respect is one of those double meaning words, I used it in the sense of due regard rather than the deep admiration meaning. I only ever use it to mean deep admiration if I put something like 'deep' or a 'lot of' before it. Your point about power and the distribution of wealth is a good point and broadens things out a bit. At the point I was saying everyone holds equal responsibility I wasn't intending to be contentious merely restating the basic tenet of a democracy. And no you aren't a pain in the ass. Not at the moment anyway :-)

Madelaine McMasters wrote: I agree about drawing lines between satire and hate speech, but it'll be difficult to draw lines based on whether a criticism is constructive. Who decides what's constructive? I think it's both acceptible and desireable to criticize, even to the point of offense, destructive belief systems. But again, who decides which belief systems are destructive, who decides what's offensive? Many people would be quite glad I'm not making those decisions. This will continue to be a mess for some time to come. Morality and promoting the common good is the responsibility of everyone in equal measure. We may not agree what is or is not moral, therein lies the debate and argument. Our collective view on the subject should be reflected by the laws our elected politician's decide upon. In France Robert Faurisson has had convictions, in Germany and Canada Ernst Zundel. More recently we see the line being drawn with respect to extermist muslim preachers who are linked with terrorism and hate speech. Whilst there are important debates to be had around Freedom of Speech, it is not unlimited and we have and do make rightful convictions limiting it for the good of society. Where moral decisions are difficult, it does not mean we should shy away from them. Respect other opinions, be open to new ideas, honest with ourselves, guard against hate, victimisation and deflection through blaming others, look to promote respect and universal love, to come to our own moral decisions about where those lines should be drawn. Offensiveness is something we can all decide upon.... sometimes points are made better by being offensive. Offensiveness in and of itself is not the deciding factor. The deciding factors are the sum of moral considerations including the impact of the action. These are not easy choices to rationalise, but ones we as moral beings have to decide upon to live in a healthy society.

Phil Deakins wrote: valerie Inshan wrote: As a christian, I wish i could forgive. But my guts cannot. As a Christian, there is no need to forgive. God forgives those who ask for it. "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins" (1 John 1:9). Those who don't admit their sins don't have God's forgiveness for them, so there is no need for Christians to offer it freely to those who don't admit it, or want it. The hard part would be forgiving someone who does us harm, and then is truly sorry for what they did, but that's the time when a Christian needs to forgive. One more thing. An evil act, like the terrorism in Paris, is never made alright, or even overlooked, by forgiveness. It always remains an evil act. It's the person who receives forgiveness, not the act, and, even then, the forgiven person still has to pay the price in this world for the act. E.g. a person commits a murder, and then is truly and genuinely sorry that s/he did it. The person can receive forgiveness because of the genuine repentance, even from the victim's family, but s/he must still serve the time in jail in this world for the act of murder. I am not sure what version of Christianity you follow but, I always understood forgiveness to be essential for Christians. Mark 11:25 (NIV)* “But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.” or Matthew 6:14,15, "For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.," I agree with your second point and the essential thrust of what you are saying. Forgiveness does not mean forgetting, or allowing passively without consequence. Forgiveness is not easy, but is it really so hard to take the initial step of feeling sorrow and pity for the terrorists states of mind and circumstances such that they are driven by hate to act out such attrocities.

Tari Landar wrote: I think the latest cover is distasteful, at least, and horrible of them, at most. Does it deserve further physical and violent attacks? Absolutely not. Is it deserving of verbal attacks....well, it's probably a good thing I don't get to decide that. I assume we are talking about the Je Suis Charlie cover? If so then I disagree 100%. Some other cartoons I have seen go beyond what I would say was sensible, or necessary to make the satirical point they were making. But the cover in question: A) leaves it to the viewer to interpret who the Arab is portrayed as. B) is a message of respect for Islam. The Arab has a tear in his eye and is standing in solidarity against terrorism. The message is not about hate. In the context of what happened the paper had to declare defiance against the aims of the terrorists or the lives lost would have been in vain. That would be a far geater scandal than chosing the cover they did with a message of both defiance and respect. There is a line to be drawn, but you cannot prevent satirical criticisms of religion and belief without forsaking the enlightenment traditions that are an essential element to so much of our lives, not least modernity. Furthermore, if one were to prevent criticsm of religious belief it would mean the suppression of atheist belief. But lines should be drawn and the principles on which it should be drawn are basically whether the satirical message is hateful (eg. racist), not merely because it causes offence. I say lines because there is a sliding scale from satire which is constructive that makes articulate important points and should be approved of to satire you dissapprove of, that which publishers should consider carefully before publishing and at the extreme end (like blood libels, malicious slander, recruitment to terrorism) with criminal convictions and incarceration.

Shock's Janis skin is the only one that comes up for me searching Marketplace for that option. Not sure if it is supported with the Omega applier. You may want to check with Ilary to see if it is in the Omega Hud or if they can add it for you. I have never looked for body freckles before.

Still 2 hours left. It has been an amazing collection of singing talent across 9 hours. Great fun crowd. I have loved every minute.

Skins supporting the Omega Hud will apply to the Maitreya Lara body, via the Omega Hud as a relay, but not sure if that will include feet or hands. There are plenty of skins that will apply directly to the Matireya Body already... League, Sinful Curves, ^^Swallow^^, Ohh-la-licious, Isodel, Lumae, Lookatme, Deluxe Body Factory, .: Soul:. etc etc... Just search for "Maitreya Lara" in the Avatar Components section of Marketplace. Since there is plenty of choice, I would stick with an applier specifically for the maitreya body for a skin. I tried a few and the League one I am happiest with. The Omega relay is great for clothes layers, the ones I have bought apply perfectly.

I don't really see how they would be able to. Perhaps a scripter would be able to develop an interface, but I doubt it. You could I suppose save bodies along with outfits in the rlv folder and could swap your clothed outfit for a naked one, or differently dressed one that way. But why not just roleplay using words..and if he says as part of roleplay he wants you to take off your rabbit slippers or put them on, or whatever... then just make the change yourself.

An estate ban list maxes out at 300 or 500, so you must be in a very select group to be banned on the Chung sims.

Linking up to the Eden or Estate continents by agreements made with relevant landowners might be more achievable and desireable.