161488303349

Parhelion Palou wrote: I waited to post hoping someone with a better memory would do so ... Groups were created as a land management tool. They weren't designed as a social tool, though that's what they're mostly used for now ... I'd like to see LL create a new group system for social groups but keep the current group system (enhanced) for land/business purposes. Groups within groups or allowing multiple groups to have parcel-handling abilities would make my SL work easier. you pretty much right about the original purpose of groups. they were also designed to assist with collaborative building. is why the default will set a new prim to the group you wearing when you rez it off the build menu + according to Nalates blog (who is pretty reliable about these kinds of things) has been a recent hire Baker Linden? who has been doing some work on groups. mostly to do with reducing lag for large group memberships. hope it goes well and Baker? is put onto some of the other things with groups that could make them better

Catwyn wrote: TO ask the silly question.... What's a "hunt"? is not silly to ask (: is like a treasure hunt. shopkeepers get together and hide little gifts in their shops and give you a clue to where to find it. is quite fun the well made hunts can google to find the blogs of the hunt organisers. can find them in the inworld search as well

JeanneAnne wrote: yeah .. i do expect ppl to act rationally .. for the most part .. i think that irrational behavior stems from oppression .. oppressed ppl behave irrationally outuv resentment or as a way of getting back @ the oppressor .. in a community that isnt oppressive i dont expect much irrationality .. some perhaps .. due to mental or emotional illness .. but not nearly as much as is seen as is the difference between the group making decisions by consensus or by majority vote & an autocrat doing so is that the group exercises compassion towards all .. dissenters included .. the autocrat or autocratic corporation has no compassion .. only profit matters not people .. when the group behaves compassionately dissenters & their opinions are accomodated as much as they possibly can be .. compromise may be reached that all can agree on & if not .. @ least the dissenters got the chance to have their opinions heard & taken into consideration .. LL currently neither listens to SL residents or takes anything into consideration besides maximizing profits .. corporatism is so pathological that any attempt to make decisions according to resident consensus is an improvement Jeanne i think you pretty much describing democracy was Aristotle who said way back: "In a democracy the poor will have more power than the rich, because there are more of them, and the will of the majority is supreme." James Madison must of thought about this quite lot bc he came to the view: "A pure democracy is a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person." he recognise that when a society gets to large then democracy breaks down. that power money wealth has this upward drift bc some people work smarter/harder at getting these things for themselves than others + is kinda impossible almost to stop this in a large society. survivalism and all that. the bigger a society gets then it ends up even impossible to ameliorate this over any longterm sustainable period bc is this tendency as well in large societies to emphasis making things more efficent, more cost effective, more affordable, etc. in areas of services and commodities and products that result. the idea being that the cheaper things are then more people (like the poor) will be better off the difficulty is when this drive for efficiency is also applied to governance. can see that happening in USA with the Federal Government in some cases, and also many other western countries that have a federated system of governance. Spain, Germany, Australia etc. Also this drive is happening in Europe right now. the proposal to establish a Euro Bank which will take governance of the banking system in Europe away from the nation/communities. is being proposed on grounds of efficiency, risk amelioration, affordabilty, etc. it all sounds, well! very efficient + i think we should try to look at how we can separate out the two functions - governance and production. i think is going to become more important as automation and technology advances really start to kick in hard over this next century

agree which part of Premium Sandbox are the linden parcel naming people having trouble with

Perrie Juran wrote: One night I woke up in the middle of the night and looked for a HUD on my wall so I could roll over. jejejejejjejee (:

Parhelion Palou wrote: I have never posted a truthful reply in this thread. :matte-motes-wink: jejejjeejeje (: very clever!

\o/ (:

Czari Zenovka wrote: 16 wrote: i tell bl vampires that i am a blood virgin when they ask me if i got their bite request. sometimes they silly enough to ask me what is a blood virgin. jejejejjjee (: i tell them that is a new level in their game and that when they bite at me then i score points off them. if they say that they never heard of that then i say you must be newbie level then. is only for like level 16 and up. some people still dont get it and want to know if blood virgin is some kinda new blood doll in the game. oh! well (: /makes note of this That is hilarious! I bet the whole "level" thing would definitely work with new Steam players to SL who get into Bloodlines. I can just see them asking their "liege" how to get to level 16....rofl. yes lol i always think that in a vampire game that there should a helsing or buffy slayer level. it be quite cool to waste random vampires who try bite at people indiscriminately. i think lots of the vamps would like that kinda challenge in their game as well. is a bit boring after a while to be total invincible and your rank solely depend just on one action repeated over and over

i think is good that linden are sticking with doing what they know best. making creative environments i think also that some of the stuff they will learn in doing these for more lightweight devices will have some spillover into SL. hope so anyways

Knowl Paine wrote: As the saying goes: We the willing, lead by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful... i think sometimes in lindens case it goes: we the unwilling, lead by the ungrateful, are doing the impossible for the unknowing... (:

Teagan Tobias wrote: I have not done a lot of hunts, but the ones I have done I have not seen a sequence to them. I look at the list of stores and go to the ones I think are of interest to me. For instance, if there are stores that sell furniture, I don't go there, I do not have a house and for the most part do not see me getting one, so why should I add stuff to my already bloated inventory that I will never use. I pick through hunts and get what I like and never even visit the rest. yes. this is pretty much me as well. i like to pick and choose which places i will go which will have stuff that i have a need for. i like when is a blog that gives a list of destinations

JeanneAnne wrote: 16 wrote: the group strives for consensus .. if 1 or a few disagree w/ the group decision .. then yeah .. they get ignored .. if it comes down to it then the issue gets put to a vote .. if 49% disagree they get overruled .. but if a community is that evenly divided somethings wrong .. if sl was being run correctly & things were going smoothly there should be broad agreement about issues ppl would pay by the month .. i figure about $15 - 20 per month altho thats just an estimate & would depend on how many were paying & what the actual operating expenses are .. if they were too far in arrears they eventually couldnt log in Jeanne yes. thats pretty much how all human societies work when dealing with dissenters. they get ignored, shunned, exiled, imprisoned, gulaged and even killed sometimes. when thats questioned the group remaining usual justifies it to themselves by saying well they brought it on themselves. if they had just tried a bit harder to fit in with us the dominant group then everything would have been OK and we wouldn't have had to deal to them what also happens is that as time passes the dominant group gets smaller and smaller. it dont really matter what is the actual political system in place. it just seems to end up that way. well so far in history thats been the case well 16 .. im talking about running SL as a members owned cooperative here .. i dont think anyone is goin2 be imprisoned, gulaged or even killed over disagreements about how to run SL .. the only way someone would get exiled would be if they didnt pay the user fee or engaged in serious griefing .. & they might get ignored or shunned if no1 like them .. but no1 is going to tell anyone else how to live their SL .. so long as they do no harm to others they can do whatever they want its silly to expect 100% agreement on how SL should be run .. from experience w/ food & babysitting cooperatives the members strive for consensus & sometime achieve it .. if theres only a few dissenters they simply dont get their way this time .. maybe next time most everyone will agree with them .. if the members hav2 resort to a majority vote its kinduv a failure of community .. but sometimes its necessary to put things to a vote .. @ least thats more fair than some unaccountable corporate bigshot dictating terms .. like it is now Jeanne just on the prison stuff. sounds silly and over the top yes but SL is a human society. same like any other online social environment. temp bans are online exile/imprisonment. permaban is death what you seem to be saying is that is ok for this to happen if the group agrees to do it. i disagree with the premise that somehow this is more fair on the dissenters when is a group doing it rather than an autocrat. it might be more fair for the group remaining but the dissenters would disagree i think + the other thing is that you seems to kinda expect everyone in the group including the dissenters to act rationally. what happens when they don't? is not just dissenters who sometimes act irrationally. sometimes the dominant group does as well + these not easy questions to answer. if they were then we would already be living in some whole other way in the real world. so am not expecting you to solve them. i just raise them for discussion

(:

(:

JeanneAnne wrote: 16 wrote: JeanneAnne wrote: i use2 call myself an anarchist but then i found a better word .. autarchy .. i dont see any conflict between communal living & autarky .. every1 governs his or her own self & every1 has a say in decisions that effect the entire group .. if some1 is so independant that they dont even want to live in a group .. nothings stopping them from going it alone .. i dont see why SL cant be a communal group of autonomous self governing individuals .. i think itd be a much better place if it was Jeanne so what happens when an individual disagrees with the group. do they just get ignored? what happens if is like 49% disagree? do they get ignored as well? what happens if they choose not to pay the $200 each bc of that? the group strives for consensus .. if 1 or a few disagree w/ the group decision .. then yeah .. they get ignored .. if it comes down to it then the issue gets put to a vote .. if 49% disagree they get overruled .. but if a community is that evenly divided somethings wrong .. if sl was being run correctly & things were going smoothly there should be broad agreement about issues ppl would pay by the month .. i figure about $15 - 20 per month altho thats just an estimate & would depend on how many were paying & what the actual operating expenses are .. if they were too far in arrears they eventually couldnt log in Jeanne yes. thats pretty much how all human societies work when dealing with dissenters. they get ignored, shunned, exiled, imprisoned, gulaged and even killed sometimes. when thats questioned the group remaining usual justifies it to themselves by saying well they brought it on themselves. if they had just tried a bit harder to fit in with us the dominant group then everything would have been OK and we wouldn't have had to deal to them what also happens is that as time passes the dominant group gets smaller and smaller. it dont really matter what is the actual political system in place. it just seems to end up that way. well so far in history thats been the case

i have never been stuck for something to say until now

sounds like the admin person you spoke with doesn't have much understanding of how people do hunts

JeanneAnne wrote: i use2 call myself an anarchist but then i found a better word .. autarchy .. i dont see any conflict between communal living & autarky .. every1 governs his or her own self & every1 has a say in decisions that effect the entire group .. if some1 is so independant that they dont even want to live in a group .. nothings stopping them from going it alone .. i dont see why SL cant be a communal group of autonomous self governing individuals .. i think itd be a much better place if it was Jeanne so what happens when an individual disagrees with the group. do they just get ignored? what happens if is like 49% disagree? do they get ignored as well? what happens if they choose not to pay the $200 each bc of that?

JeanneAnne wrote: i dont know mucha bout Marx .. i do like his saying "from each according to ability, to each according to need" tho .. thats 1uv my favorite quotes this is one of those noble ideas that don't ever seem to work out in practice. lazy people overrate their abilities and overrate their own needs where it can work is like on Star Trek. Mr Spock says this all the time. it works on Star Trek bc no one has to work on there. they dont have to work bc they got replicators/machines that make everything they need

JeanneAnne wrote: 16 wrote: I don't get it when you say stuff like: if we all pay then we wont have to pay I sometimes think that you think that you some kinda marxist. doesn't really fit tho with what you say sometimes bc marxism->communism isnt about anyone paying. is about labour. you get fed and clothed and a roof. medical and education and thats about it. just have work after that. if not want to work in a commune style living then you have to anyway bc nobody will carry you when all everyone has is their ability to work. like you get made to if you dont work bc is no way you can contribute otherwise i dont know mucha bout Marx .. i do like his saying "from each according to ability, to each according to need" tho .. thats 1uv my favorite quotes .. when you say that communism is about getting fed clothed housed medical treatment & education .. that sounds better than many get under greed-based fascist corporatism .. but why does that have to be "about it"? why cant that just be the beginning? in exchange for what youre able to do why not get whatever you want .. so long as its no more than anyone else gets? Jeanne it ends with all the people who dont want to be in a commune style. is what I meant by anarchy. anarchism is an extreme form of self-expression. when is any effort made to coerce a true anarchist into commune style ways then most often they react quite violently

I don't get it when you say stuff like: if we all pay then we wont have to pay I sometimes think that you think that you some kinda marxist. doesn't really fit tho with what you say sometimes bc marxism->communism isnt about anyone paying. is about labour. you get fed and clothed and a roof. medical and education and thats about it. just have work after that. if not want to work in a commune style living then you have to anyway bc nobody will carry you when all everyone has is their ability to work. like you get made to if you dont work bc is no way you can contribute otherwise

here is her answer to the media here is her answer to a cheating bf + is pretty cool I think how she done these at those times in her life. good on her (:

JeanneAnne wrote: Theresa Tennyson wrote: So, in other words, the only people who should be able to access SL are those who can spend $200 a year on "pretty cartoons"? Incidentally, that's well over twice what a premium account costs now. yep .. thats how it should be .. no "ownership" & no freeloading .. everyone contributes & everyone has equal access .. premium accounts are worthless anyway .. those who pay tier support everyone else .. this promotes classism conflict & griefing .. if everyone paid a user free & no one "owned property" & there was no L$ & all content was free .. sl would be a truly egalitatarian virtual society & everyone would be equal .. as it should be .. Jeanne but i dont want to pay anything at all ever to anyone. i just dont value community enough to be worth anything to me. community sux anarchy rulz or something