Pie Serendipity

You don't really think that a group of organisations (Remember, it's not just LL; they outsource several functions, and the home-based moderators have access to your account details on their PCs in their bedrooms or kitchens, which are probably not entirely secure . . . ) who can't even prevent frequent and regular spam attacks on their - Lithium hosted - forums have a coherent security system? In fact, if you really want to start worrying, the recent ToS changes could even be interpreted - by idiots/marketing department staff - to mean that not just your intellectual property within the game was usable by LL and its cronies, but also any personal information you shared with them. They are potentially runnning into serious problems of course, as Europe has laws about this sort of thing, even if the USA don't - and once LL withdrew operations from their European locations they exposed themselves to all sorts of potential litigation.

steph Arnott wrote: Call me what you want Pie, Your a nobody. You do not upset me any more, your words are no use. Have a great day. I expect you will write more, but thats your time to waste. ADDED: Just to update you on the guidlines. Vulgarity, Profanity, and Sexually Explicit Content: No name calling, expletives, or any language that is offensive, pornographic, or sexually explicit. Profanity, hate speech, or threats of violence are not permissible. I wouldn't expect you to understand but the phrase "attention whore" is neither vulgar nor profane, nor is it in any way sexually explicit. It is a purely descriptive term which is entirely distanced from name-calling, is not an expletive, is most certainly not pornographic, does not embody hate speech and can in no way be interpreted as a threat of violence. Which just leaves potentially offensive language, and the way in which you misuse and abuse language is considerably more offensive to me than any accurate epithet which might be construed - or more correctly, misconstrued - as such, by you. PS Thank you for calling me "Nobody", because as everyone knows, "Nobody is perfect".

The Poles won't find it difficult.

steph Arnott wrote: I can not even be bothered to answer. Most pointless question i have read. Ah, the defining indication of the desperate attention whore - pointlessly posting to say you won't be pointlessly posting.

I had a look at the Tiny Marketplace . . . . . . but there was too much small print for me.

Orca Flotta wrote: I hear one can also get demotivated in the forums. FIFY!

One of my alts is called Anthony Rose . . . . . . because A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

PudgyPaddy wrote: Today I bought myself a birthday card Do you know how frustrating it is to play frisbee all by yourself? Sue Lawley sends PP the perfect birthday present for a lonely person - a boomerang to play with instead of a frisbee . . . . . . and wishes him many happy returns.

PeachJubilee wrote: For your edification, hips are not asses and asses are not hips; now you know. Even as virgin students there is really no reason to confuse these two parts of the anatomy. I appreciate that when you and your pals were all student buddies, you all may never have seen another human being naked and perhaps were all too self conscious to gaze into a mirror or look downwards when naked, but you can clearly see hips and asses are different parts of the body even when someone is dressed, so really no excuses... For your own edification, a fatass indicates broadness of beam, rather than potential depth of penetration. If we had wanted to discuss the development of females' gluteus maximus muscles we would have been making the evaluation in terms of Helis, ie the estimated number of radio controlled helicopters which might simultaneously be landed upon them. For example, assuming that the image above has not suffered significant aspect ratio distortion, the avatar would rate at 1.9 Helis. Erm . . . and perhaps you are not yet as mature - or rational - as we were, since when we looked downwards in the mirror, we saw not our backsides, but our pride and joys.

Madeline Blackbart wrote: large hips does not = fatass. Yes some women with large hips are fat granted. All of them? I think not. I geuss you and your fellow students condemned people for being diffrent then you. How charming you all must have been. Yet again you are completely wrong. You can be as skinny as Mother Theresa's anorexic grandmother but if you have wide hips you are a fatass. Since you ask, my coterie of fellow students and myself, being intelligent rational beings, made a nightly habit of assessing a subclass of humanity who were different from us, that is, those of a different gender; unlike these forums, we were not concerned about how lacking in cognitive abilities they were, merely the extent to which they would be grateful for the opportunity to be introduced to various members of our group.

I've... seen things you people wouldn't believe... Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those... moments... will be lost in time, like... tears... in... rain. Time... to die... Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer) Blade Runner

Madelaine McMasters wrote: SL is a ... mess QFT For once.

Madeline Blackbart wrote: Pie Serendipity wrote: Madeline Blackbart wrote: You have a WARPED definition of fat there. Big hips does not equal fat. I'm geussing you have some kinda beef with said resident though and that's the ultimate purpose of this post? Why else bring up that photo? She musta really meant fatass. If you think that avatar is a fatass you've never seen a healthy women before. Some of them look like that. She has no body fat to speak of just large hips. Troll harder Pie. Large hips = fatass. (When we were students we used to damn fatasses with the faint praise of "good child-bearing hips"; as if we cared.)

From "Avengers Assemble", my favourite movie dialogue of all time: Nick Fury: I'm here to talk to you about the Avengers initiative. Logan: Go ***bleep*** yourself. (Explanation? I see Fury as the LL Marketing Department and myself as Wolverine, of course.)

Madeline Blackbart wrote: You have a WARPED definition of fat there. Big hips does not equal fat. I'm geussing you have some kinda beef with said resident though and that's the ultimate purpose of this post? Why else bring up that photo? She musta really meant fatass.

Kelli May wrote: A man can be considered cute without it being a slur on his masculinity. So Storm might be considered cute? I don't think so!

Let the women organise it. It would be difficult for you after the lobotomy you must have had to agree to it. I would, however, recommend setting a date about a month away, and don't pay for anything up front - that way, when it doesn't happen you won't be so deeply out of pocket. Oh, and if you get accused of a lack of commitment, you could offer to arrange the divorce party.

I like dumb blondes. Not the really stupid ones, the ones that don't say anything to confirm it.

steph Arnott wrote: i have nothing to say. No talk to you any more, Promises, promises. If only . . .

Akemiaiko wrote: Why blasting my little sister? You a mad prson? Be carfull. Steph drop it, i not well happy. Now the question is, are there two semi-literate East Africans studying biology who happen to be in the Forums at the same time, or is this a face-saving alt? By the way, accusing Storm of being "mad" is not the sort of behaviour that the moderators would be too happy about, given the number of mentally ill users of these forums who would be very upset.

steph Arnott wrote: Pamata, Zvakanaka. Google that. Nah, I'll repeat that this is an English language forum; if you want to lobby LL to institute a Shona forum, or maybe even an Ndebele one, please feel free. Or if you like I can continue to trade insults here with you in Bornholmsk, Kickapoo or even Zoque-Ayapaneco.

steph Arnott wrote: Chokochoko si njema mchague la kusema Wameadhirika mahasidi wasojijua!

Hoshi Kenin wrote: Instead, it was Humble who - possibly with no little astonishment - realised that at LL, not only was the customer not King, they were not even tolling the fields as serfs....the customers were, if anything, worms in the soil and hence not even worthy of communication. While agreeing with many of the sentiments expressed in this thread (please keep bringing up LL's incompetence of vision and fulfilment, Del, newcomers need to be informed and everyone else needs to be regularly reminded so that they don't succumb to intellectual inertia) I must take issue with this opinion. Rod tried initially to communicate, but - with the support of an arrogantly inadequate succession of marketing "managers" - was reminded that communication is a two way process, and discovered that it was not possible to manage the incoming flow through the several channels that LL's properties offer. When the policy of attempting to smother incoming criticism foundered on the inability of monitors (I won't call them moderators because that assumes some sort of cognitive discriminatory capabilities) to process a torrent of public opinion in LL "controlled" properties. As an aside it was fascinating to see Rod attempting to cuddle up to an apparently vocal minority over in SLU - SC2 being almost ignorable now - before realising that that community was a tiny mutually masturbatory self-appreciation club with no external impact, rather than try to stem the more variegated input from these official forums, where he and his marketing stooges would have got torn to pieces just as was the fate they suffered in the Feeds before they made their tactically humiliating withdrawal. It is a critical point of marketing - commercial or psyops - that you do not participate in a communications channel that you can not control; if nothing else, LL's farcical incompetence in the face of a single determined activist (remember Wasted?) and subsequently their complete inability to stem the flow of subcontinental originated spam has demonstrated their impotence. It is not that Rod refuses to dignify his rabble-rousing customer base by speaking to us, but an acknowledgement of LL's inability to manage the largely anonymous and unaccountable army of alts (why would you compromise your business avatar's relationship with LL when it is the simplest thing in the world to create a stream of unsilenceable opinion offering accounts) by accepting the self-preservation measures suggested by his latest faceless Marketing VP? It's like school disciplinary action in reverse; instead of putting the naughty children in isolation, the Principal has locked himself inside a windowless sound-proof room so he can pretend that anarchy does not exist outside. Who is it that is living in a fantasy world?

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: Pie Serendipity wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: all people on this rock are of one race... human. except Perrie. I disagree. A considerable number, including many of the participants and contributors to these very forums, are sub-human, allowing their behaviour to be determined by their reptile brains rather than by consciously rational cogitation. Intellect does not enter the discussion of race. Lack of cognitive skills does not equate to a sub-human race. That would be the argument which the sub-humans would try to make. And fail.

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: all people on this rock are of one race... human. except Perrie. I disagree. A considerable number, including many of the participants and contributors to these very forums, are sub-human, allowing their behaviour to be determined by their reptile brains rather than by consciously rational cogitation.