Pie Serendipity

Melita Magic wrote: Pie you make a point but if someone is actually mentally ill, overly sensitive, or emotionally distraught to begin with, words can wound. If the person is already in a compromised state of mind or emotion, that one word could be the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. Also, cyber bullying is often used as a tool in conjunction with other forms of bullying or harassment. But that would have to be a person who cares inordinately about what others think of them. So everyone is supposed to go around walking on eggshells on the basis that there might be one individual who just once might decide to read these forums, because that person might have some sort of phobia about reading a word like, say, "beastiality" - the mis-spelling of bestiality, not the concept itself, of course! I don't think so. If someone is mentally ill, overly sensitive, or emotionally distraught to begin with, they should be attending the LWL Sunday breakfast in the feeds, not reading these forums - unless they put on their fantasy blinkers and stick to Hippy's "Friends" thread. Further, baseball bats are used as a tool in conjunction with other forms of bullying or harassment, but I don't see much of a lobby to stop the MLB programme.

And we can be assured that this is not a complete fantasy biography by what means?

Orca Flotta wrote: I was just recently suspended for 3 days, no explainification given. :smileysurprised: It's maybe because I called the moderators stupid evberytime they sent me a warning. Some people just can't handle the truth. :smileymad: Perhaps someone misunderstood one of your posts and thought you were insulting or harassing them.

Apparently, I manage it simply because I exist. Or is it because I persist?

Specific avatars can be banned. People can't.

I made an alt called "Nobody" but I STILL couldn't read your feed!

Theresa Tennyson wrote: Psst, Aethelwine - this is just one of Storm's strawman arguments to try and get people upset. He's probably actually trying to get his friend, whose hobby is acting exactly like your roadie friend, to join in. However, his friend may be busy today or possibly has run out of forum alts. Strawman argument? It is rather a completely justifiable position against lily-livered brown-tonguing politicians trying to cater to the rose-tinged inclusivism of the LWL lobby who have absolutely no constructive argument for the existence of their elusive concept of "cyberbullying", which is seemingly based on the writings of Lewis Carroll. Did you know that in the most recent "horrifying" suicide in the UK, supposedly based on "cyberbullying", forensic investigation post mortem revealed that 99% of the "mean" posts were actually made from the "victim's" own phone! Now that is what I call a severe case of masochistic attention whoring. Mentally ill, or what? And THAT just about epitomises the state of the anti-cyberbullying lobby. ETA: I HAVE been busy; I have been running a Bank Holiday mobile surgery for a specific set of "cyberbullying" victims - those who have been told online that they are obese; we used a specially adapted van which had extra-wide doors so that the fat-asses could squeeze in. EFTA: Oh, and there is absolutely no chance of the last eventuality coming to pass, you will doubtless be delighted to hear.

Aethelwine wrote: If that is actually true and not just something you believe then you are very unusual. A friend used to be a roadie and she used to play a game they called how low can you go. Their challenge to others was through words alone in 30 minutes they could make anyone physically sick. Ex-marines, truck drivers, roadies on other crews when they accepted the challenge always gave in. Everyone has weak spots not so hard to find if you go looking for them I presume that this game was played exclusively against other Americans? Or perhaps against rather delicate grammar nazis, who were appalled at the mangling of their beautiful language. Or maybe their victims were all closet bulimics, who felt the game therapeutic. Did they find it considerably less effective when they were playing the game against non-English-speakers who had no idea what they were talking about, and if so, what does that tell you about the effectiveness of words?

Aethelwine wrote: People get hurt all the time on the internet and by words alone. Really? Then take "THAT". Did that hurt? Or do I need to say "THIS"? If not, perhaps the punctuation mitigated the effect. Or maybe I am being blunt, and I need to use sharp words in a cutting fashion. I'll say it again - and again, if necessary - you can't hurt anyone on the internet unless they allow themselves to be hurt - which is why places like this Forum is largely populated by masochists - it's a great place to get those sort of kicks! Your feelings are your own, and whether you consciously own them or not, nobody can force you to feel anything, so don't blame the words of others, or the "meanings" or "sentiments" with which you imbue them, for the feelings you allow yourself to have. Because it is your problem, not that of the one who writes the words that you are interpreting in your personal way, affected by your life experiences and with your own specific connotations - and ignorance, of course. (In passing, is it possible to be hurt by words that you don't understand, and then to feel hurt only after you have looked the words up in a dictionary, or after you have translated them - and if the latter, do you blame Google Translate rather than the author, and does it make a difference if the original insult has been lost in translation?) Did you know Billy Bob Thornton has a fear, a phobia even, of antique furniture? Does that mean that Thomas Chippendale should be brought before a court because he has had the temerity to manufacture lots of classic chairs? Those of you who believe that the onus is on the originator to telepathically predict the over-reactions of a minority of hyper-sensitive readers to his words would doubtless argue for the stringing up of Mr Chippendale, if the word associations weren't distracting them already by making them salivate at mind-images of hunky men, with oiled musculature. (Editor's note for the benefit of American readers: Chippendale is actually dead; he died before the USA became a proper country, and certainly before the natives had invented sitting on chairs rather than the ground.) I have more, but that is enough Grievous Verbal Harm for the moment. Go have a cry, and come back for more of a beating later.

What if the private message you received that you wanted to report was actually sent to you by a Moderator?

It's not as big a problem as a drinking problem. And I have no problem drinking.

No **bleep**!

Ah, I see. The SLEDU subforum is actually an adjunct of SL Answers . . . I shall prepare to read masses of cut and paste posts on how to change your underwear.

TDD123 wrote: Pie Serendipity wrote: Or if the clientele liked practival jokes it could be renamed Central Prank. I love it when it happens .. to YOU ! OMG PepPie ..misspelling by you ? Did hell just freeze over ? :robotlol: Erm, maybe somone should explain to you the difference between a mis-spelling and a typo. And what is different about me is that I have sufficient respect for my potential readers to review and correct promptly the errors which occur because I am prolific.

Or maybe if the intention is to build a network of frequent customers it could be called Central Plurk. Or if the clientele liked practical jokes it could be renamed Central Prank. Or if they removed all the comfy seats and forced customers to lie rigid on various surfaces: Central Plank. I could think of more . . .

Everything in moderation.

1whowaits wrote: I will always choose a food extract or dietary supplement over a drug, So you are one of those homeopathic enthusiasts, eh? Or do you just sell the stuff? 1whowaits wrote: I will take the experience based wisdom of people in countries like the Philippines over the severely limited scientific knowledge of the FDA any day. For example:http://best-hoaxes.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/psychic-surgery-in-philippines-miracle.html FIFY!

Bravado! Bravado!

Give a tinkle.

wisdomadvocate wrote: Pms!! FIFY!

imAlexiaAndiRock wrote: Maybe we can even have this as a topic for our next group discussion. LOL. Right surname, wrong subject. Or was it this one?

imAlexiaAndiRock wrote: Don't feed the troll, Ellie. Just sit back and watch how he/she/it ridicules himself/herself/it. It's kinda funny, actually. "And straightway there fell from his eyes as it were scales, and he received his sight; and he arose" (Acts 9:18) Or as Jimmy Nail put it: "She's lying"

wisdomadvocate wrote: For a moment there, I really thought you had an intelligent exhange going then you resorted to make things a little personal which made me think...why is this person so agitated about a cause to try to help others? Since when is doing good deeds without expecting anything out of anyone something to be crucified for? I am thankful I am one of those people who has faith in others and immature remarks based on unfair judgement, well, more like accusations doesn't go anywhere with me. It's amusing how one can be so quick to make assumptions when they don't even have the facts to back it up. We don't do 'services' as you put it. We are a support group. Don't make it complicated than it should be, because our aim is to be a listening ear, not con-artists. We don't have donation boxes anywhere nor have we asked money from anyone. I suppose, where you come from, genuine people are hard to find. So, I do know where this is coming from and I'm glad these kind of remarks are brought up so we can clarify it. I just hope the decency as a human is there. To ask if you need clarity, not attack the first red dot you see. Yep, that's just the way a con man would respond; an appeal to ingenuous readers while declaiming "We would never do anything like that". Next up is the even more helpful: "Sure I have a pen if you want to sign a cheque for a gift for us because we have been so kind to you". Did I also mention I had a friend who was seduced by the Moonies in just this fashion? Not everyone here is that naive. Well, OK, most are.

Sephina Frostbite wrote: Pie Serendipity wrote: It sounds like this scam has potential. SL is full of individuals who, for one reason or another, or another, or another . . . are not able to cope with real life, and promoting an anonymous "we will listen to you" service sounds like an excellent way to bring those desperate people to you, so you can exploit their weaknesses for your own gain. Maybe I should promote a "Hugs for rich widows" business and get rich quick too. I understand where you are coming from however how does offering free help scam people? I would understand if they were asking for something in return but they are not. I am just trying to understand your way thinking. EDIT Spelling Yeah, you're probably right. By the way, you wouldn't want to buy a bridge, would you? It's getting on a bit now, but it's in a very desirable location.