Jump to content

PeachJubilee

Resident
  • Content Count

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About PeachJubilee

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. 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...
  2. I just noticed now when I couldn't do a temp upload...so a lot of people might never notice. My avatar still looks fine after all.
  3. The IP issue that does exist for texturers of full perm mesh is that the license often obliges them to not distribute any of the content full perm (and yes it sometimes even specifically mentions the alpha texture just to be clear that they really meant that too). I don't know why they'd do that. As you seem to be pointing out, there is no loss of value to the original creator if these alpha textures that are specific to particular pieces of mesh clothing are distributed full perm. Unless someone buys the mesh clothing itself, what else can they do with the alpha specific to it? But if it is in the license, then it's in the license...
  4. I woulnd't buy a texture template kit without a download link to the layered files (with the elements on different layers, like the wrinkle shadows, the highlights, the edging, the body-shape shadow/high lights, the main fabric, etc). I don't think tinted grey scale is really up to standard these days. You can tell it's tinted grey scale and even if you alter it in an external editor, there's no control over individual elements. You need the layered files to fine tune and finesse things like shading to be able to recolor and change textures properly. Otherwise the outcome is just not really market-quality in my view.
  5. Brenda Connolly wrote: You also should not care if they come for the Jews, unless you are a Jew of course. Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a Godwin! *whips off her pants and waves them in salute. Ladies and Gentlement, we have another one who does not understand the point of Godwin's formulation. We'll ignore the fact that the nazis are not the first or only folk to come for the Jews (while perhaps no one expects it, surely most of us have at least heard of the Spanish inquisition) or that the point of the literature you seek to censor my reference to is not about nazis per say, but merely references that subject matter as a real world example and inspiration of the epiphany the particular piece of literature referenced was attempting to convey. Godwin's law is intended to preserve the power of the subject material it discourages inappropriately glib and hyperbolic use of, because that subject matter has value in appropriate contexts. The law assumes that the subject matter has innate value in discussion where it is not hyperbolic, and that hence the glib misuse of it is to be avoided. The use of the law to censor all discussion of the subject material, rendering it utterly valueless in discourse is diametrically opposed to the purpose and justification of the law, yet, that's how you are using that law here. But you need not worry. Most of the audience you seek e-peen from with your pantie whipping censorship probably do not understand the meme any better than you do, and are likely to be fooled into thinking you are as sophisticated as you think you are when you engage in this shallow and uncomprehending form of censorship.
  6. Aard Andel wrote: ... then it's a business decision, not a moral one. What? Under market democracy there is absolutely no difference between a business decision and a moral decision.
  7. Why would a small minority who stand to benefit impose the dumping on the rest of you? Well they are not going to be forced along with the herd when they know they have options. Look if they don't use or own nightclubs and something bad happens to ruin all the fun and income of the nightclub set, the dump-profiters are not effected so they don't have a problem. You've got dumping imposed on the majority by a minority because your "I don't care about you or anyone else, so long as I got mine" mentality is the only legitimate morality and attitude in the "market democracy" model. The dump profiters are being rational actors, and we should all celebrate not only their freedom to do so, but that they rationally choose to do so. You should not care about the nightclubs Ceka, it would be irrational to do so, just as the dump profiters should not spare a thought for anyone who does not want to be imposed on by the dumping. You also should not care if they come for the Jews, unless you are a Jew of course. If it's not your problem, what kind of an irrational herd like plonker would you be to care?
  8. Phil Deakins wrote: PeachJubilee wrote: With respect to the market, that's nice for you Ceka but it does not help the person with G rated products who has someone's BDSM gear showing up on their G rated listing, in their G rated store which they are checking up on while they are logged in with their settings set up to only see G rated items, from their place of work in Saudi Arabia. Nor does it help a teen checking their store in similar circumstances while their parent is over their shoulder, and if it comes to that and the parent happens to be particularly "sue-happy" it probably won't help LL much either. Haven't they fixed that problem yet? It's been quite a while since I read about it happening to a lot of marketplace merchants. It's completely ludicrous that it started happening at all. Has LL said anything worth saying about it or are they still in the 'we don't have to tell you anything' mode? I think from the patchy communication that LL's stance is that it is a years old problem form the XStreet migration that just seemed worse because of all the DD transition activity. This apparently made the problem much more visible or something. Anyway, more or less, they are aware and always have been aware of this problem. They are and always have been fixing it. In good news, chocolate rations have gone up. Most recent thread about this issue...
  9. Peggy Paperdoll wrote: Are you sure Deltango? ------------------------------------------------------ [ edit] Legality [ edit] United States The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled [9] in November 2002 that the Federal Wire Act prohibits electronic transmission of information for sports betting across telecommunications lines but affirmed a lower court ruling [10] that the Wire Act "'in plain language' does not prohibit Internet gambling on a game of chance." But the federal Department of Justice continues, publicly, to take the position that the Wire Act covers all forms of gambling. [11] In April 2004 Google and Yahoo!, the two largest Internet search engines, announced that they were removing online gambling advertising from their sites. The move followed a United States Department of Justice announcement that, in what some say is a contradiction of the Appeals Court ruling, the Wire Act relating to telephone betting applies to all forms of Internet gambling, and that any advertising of such gambling "may" be deemed as aiding and abetting. Critics of the Justice Department's move say that it has no legal basis for pressuring companies to remove advertisements and that the advertisements are protected by the First Amendment. [12] In April 2005, Yahoo! has instigated a restrictive policy about gambling ads. [13]  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Somehow I don't think many businesses who value their busines would interpet the law as you have. Somehow I don't think any vigilent populice who value their freedoms would put up with a Justice Department that obviously thinks it is above the law as interpreted by the courts.
  10. Part of what has to be delivered on is the appearance of caring. Caring for the quality of product, caring for the experiences customers are having. Sure you don't have to actually care, but you're not delivering if your customers believe you don't care, and it tends to work out that those who care about their customers' experience are better at deliverying the kind of high quality experience that gives customers the impression that the provider cares. With respect to the market, that's nice for you Ceka but it does not help the person with G rated products who has someone's BDSM gear showing up on their G rated listing, in their G rated store which they are checking up on while they are logged in with their settings set up to only see G rated items, from their place of work in Saudi Arabia. Nor does it help a teen checking their store in similar circumstances while their parent is over their shoulder, and if it comes to that and the parent happens to be particularly "sue-happy" it probably won't help LL much either.
  11. Agreed. I understand why we have their categories outside our shop area in what we might describe as the "search commons", but when someone navigates to my shop, they should see what I want them to see, including the number and kind of categories that I think my products are best organized into for my customer's convenience.
  12. Well you're not wrong about shoot first and think it over later. I just logged onto my email to find the ticket I put in has been resolved. It turns out that the item was appropriately listed all along and both a flagger and the Linden reviewer both happened to think it should be in another category that apparently it also would fit in. I've been told I can relist it again in the same category it was delisted from. I just hope it does not happen all over again, because nothing about this process gives me confidence that it won't.
  13. I just wish they would sort out their current categories and delisting process and treat us like customers rather than cheats. Most importantly of all, tell us where things should have been put in the delisting notifications, both for practical reasons, and because it is indescribably disrespectful to not do so. I'm still waiting to hear which category an item delisted last week belongs in. I should not have to waste my time submitting a ticket, or waiting around, and LL should not be wasting its staffs' time having them double handle an issue that should be initially handled in a way that least inconveniences customers, not the way that most inconveniences them while also creating more work for LL's own staff.
  14. The debt does not have to be paid in Euros or dollars. In fact it does not have to be paid. Obviously creditors would prefer to be paid and in Euros or dollars rather than drachmas, but that does not mean Greece "have" to pay in dollars or Euros.
×
×
  • Create New...