apw9900
-
Posts
57 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by apw9900
-
-
7 hours ago, Livio Korobase said:
I think they are conscious of this, and for what i know they discuss on. in anycase, the problem is how do, not what do. Also in this long discussion, don't seem come out one of principal points in my opinion: as stated in LEA Wiki Page, the committee have to be guided by "a dedicated board of renowned Second Life artists, ". In time, committee composition is changed and a balance between artists and marketing is gone lost. Actually no one renowned SL artist is part of the committee, and i don't know at all at least two persons in charge. For sure they are all good people, but i have some doubts about the "artistic" side... also taking this word in a SL mood. Is enough make a visit at the welcome area, LEA3, for see something that the worse noob of sl don't build and is work from a committee member. For be sincere i don't understand much of this area, Eupalinos rubbish dump included. There are so many talented landscapers in SL, make the welcome area as all the other sim of LEA, giving a round to architects for rebuild the welcome area every 6 months. But ok, this is only my tought and i am going out topic.
I would never have thought that I would live long enough to agree with something you posted, Livio, but this post actually makes a lot of sense even to me. And I also do agree in what you stated in another posting about Second Life art scene needing LEA. So do I believe. Upcoming artists shouldn't spend time fundraising to get a sim for a period.
LEA could, if run in the right way, be a wonderful starting place for upcoming artist to use and experiment with.
-
8 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
I can talk only for me, obvious, but this is very real and CLEAN.
I actually do believe that Lexbot's statement about a "perpetual committee that has no interest or incentive in bringing in fresh blood (and new views) doesn't sound like the best recipe for quality control either" was meant about bringing fresh blood (and new views) into the committee itself and not about new artists.But I may be wrong about that. -
2 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
that is exactely the same... win who have more friends.
At least the decision wouldn't be in the hands of an oligarchy.
-
3 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
this also is not true. In SL i know some sim owners that have nothing to do with LEA that do the same, they give a sim to an artist for work free. where you live?
For heavens sake, Livio.
This thread is about LEA. Hence, I was talking about LEA sims. When I had my gallery I too let other artists use my land for their art, so I know all about that. But now we are talking about LEA sims.
Keep focus or leave the discussion.
-
3 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
LEA need a good portion of good and serious proposals, and i am sorry to inform you that SL is not a RL simulation game, SL is a vital and happy place where people can express creativity without have the weight to think at Louvre or criticism or barbados self-made experts. Grants are already assigned by a vote, for what i know committee members vote each project and then who get best results get the grant. Open this system to public is the same than use the like system of facebook. you know that you can buy 1.000 likes for few dollars, right? And you think this is something desirable? We can do a lottery, is the same. This get us in a more good world? I don't think. Ah, yes, maybe you do for me because i am the only that read you... be happy that at least one do.
Sometimes you read my posts like the Jehovah's Witnesses reads the Bible. You don't read what I write. You read what you think I write.
It's not about getting likes on Facebook.
The voting process could be something like the way you vote for the Second Life 'Avi Choice Awards' where Second Life residents actually have to log in to vote.
-
1 minute ago, KanryDrago said:
Public voting on which artists get sims is a terrible idea.
Good art isnt a popularity contest.Indeed good art often makes people feel uncomfortable.
But the way it is now the definition and decision of 'good' art is in the hands of only 6 people. They, and only they, has the power to decide which artists will get a sim to work on.
-
1 minute ago, Livio Korobase said:
Fried air... point 1 is delirant. point 2 is already so. point 3, can be. point 4 the list of artist in grant for each round is already published, and i don't think is interesting know the list of all the projects presented. 5 is delirant, why residents have to vote something for a artist that maybe is for nothing interested on do something on LEA? LEA is already open to all, what mean "broader" in this context? Applicant for a sim that promote their idea to a broader public what mean? desolate assemblies where a guy talk alone with the sea? Then, you close adfirming that LEA is a closed party for few. There are at LEA at least 80 different work exposed for year, and you affirm that is a closed party? You can say i don't like the people that actually compose the committee, is more sincere and fast. Maybe you like if Ebbe ask you to prepare a list of friend to be elected in next LEA committee?
One more time just for you then:
Members of the LEA Committee are recruited and chosen by members of the LEA Committee.
Turning granting of sims into an election (like the way a member of a city council is chosen) would force the artist to promote his or hers ideas to get votes. That could be by using Facebook, Twitter and other social media. And by having rallies in Second Life. By doing so more people would be aware of what LEA is - and it might even bring more visitors to the sims.
And the same goes for election of committee members. They too would have to convince those with an interest for art that they deserve to have a seat in the committee. And if they do a good job they can even get a second term.
LEA needs a good portion 'glasnost' and 'perestrojka'
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:
Well a process has been outlined under the old rules where the rules could be changed and additionally how Committee members can remain beyond 2 years with a short ex-officio period. apw9900 seems convinced that didn't happen, but I don;t know how he can be so sure of that. It is all a bit academic as the rules being discussed are "By Laws", which means they are self regulations... ie the Committee itself is ultimately responsible for enforcing or not the rules anyway and not Linden Lab.
I also am beginning to think that too.
Since one (1) current member of the LEA Committee has had a seat in the committe ever since LEA was founded in 2010 in spite of the two term policy, each and every decision made after 2014 has been invalid due to the LEA Bylaws, as he at the time was and still is an illegal committee member according to the LEA Bylaws. And that also includes altering the very same bylaws.That, I find is a problem. -
37 minutes ago, Kennylex Luckless said:
I have a feeling that this thread is 'Troll Art' to open old wounds within the 'art community' just to be able to post links to Ego Art Videos.
Oh, you can be sure that this is not 'Troll Art'.I am seriously concerned about the lack of transparency and democracy in the way LEA is managed by the LEA Committee. To me the LEA Committee very much looks like a school book example of an oligarchy.And I believe you earlier asked what I would suggest to change in the way LEA works. I actually have a few suggestions to that:1) Members of the LEA Committee should be recruited through a public election.2) All residents in Second Life should be able to run for a seat in the LEA Committee based on their ideas and visions.3) Summary minutes of all committee metings should be public.4) A list of all applicants for a LEA sim should be published on the LEA website.5) Residents of Second Life votes for the artist they would like to see on a LEA Sim.Those suggestions would open LEA to a broader public.
The candidates for a seat would be chosen on basis of their visions and ideas, and would have to promote themselves.
Applicants for a sim would have to promote their ideas to a broader public in order to get votes.That way LEA wouldn't be a closed party for the few but would open up to the world and involve everyone with an interest for Second Life art.And it shouldn't be that hard to make those changes. It's just a question of will. -
10 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
Stop with this pain apw, i have nothing to document...maybe you forgot that is YOU that raised this discussion... useless tell, you read only what you want read. Bye
You wrote:"Read well the papers, and you can discover that what you say is ***not true***."I read the papers and couldn't find it. And then I asked you to point me to the right place.
But instead you started a rant that would make Donald Trump envious.Wouldn't it just have been easier if you gave me a link to what you know and I don't know? -
14 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:
Point Blank: If you feel there is a serious issue with the LEA then you ought to directly contact Linden Lab instead of wasting everyone's time here. If they believe there is a problem then they will take steps to correct it.
The only way to go directly to Linden Lab is by old-fashioned snail-mail. And sending a letter from Denmark to Californien may take forever. And in case of missing response you will not know if the letter disappeared on it's way or just got ignored. And then you can start all over again.So that is really not an alternative.But with a little luck a thread like this will eventually reach some one that will look into the matter - or better, make others raise questions to the way LEA works.-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Livio Korobase said:
Well, seem you are stuck again in your belief. What i have to say, i am not a doctor. Good luck, take your pills and bye.
A lot of insults but no documentation for your claims.
Kind of says a lot about you, doesn't it?
-
9 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
You are boring mister... is you that have nothing to say, not me... i have to provide nothing, because i don't have started a tread in a public forum telling lies and defamations. What you think is a scandal is nothing, is just something you use as pretext for make some adversiting about you and your friends. For someone art can be a serious topic, use something other for your goals and i stop to crash balls. Go talk on fashion maybe, but don't use art for your marchandising.
And still no documentation for you claims. Instead you are slowly sinking down to the level you accuse others to be on when it comes to argumentation.
Should I take that as a sign that you were bursting out steam and not facts?
Why don't you go paint another landscape painting. I am sure that some one somewhere can do with one more. And if you put a duck and a deer in it not a single eye will be dry ;-)
-
1 minute ago, Livio Korobase said:
HAHAHAHAHA ok ok
you are right, lea committee is a band of slobs that try to cheat no one know over what, but ok. Try to be serious one time, and tell us who and when is happened a fraud made by someone of committee, actual and old members. you can say one? NO... all the others blabla are just byzantine interpretations of a old document, dead from years. What meaninig can have this? What you want demonstrate? Is really obscure. This mean that all in the LEA is good and well standing? No, there are some area that can be for sure improved, as a sort of lack of transparency and poor communications. But this is not something illicit or fraudulent, or hiding perversion. By my side, time ago i sent a notecard about my thoughts on this topics to committee, someone is gone very angry, others told me thank you for raise the problem. I don't go sob in forums or facebook for this, i did what for me was right to do and ciao.
And now even distraction instead of providing proof for your claims.
Come on, Livio. you can do better than so.
-
1 minute ago, Livio Korobase said:
LOL is you that is still not able to deliver documentation about your statements. wake up, Joseph, is late
I am still waiting Livio, for you to back up your claims with facts.
But all I hear is you to trying to prevaricate.
-
1 minute ago, Livio Korobase said:
stop do the little boy, you are a adult or supposed to be. Others have extensively responded to your claims, just read... i don't have necessity to do this for have a sim at lea, my work is enough.
Still not able to deliver documentation?
-
5 minutes ago, Dekka Raymaker said:
OK re-SaveMe Oh, whilst I was a committee member she was banned a few times, by other committee members, not me, but it was I who spoke out in her defence, not that she needed me to do so, and I unbanned her at least twice, maybe 3 times. I think SaveMe Oh is an amazing artist, she understands what the mechanics of art should be in a virtual space, the only problem is that at this time, her art is extreme for the Second Life virtual environment. SaveMe Oh will just have to except that she is before her time, and that if she accepts her own greatness, she has to accept that being banned comes with it.
I can only second your opinion regarding SaveMe Oh and her art. I too find that she is amazing. And we have been co-working on several occasions in Second Life.
But have in mind that the topic of this thread has nothing to do with SaveMe Oh. And it might be dangerous to bring her name into the discussion as it may take the thread off topic being about SaveMe Oh and not the LEA Committee.
SaveMe Oh does tend to get all attention when her name is brought up :-D
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
Lol no you can't ask nothing. Just read the messages people sent you in this discussion, also involving dead documents. As usual, you have nothing to say apart some bizantine statements. I am not interested, thank you, take care.
So you can't deliver documentation for your claims :-)
Never mind, Livio.
The last time you stood up for LEA against me you were granted a sim of them.
I am pretty sure you have been noticed this time too and have made yourself eligible for yet another sim for 6 months ;-)
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Kennylex Luckless said:
You have also stated "I am not an artists, hence I have never been rejected. And I have no intention of being a part of the LEA Committee", and that make me a bit confused, for at the same time you complain publicly you have over the years not (what I can see) showed any will to change anything by involve yourself with LEA as an guest, advisory or in any sub-committee, nor as an active artist.
The only way you can be a part of LEA is by invite from the LEA Committee.
I have from time to time tried to get in dialog with LEA. But they are not happy about questions about the way LEA is run.
In June last year I posted the attached question in the LEA Facebook group. I never got an answer. Instead I immediately got ejected and banned from the group. That made me curious about LEA and I started to look closer into the way LEA was run. I spoke with a lot of the artists I had in my Josef K Galleria dell'Arte and bit by bit I realized that something was not right in the way LEA was working.
If LEA had nothing to hide, or if everything in the LEA Committee was run by the book then they had no reason to ignore my question and eject me from the group. They could simply have given me an answer. And we wouldn't have been here today.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
This is just your opinion sweet. Read well the papers, and you can discover that what you say is ***not true***. As i told before, you can't understand what people tell to you because you are all taken by yourself. Or open a trial to the court, so we laugh a bit. Again, you are diffamating people, you understand? You say to be a professor at school, i am happy not to be one of your pupils.
Then please tell me where it states in the bylaws that changes can be made and decisions can be taken as long as the committee has a member who is not supposed to there according to the bylaws. Or the committee doesn't have the sufficient members as stated in the bylaws. Earlier you asked me to show some documentation for my claims. Now I ask you to deliver the same.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Livio Korobase said:
Is completely useless talk or claim topics about a dead document, no? They changed and they was authorized to do, where is the problem?
Any changes to the bylaws that may have been made by the committee for the last 6 years is invalid. And that is so because at least one person of the board had exceeded his term while the changes was decided.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Kennylex Luckless said:
5.1.7 After 2 terms, Committee Members may be moved to Ex Officio status.
5.3.2 Ex Officio members may be eligible to move back to Committee Member after serving 4 months as an Ex Officio and with an unanimous vote of the Committee Members (see clarification of abstentions in section 5.1.4.1 and proxy votes in section 5.1.4.2 above).12.1 The bylaws may be amended, altered, or repealed by a 80% vote of the Committee at any regular or special meeting. The text of the proposed change shall be distributed to all Committee Members at least 5 days before the meeting.
None of the 3 members in question has at any point been moved to Ex Officio status for the required 4 months. They have all just kept their seat in the committee, regardless of the bylaws.And, to repete myself, for more than a year there has been less than 7 members of the committee. That too is a violation of the bylaws.And finally, any changes to the bylaws that may have been made by the committee for more than a year is invalid. And that is so because at least one person of the board had exeeded his term while the changes was decided.-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:
No, I'm saying that the person who'd write those comments on YouTube might not be the innocent upholder of the public good that they make themselves out to be. Right now we only know your half of the story.
If you read my very first post that started this thread then you will actually get the full story. It's all about the LEA Committee and the mandate they administer.I am off to work now and won't be able to respond to any questions until later this afternoon. -
41 minutes ago, Livio Korobase said:
Apw, you started this useless discussion stating that " There seems to be some irregularity or perhaps even fraud in the way the LEA Committee is working". Or you put in table a fraud case, with evidence and witnesses, or you are falling in a defamation. I don't know at your place, but in Italy this can take you in a tribunal. You understand? You have not exposed a single argument justifying your statements. Things can be done more well? Sure, but this is not scandalous, is just normal life.
Well Livio,I will 'cut it out in paper' for you then, as we say in Denmark.If you look at this page, you will see the current LEA Committee:If you look at this page, you will see the LEA Bylaws before they were removed from their site:And if you look at this page, you will be able to look at the LEA Committee for the years 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 by clicking on each year. And by doing so you will notice that three (3) names occurs in all 5 years. They should only have been in the committee 4 times as they appear first time in January 2013:Then look at this page and do the same:Then you will notice that one (1) member of the current committee has been a member in each and every LEA Committee each and every year since 2010.I have done my recearch, Livio :-)And that proves my point that:1) For more than a year there has been less than 7 members of the LEA Committee. The Bylaws states that there must be a minimum of 7 members.
2) Three (3) members of the LEA Committee has exceeded the two term policy stated in the LEA Bylaws.Hence, the LEA Committee hasn't been competent to transact business for quite some time according to their own bylaws.And that, and only that, is what my problem with the LEA Committee is about.-
1
-
you are right, lea committee is a band of slobs that try to cheat no one know over what, but ok. Try to be serious one time, and tell us who and when is happened a fraud made by someone of committee, actual and old members. you can say one? NO... all the others blabla are just byzantine interpretations of a old document, dead from years. What meaninig can have this? What you want demonstrate? Is really obscure. This mean that all in the LEA is good and well standing? No, there are some area that can be for sure improved, as a sort of lack of transparency and poor communications. But this is not something illicit or fraudulent, or hiding perversion. By my side, time ago i sent a notecard about my 
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
What's going on in the LEA Committee?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Hence, it's time to let it slide down the list and vanish into oblivion.