Awe Thor

Charli Infinity wrote: 1:20 The titles are entirely nonsensical. Both participants can (need to) shave which converts them either into "internet entrepreneurs" or hackers.

Use a standard female avatar... ...and attach a peni5 to it.

Unionism is a rational response to feudalism; the USA was never a feudal society, so unions were an irrelevant aberration in the developing country, just as religion has become, a method for individuals without any power to grab some for themselves. I also see organised government (if that isn't an oxymoron) as becoming increasingly obsolescent with the improvement in communications afforded by the 'net, a trend hastened by government's own slide towards uninvolvement by outsourcing. I'm just disappointed that I won't be around to see the rise of collaborative anarchy, or as the Eastern Bloc call it, crime. ETA: I'm not disagreeing with you Medhue, although you seem to be more of a Monetarist than a Keynesian.

I believe in the Eleventh Commandment, so the ToS has little relevance to me.

There are a couple of methods of "stalking" people in this manner; you can't do anything about it. Either get used to it, and wait until they get bored, or make an alt using a different email address - and credit card, if necessary - and have no contact with your existing avatar.

I might have been interested in being a referee, but unfortunately I have a father.

Saverio Didero wrote: The first real soccer simulation Is this not an oxymoron?

I think that traffic lights are unfair on people who suffer from colour blindness.

I haven't followed this argument in detail (it's boring for those who have no intellectual property to worry about) but from a legal point of view (and I should also point out that I am not a lawyer, but I have successfully, and lucratively, sued a number of major legal firms for incompetence) I would not have thought it possible that LL could unilaterally take the rights to EXISTING intellectual property (ie before the ToS was changed) without paying compensation to the owners of that property. That would have to be tested in court, although I am pretty sure that British courts would insist on a fair recompense of originators, but only if LL profited by their assumption of property rights, which seems unlikely. From the point at which the ToS changed, however, creators who ticked the box gave away their rights. It seems simple to me. Don't make anything new. Just keep on selling the old stuff. That stagnation will hasten the demise of LL, of course, but that has appeared inevitable for some time now.

Nielso wrote: Evererywhere I go, be it a RP sim or not a RP sim I see a huge fear and hatred to child avatars. You are obviously an ESLer, since you demonstrate the most indicative symptom of cultural semi-literacy by using the wrong preposition, ie "to", rather than "of". You then compound your trolling - intentional or otherwise - by expanding the title of your thread to include hatred as well as fear of child avatars. Although I am concerned that you don't actually understand fully the meanings of these words, I'm going to assume for the moment that you mean what you say, but do you mean to say that you see both of these emotions in the same avatars, or that one set of avatars fear you, and a completely separate collection of avatars hate you? Your complaint is worthless without further explanation, which I would not encourage you to pursue. You also, later in your post, confuse ageplay with sexual ageplay, which is a really stupid thing to do. All in all, your OP is not merely a waste of space, but an invitation for those, who, like me, find child avatars ridiculous and annoying (no, I neither fear them, nor hate them; I feel the same towards them as I do children running around in pubs) to have their opinions confirmed, that those who play child avatars are unable to express themselves coherently, even when they are not pretending to lisp.

My wife says it's almost impossible to tell the difference between me working and being on strike. ETA: Both involve sitting in a comfy chair in front of a screen, with a beer in one hand and hitting a keyboard with the other.

Actually it's just a very strong local nasal anaesthetic spray. --||-

Oh dear. (Makes note to remind oneself not to express support in future for those whose comprehension of English lags considerably behind their understanding of technical matters.)

Toysoldier Thor wrote: This is another MAJOR BLOW to LL's credibility You mean they had any in the first place?

So you know, the poopourri spokeswoman is actually Scottish. The accent is just north of Dick Van **bleep**'s.

Freya Mokusei wrote: it's part of an experiment in security via obfuscation, minimal-trust paradigms and other long words I thought that approach had been abandoned because use of symmetric cryptography allows any node to corrupt the routing protocol operation within a level of trust, by mounting virtually any attack that would be possible without the presence of the scheme. Or is that where the obfuscation comes in; you hide the data in pizza boxes?

Freya Mokusei wrote: Ooh, and mature dating! As opposed to immature dating?

Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Sadly there is NO way to contacting LL for anything other than billing issues, if you are a resident except support tickets, abuse reports,, the Jira, and if you are premium, with live chat. Erm, you are not entirely correct in this respect. Actually, the format of the LL email address is in the public domain, as are the real life names of LL employees, so it is very simple to contact the relevant employees. Most Lindens and Linden representatives with non-Linden surnames can also be IMd and sent messages via their private feeds, since most don't seem to understand the privacy settings and have made no adjustments to the default settings to restrict incoming communications. Whether they actually respond is another matter. Whether they respond in a meaningful, or helpful manner, is yet another.

Keli Kyrie wrote: Some of these ads seem dangerous to me. I get warnings from my Virus Software and my Phone that some of these ads are dangerous. I don't understand why LL would let them be used. For the same reason that most crimes are committed. There's money in it.

Sy Beck wrote: Coby Foden wrote: Out of curiosity though I've had the direct net TV stream on for many hours now. I occasionally glance there to stare the waiting journalists and police officers on guard. () :smileytongue: Interestingly enough in history a Royal birth was quite the spectator sport. Quite literally hundreds of people would be in attendance at the birth or at least very nearby. When the future direction of a country's politics and policy is about to see the appearance/debut of a key player then many interested parties had or demanded the right to be present to ensure there was no foul play. In fact I think it was still required up to the mid-70s that a member of the government (Home Secretary I think) had to be present and bear witness to the birth of a royal child. So this circus going on at the moment is not uncommon, just a little removed. It had something to do with the potential spiriting away of inappropriately dusky or oriental looking progeny, to be replaced with more Germanic babies, preferably resembling Winston Churchill. Awe . . . well, would you want a Sovereign that looked like Camilla?

Dilbert Dilweg wrote: I don't think it is wise to feed human food to dogs. It is abuse to your animal because he/she doesn't know what is good or bad for it. I know a Lady that always fed her dog steak and dinner scraps. All of her dogs died early and suffered. Still to this day, she doesn't beleive she is killing her own dogs. Even though the vet says so as well. Did you know the Ancient Romans didn't distinguish between dogs and cats either. Awe . . . for which some gladiators were eternally grateful.

DId you regurgitate it first? Awe . . . Talking of which, here's an example of taking coals to Newcastle.

Czari Zenovka wrote: Porky Gorky wrote: I am English and I am VERY EXCITED about the royal birth ......mainly because I want to see whether or not the baby is Ginger and enjoys dressing up as a Nazi in it's spare time. Pulls out my secret decoder ring to try to decipher that...or maybe it's an inside British joke? This may help. Awe . . . Gaffes run in the British Royal family; think US Presidential dynasties, but longer lasting

I'm not at all interested in kids in SL. Awe . . . But where do you draw the line between a new royal baby and Marianne?

Sy Beck wrote: Awe Thor wrote: Ahhh, all is explained. The Aussie cricket team wanted to finish the Second Test early, in four days, so they could use the day off to watch the TV and net coverage of their next-but-two ruler's birth. Awe . . . I thought their pathetic performance could not be fully explained by lack of talent or commitment. ETA Although what was their excuse for the First Test? Well the baby will be a future Australian monarch so it should be out in less than 20 minutes and crying. In that case, should we be expecting the baby to be called Kim - whatever gender - after post-match scenes involving a famous losing Aussie cricket captain? Awe . . . it was all Kerry Packer's fault!