Lunar Core

Really now? That is not what you stated nor what you implied. "My point is that whoever wrote the support ticket, with a 30 day deadline to respond to the ticket, was not aware that the ticket would be automatically closed in 3 days." The above are your exact words Ms. Galli. So no, your point is as stated in the above quote, not what I stated should have been done. A point that has been pointed out to be a wrongful assumption on your part. Kindly do not attempt to rewrite your own post history next time.

There was no misreading done. You yourself stated that you had been given a case number. I am sorry that you lack basic reasoning and reading comprehension skills. I will now spell it out for you: The thirty day limit cited within the e-mail is a legal requirement. The three day limit for the automated system is applied no matter the case. You should have at least given a query response asking for clarification before that automated response was triggered. "They" did not close the case. The automated system did when you failed to even so much as attach a question. Own your mistake, contact support, get the ticket reopened and next time do not ask for clarification on a support ticket using an e-mail. In closing: Yes, the system should have had a longer time frame or been suspended for such a ticket. It was not and you should never have assumed it would be. Especially if you have actually used the support ticket system before.

The thirty day deadline is a legal requirement. The automated response is part of the support ticket system. The assumption on the part of the employee opening the ticket is that no one would go for three days without making some sort of response. You did not respond in any manner, not even to ask for clarification. Not using the support system. Reading your comment there I can only say this: Yes, you were supposed to provide the documentation or at least respond to the ticket when you found it. You were not supposed to contact the employee directly through e-mail. If the support line knew nothing about the ticket it is far more likely that you failed to give them the ticket number so they could look it up. Apparently, you did need instructions as you made assumptions that were quite unsound. Your "point" is nothing more than your personal feelings on the matter. I have filed a variety of support tickets with various services and found that the automated system (which is employed by many, using a slightly longer timeframe) is often assumed to not be an issue. Anecdotal and personal experience? Yes, it is. It does show however that service providers expect you to at least use their support system for inquiries about a support ticket. If we were discussing the government instead of a service provider, I'd agree with you.

Not really. Unless you responded to the ticket with the requested information, the automated response would have been sent out. It's a machine Ms. Galli, programmed to respond under specific circumstances and applied to all Support Tickets equally. If you intend to respond to them, contact support and notify them.

Pray tell why you do not use VTOL aircraft? Simply put, using tricks of any kind to fore someone else to move is underhanded and immature. They will not listen to reason, so find a way to work with what you have.

Or move on and ignore her. You know, the mature way out of this.

That is an automated response, sent out when no actions are taken by an end user.

Maelstrom Janus wrote: Hey Ive got a forum stalker once again getting his facts completely wrong too.... Hmm, having lurked here long enough to have read that particular thread I can safely say that Perrie is one hundred percent correct where data usage is concerned.

Maelstrom Janus wrote: Considering I spend most of my sl time 'at altitude ' and flying vehicles myself ..... and havent seen any other airborne vehicle for a good year or so.... By th way your facts on the ostrich are erroneous assuming you are using that old fallacy about em burying their head in the sand... so basically your facys were 100% wrong.... Considering the both of you are using anecdotal evidence (personal experience) to support your opinions, neither of you are making factual statements regarding Second Life air travel. You are relating your personal experiences. Treating these experiences as if they define the rest of the world damages your credibility.

Maelstrom Janus wrote: Ah ban lines and security orbs - legalised griefing implements .... one of the many reasons we never see aircraft flying in sl any more..... Sorry, your opinion on existing security systems and access restriction methods does not rquate out to hard facts Mr. Janus. The correct phrasing is as follows: "Ah ban lines and security orbs .... one of the many reasons - in my opinion - we never see aircraft flying in sl any more....."

Welcome. To. Reality. When all other service providers and entertainment providers (including Blizzard) manage to block Spammers from sending their messages through Instant message in an effective manner that reduces such events to negligible, let us know.

Thank you for confirming that all you are capable of is projecting your own nonsense onto anyone who dares to give you common sense advice. If you honestly expect each and every service provider to do everything for you, you will live in eternal disappointment. That is your choice.

There are also ways of reading a post without inventing rudeness or hypocrisy. Learn them. Or go through life with the belief that everyone that is blunt with you is rude.

Nope - it's reality. Running to Linden Lab, without making even one realistic suggestion, is "one-step thinking" of a sort that no other service is expected to listen to. Follow the advice you've been given or put forth a reasonable suggestion (no, charging for an account is not realistic or reasonable). Continually responding to common sense methods for spam control with your "one-step thinking" projectionist crap does nothing more than show the type of person you really are: One that expects everyone else to do everything for them. But hey - at least your sort keeps those lovely Identity Theft "protection" services in business! One born every minute! Edited to add: Oh and so you are aware: Even Blizzard cannot stop spammers of this nature. They've tried. Their response? Report and block the spammer. In the case of Blizzard, these spammers even go so far now as to try and hack/hijack existing accounts. Be very thankful that all you're getting is a minor annoyance (an IM or offline directed to your e-mail) as it could very well be far worse.

Learn the difference between whining and stating facts before laughing next time. Maybe then you will not be laughing at a hypocrisy that does not exist.

Perrie Juran wrote: Anya Ristow wrote: Lunar Core wrote: tell a user how to fix it on THEIR END one-step thinking mathematical fail I-got-mine solution Reminds me of the spam apologists of the 90's. Just delete it. Learn to use procmail. Blah blah blah. If you're not a shut-in and actually know people, look around you at the people in your life. Do they know how to filter their email? Should that be an obstacle to using SL? Ever hear of a company called google, and a product called gmail? That's right, people like spam filters. People *need* spam filters. My solution would be even simpler than yours. I could block all SL email. Done. No adding to filters ever again. I got mine. But some part of me still has hope for SL. I want it to be non-hostile to real people. I want it to be successful. I want it to be a place that isn't only for dweebs and their anti-social suggestions and their spam filters. Any effort LL makes is multiplied by the number of users they have. It's worth some effort to protect their platform and make it non-hostile for their users. I'm not sure I completely understand your post. But what makes us think that LL isn't looking into the problem? Many are assuming that LL shut down the private message function on My Second Life in response to the Mmook spam. The timing makes it look that way but I am not convinced it is the only reason. I have no evidence that I can cite, but I personally am wondering about the security of the Web Based services in general. And Instant Messaging In World. How the heck do you set up Spam Filters server side on something like that? Viewer side it would be plausible but it would need to be my choice whether or not I ever wanted to see the word F*ck in an IM. I sure don't want LL playing Chat Nanny for me. Could making new account registration harder on the Spammers? Possibly, but for many of them it would only be a minor annoyance. Pay for accounts? If Mmook spent ten dollars and earned one hundred it would still be a nice ROI. Maybe LL can come up with a solution. I truly hope that they do. But the proposed solutions to the problems I keep hearing may not be as simple to implement as people are making them out to be. On my end Mmook will be treated as spam by my E Mail. That took almost no effort on my part. It took less time to set that up than what it took for me to write this post! This bolded part a thousand times over. Frankly if people cannot take the rather small amount of time it takes to set up a filter for something like this, they do not need to be using the Internet. You will get Spam on occasion from various sources no matter what. Instead of crying to your ISP or any other service to handle it for you (and lets be realistic here, they're already handling it as best they can), people should be taking common sense steps themselves. Anya's continual "one step thinking" response is nothing more than a projection. It is "one step thinking" to demand that a service do everything for you. No other service is expected to supply the sort of "do it all for me" solutions that have been demanded by some of the most vocal users here. None. This is no different, Second Life is not some Special Snowflake that requires that sort of response. as another poster has pointed out, some of the third party programs already have an option to block all IMs that do not originate from your firend list. This option will not work for everyone but quite frankly, expecting the service owner to cover each and every use case is unrealsitic.

Oh look! The very user I've been talking about has come back to once again throw away anything that isn't a cry to Linden Lab! No, it is not "one step thinking" - it is reality and personal responsibility. If you cannot handle that, don't use the internet. Simple as that.

I say this as if people need to learn and use personal responsibility and quit looking to someone else to solve all of their problems, nothing more and nothing less. Nowhere have I said a single thing about Linden Lab not bearing any responsibility. That is you making an assumption Dresden. The ONLY thing Linden Lab needs to do in this case is add in the option to block all IMs from anyone that is not in your friend's list. That's it. Same as any other IM system. Barring that, all other methods are on the user. I have seen no one here make such a suggestion. This entire thread has been nothing more than "WAAAAAH! I'S GETTIN SPAMMEDEDED! FIX IT!" Someone comes along to tell a user how to fix it on THEIR END (and they'll have to follow those instructions anyway, eventually) these same users that want Linden Lab to do everything for them disregard it. As I said, I remained silent for so long for a reason: I have no tolerance for this sort of crap. You can preach what you've been preaching until the cows come home and it will not change the fact that people here need to learn to take a bit of responsibility for their actions and a bit of control over their own things (like their e-mail) instead of making generalized "FIXITFIXITFIXIT" complaints. If they'd been suggesting the standard "Ignore IMs from everyone not on my friend's list" function, there'd be no reason to tell them off.

Wrong. Personal Responsibility: Learn some, use it, stop the whining. Welcome to life.

From what I understand, his "bandwidth package" has no data limit attached to it. I was speaking more or less about the actual data speed being sent through the ISP systems. On top of this, his in home stream is on a dedicated machine. A basic laptop on a hard line (ethernet connection) could run the streaming software. ISP upkeep cost him a little over $60 a month and the dedicated hardware was something his roommate bought off of Craig's List for a little over $115. A former rack server. Granted, not everyone can afford even a used bit of hardware like that and such a deal does not come around every day. The point though was that one does not need to pay for an external stream if you're able to get a good price from your ISP. Adding to it, the advantage of having an in house stream is that you're in control of up/down time. The stream server going down for any reason is one of the biggest issues/complaints the DJ friends I have have voiced.

Some advice from my DJ friend - one bit of it that counters another poster at that: Hosting a Shoutcast stream yourself (assuming your ISP package can handle it as well as your hardware) will not cost you a single cent beyond what you pay for your internet access. You may have to set up your software and hardware firewalls to allow the traffic through however. There are a few articles in the Winamp forums on how to set it all up. Second: While there are some very good, free bits of DJ software out there, the bulk of them only allow MP3 or similar formats. If you're going to do as my pal has done and use non-standard formats (like any sort of chiptune as an example) your best bet is to stick with Winamp and grab a few of the input plugins from their site. If you need to run the audio through a DSP as well to clean it up, there's a nice DSP stacker or two offered as well as a few good DSPs offered as well. I'd tell you to use the same stream DSP he does but it is sadly no longer offered by the parent company (same company that makes SAM made a Winamp streaming DSP years ago), same with the DSP he uses for audio cleanup (iZotope no longer offers Ozone MP for download/purchase). Get yourself a decent mic or headset as well. If you do not mind the cost, there's the Logitec H530 on Amazon.

I think you should learn the difference between being told to use common sense and taking responsibility for your own actions and being told not to try and enjoy Second Life. But hey, from what I have seen of some of the users in this forum during the time I remained silent, I do not wonder why some users have lost their patience with others or have simply moved on to places where they can post exactly how they feel without fear of being censored by a bunch of Disney rejects. It amazes me that users here willfully misinterpret what others type or are so stuck up that the slightest bit of impatience or annoyance in a post ends up reported. THIS crap is why I remained silent for as long as I did. Everyone here is so coddled and thin skinned that it's a fraking joke. The DJ I mentioned in an earlier post? Most he can do thanks to some overly zealous user is look at the forum without ever logging in. As for myself, I am likely to go back to being silent until I cannot tolerate the foolishness anymore. Otherwise I'll end up the same way.

Oh yes, and Private Messages here in the Forum are still active. You can compose them from the same section you go to to view them.

Your point has been to whine and cry and have Linden Lab hold your hand.

Freya Mokusei wrote: Lunar Core wrote: More thatrical nonsense and a blatant failure pathological whiners Anyone that uses that piece of paid for, overblown and fluffed up trash to decide where to visit deserves the crap they get. Use some common sense, a few search terms and think for yourself instead of listeing to a glorified Classifieds page. Phishing attempts are only as good as the fools that fall for them. Those theatrics and exxagerations of yours make you look silly and foolish. You're welcome to disagree, but you're only one more opinion here. Extracts above indicate to me that yours is particularly more noxious and less useful than most. Moving to discard your posts. You don't get to decide how much responsibility LL has towards me or any other user. You also don't get to define the purposes of SL or which functions are or aren't important. As I've said above, LL clearly feels differently, and I'm glad for that. I'm also pretty glad that LL has demonstrated more sense and better understanding of the problems than you seem to be able to manage. Bye. Sorry, you don't get to decide either cupcake. Discard all you'd like, next time do it silently instead of proving how much of a drama monger you really are.