LlazarusLlong

DejaHo wrote: PS Do you have a preference or are you sensitive to how others should refer to you? I mean LlazarusLlong is just too many keystrokes. LL would do; I don't think it would cause any confusion, would it? Actually, since I am probably now the Father of the Forum, you could call me Pop, I suppose. [it's slightly easier to type than my preferred #1 sobriquet, SLIG, which is short for "Significantly Lacking In Gravitas"]

Aislin Ceawlin wrote: (laughs loudly) Damn you're good! No this color is NOT found in the natural world....and trying to get (cough cough) "everything" to match is quite a task.! Also, we didn't HAVE "packets" in the old days, we used crushed plants, dirt and rocks and WE LIKED IT!! Ah, I only asked because my daughter came downstairs on Sunday morning with hair that colour, having gone to bed a strawberry blonde. Apparently she has a fancy dress party to go to as Ariel.

Aislin Ceawlin wrote: LMAO! Ummm, that may have actually been me at some point in the old days.....Not sure if I ever went that far, though. Took me a while to understand a certain old forum soul....lol! The forums are really not important enough that quitting them should be necessary; and they are certainly not sufficiently important that anyone should find it necessary to return. Unless you're inherently contrarily refractory, of course.

Aislin Ceawlin wrote: There's been a lot of great advice so far, not much I can add. Bobbie is right, how many of us actually look like our avies?? Your Second Life, Your imagination! While Aislin is designed to look like the younger me, I don't feel the need to advertise the fact that I'm not as thin or young as Aislin anymore in my profile. I know that's a pale comparison to gender, but you get what I mean, I'm sure. Presumably you have colour matched your SL hair to that on the RL packet though?

Aislin Ceawlin wrote: /me ducks head waiting for Llazarus :matte-motes-shocked: By George, I think she's got it!

valerie Inshan wrote: LlazarusLlong wrote: As long as you don't take me too seriously, Val . . . As long as you don't underestimate me..... I have great respect for your musical taste and linguistic capabilities. Less so for your choice of forum threads to hang out. [That your avatar looks increasingly like a mix of Sophia Loren and Gina Lollobrigida also helps.]

KarenMichelle Lane wrote: However, Phat Azz is no longer available... Was it J-Lo or KK that sued for passing off?

KarenMichelle Lane wrote: Oh wait....this question is asking for a veiled recommendation Phat Azz sells wedding veils?

KarenMichelle Lane wrote: it can be relocated to the very pinpoint Sub Sub forum titled: MarketPlace / Banned Product / Alternate / Recommendations That is PRECISELY the response you should have made in the first place!

valerie Inshan wrote: *laughs* And you are fast too!.... And so predictable! I prefer when you whisper to me in "Basque": I so love the Espelette pep..pep...pepper! (sorry I sneezed, so much pepper, you know....) As long as you don't take me too seriously, Val . . .

1. This thread should be in Wanted, or Answers; it is NOT a Discussion! 2. It took me three seconds to Google "Phat Azz Second Life" to come up with multiple accurate responses. 3. The OP, and other cognitively handicapped or sufferers of Indolence Syndrome who might see that the OP received a speedy response are likely to be encouraged to clog up our General Discussion forum with further queries demonstrating their slothfulness. Please, if you see such a thread opened in GD, RIC it to the Mods, requesting its removal, and if you wish to offer an answer, wait until it has been transferred to a "more helpful forum" as Greg so delicately puts it. [Ask and ye shall receive, Val!]

Why do some of those who feel the need to gain kudos over in Answers (not all of them; for example, Rolig is too busy and Lindal knows better) think that they can come to General Discussions and apply the same attitudes, expecting threads to remain on track, not recognising humour, and thinking that everything has a single, correct answer? I have news for you, guys. You won't enjoy the way GD is going, so you might be better off sticking to your cut-and-pasting. But don't worry, we'll send over any threads started in GD which should be in Answers, so you'll still have stuff to do. [Ditto for threads appropriate to Technical or Commerce; we might keep some of the Adult ones though.]

Ohjiro Watanabe wrote: In this context Derek was being a care troll. So you felt able to be a Godwinazi?

You could always use a Displayname saying something like: "TestosteroneFuelledStallionWithHugeWellUsedMemberJustPlayingAtBeingAGirlieBecauseILikeWearingVirtualFrillyPanties". I think that would probably get the right message across.

Ohjiro Watanabe wrote: Little Hitler with his rule book. LOL Erm, it's not Derek's rule book, and in fact, the central point that Derek is trying to make is that there isn't a rule in the rule book which covers the display in the forum of real life photos of individuals made voluntarily publicly available on the net with no identification made of the subjects and with no attempt to associate the real life identities of the individuals shown with specific SL avatars. Non-existence of such a rule would not, however, preclude its being used as an adjunct to the CG catchall: "the actions taken (or not taken) by Linden Lab and our moderators are at our sole discretion, and we may act without warning or explanation" While this does contradict the commitments that successive Community Managers have publicly made, and which would seem supported by Ebbe's very public pronouncement early in his reign of a desire for "transparency with authority", I understand that LL management might find it easier, and less embarrassing if it occasionally exercised the right not to explain why they had not followed their own defined Guidelines. In this context, I think Derek was trying to be helpful to the poster, lest she should fall foul of this "rule".

Madelaine McMasters wrote: LL would benefit from elimination from the GD forum. Did you REALLY post that about me? [Ah, no, you didn't. Freudian slip, I suppose.] [You were actually just being a dog in the manger.]

Darrius Gothly wrote: LlazarusLlong wrote: {snip} [Apart from the bit which says you are not supposed to annoy anyone, which means that I could RIC the majority of posts ever made in the forums, because inhumanity annoys me.] FIFY! FIFM! [settle down there boys! It's almost impossible to tell if somebody is (not being) serious using just text.] [To avoid misunderstanding, you may assume I am always serious.] [Except when I wrote the sentence above.]

Does esperanto mean hopefully in Esperanto?

CleoSertorii wrote: fine, should i just pull the damn photo if it will make all of you happy? They are public figures and their identities are well known by anyone who takes the time to look. Don't take it personally, Cleo, I was merely posing a hypothetical question in the hope that a Linden representative might offer a viewpoint. Myself, I don't think you have done anything at all wrong.

CleoSertorii wrote: the photo doesnt violate any of SL's rules. Isn't it invading the privacy of Cariba Heine, Claire Holt and Phoebe Tonkin? Or is it OK because you haven't given their names, or the names of the avatars they use in SL?

CleoSertorii wrote: What i would like to know is why does it seem like every thread on this forum has to end up being some kind of a debate? The clue is in this forum's name . . .

CleoSertorii wrote: lastly, your pic is sooo of topic, im not sure why you bothered to post it...but whatever. As an aside, I don't think that it is possible to be off topic in General Discussion.

CleoSertorii wrote: the people in the photo are three actresses portraying fictional characters from a tv show that is the RP basis for my avatar. The photo was posted online by the studio who produced the show. They are not SL residents, and unless you actually know who these actresses are, you'd have no chance in hell of ever identifying them just off of the photo. The problem Cleo, is that what you are describing is VERY similar to a recent problematical interpretation of the ToS/CG. Don't take it personally; leave that to Derek!

Madelaine McMasters wrote: The point he may be trying to make is that someone might interpret the ToS, CG, etc in an over-the-top way, RICing your post. Should that happen, I think it's possible the moderator would simply remove the post rather than consider the validity of the RIC. You might think that, but I don't, and in fact, recent experience suggests that there are others in authority who disagree with you as well. Madelaine McMasters wrote: There may be a few people who've carefully read the ToS/CG and exploit it for their own enjoyment, Criticising the moderators and their decisions, even implicitly, is specifically against the ToS/CG, Madelaine

Hey, you've changed from being a dragon to a fox! But you still seem to have problems expressing yourself coherently.