Jump to content

SirLeighBastard

Resident
  • Content Count

    239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About SirLeighBastard

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. HarrisonMcKenzie wrote: Ooo. Me! Me! Pick me! I live in Asia, and so I am usually in world after midnight. While I do stuff with my family still, most of my friends are asleep, and most events in SL are based on American times and so there isn't really anything happening when I get to log. I play a kid, bit I do have a bunch of friends who are grownups. If you're cool with that, drop me a line. If you are a kid you should be tucked up in bed at that late time of night. Shame on you. ***Call me vulgar? YASNY!
  2. Gadget Portal wrote: So, I'm online between 9 PM to 9 AM, and it seems like SL is fairly dead at these hours. Everywhere I go, it's empty sims or bots. Or both, which is just misleading. So does anyone have any interesting, active places to go when it gets ultra late in SL time? Obviously, everybody is going to places where they know you won't be able to find them. ***Call me if I am ever inworld; that's never
  3. jjccc Coronet wrote: I have noticed that Linden lab mass ban people on the 28th of the month for some reason dont no why. It's the day before they get paid on the 29th, which gets withheld if they have done nothing demonstrable during the month, and most of them haven't. ***Call me if your direct debit bounces
  4. DejaHo wrote: Pep brought people to this house. Imho ! He drove a lot away as well, though. The boring and hyper-sensitive ones mainly. But new ones seem to have returned. Back to work then... ***Call me if you spot an interesting thread
  5. Shannon Danick wrote: Hmm. I've actually tried it both ways. That won't impress Dres much. ***Call him, I am sure he can illuminate your experience
  6. Theresa Tennyson wrote: SirLeighBastard wrote: As a solipsist, I made you do so. So, the only thing capable of proving yourself right is you? (Psst! Look at my first post in this thread.) Truth is universal, but the ignorant are unable to recognise it. ***Call me when you realise it is Friday again
  7. Shannon Danick wrote: Pffft, you're pathetic. Probably angry because you're most likely one of the many I have turned down over the years. Happy "gaming". I have never been turned down in SL or RL. I guess it's the silver tongue, or maybe that I am fantastically attractive and extremely rich. Or maybe that I have very low standards. Although I would not stoop so far as you. ***Call me in private . . . oh, you did already
  8. Shannon Danick wrote: Condescending much? The fact I have survived and been VERY successful in SL since 2009, speaks for its self. And yes, in that timeframe, I have bumped in to pigs like you....that's why my Mute list is so full. I can see people like you coming. And I have an itchy clicking finger. Looks like you get added to my list as soon as I log inworld. Condescending AND accurate. Thank you for confirming my viewpoint. ***Call me if you want the names of my other 100 or so alts; you can waste your time adding those to your list too
  9. Theresa Tennyson wrote: SirLeighBastard wrote: Make up your mind! The human who joined SL was not the same as the human who typed the original post in this thread, and a different human is now typing this response. In addition, SirLeighBastard does not exist, except as a label to attach to what you seem to perceive, incorrectly, as a coherent single individual. The Many Worlds Implementation applies, of course, although this is only tangentially of relevance in refuting your misconceptions. No, I picked up on the incoherence quite a while ago. Your reply died aborning, as I had already stated that I was addressing a person, which I specifically said could also be a partnership or corporation -- i.e. multiple humans acting collectively -- and in English "you" is both the second-person singular and second person plural pronoun. SirLeighBastard most certainly does exist -- as a Second LIfe account. How could I reply to it otherwise? As a solipsist, I made you do so. ***Call me when you have discovered that, in law (in civilised countries at least) a corporation is NOT multiple humans acting collectively, but a legal entity in its own right.
  10. Shannon Danick wrote: Then you "Sir", know nothing of SecondLife. Just like the OP. And you, sweetheart, are just as naive as the succession of dumb broads who have believed every lie I have ever told them in SL. ***Call me if you really don't believe that you can be gamed in SL - and if you are absolutely sure that you haven't been . . .
  11. Shannon Danick wrote: Why, oh why hasn't someone just shouted the obvious reply to this fool? (OP).... SecondLife is NOT a game! Go away Troll! There, I feel a little better. Carry on. Because it IS a game. ***Call me when you have worked out that about half SL's inhabitants treat it as a game [And the other half whinge in these forums about what swines men are.]
  12. The Many Worlds Interpretation means that there is at least one Universe in which a woman is the Supreme Being. It just isn't this one. ***Call me when he confirms the eleventh commandment
  13. Theresa Tennyson wrote: SirLeighBastard wrote: Theresa Tennyson wrote: SirLeighBastard wrote: Theresa Tennyson wrote: SirLeighBastard wrote: A very successful British comedian used to wonder why parents took their children to supermarkets just to smack them, and in the same way, I was wondering why so many people joined SL just so that they could post in the forums to demonstrate in public how stupid they were. Go on, prove me right! You just did. Your reply makes no sense at all. Thank you for participating. ***Call me when you have learned the lyrics to The Logical Song 1.) In creating this account, you joined Second Life. 2.) Strong circumstantial evidence indicates that the account that you created and which posted this is a Second Life account created primarily/only to post on the forums. 3.) Many of the posts of this avatar appear to be demonstrations of your self-impression of your intellect as compared to others. 4.) "Demonstrating how stupid one is" doesn't mean one is stupid (i.e. possessing a high level of stupidity) - it's very possible to demonstrate that one isn't very stupid at all, which would be a level of stupidity and therefore a "demonstration of how stupid they are." Of course, if you didn't understand that... Who is this "you" that is referred to in the post? It reminds me of the Welsh Cocktail chat up line. What's a Welsh Cocktail? A pint of bitter and a piece of ewe. ***Call me when TT has worked out what identity does or does not mean here The person (human, partnership or corporation; singular of people) who actually typed your hypothesis. By using the phrase "people joined SL" you acknowledged the existence of humans as opposed to avatars; in fact, it can be about nothing but humans instead of avatars, based on both "people" and "joined." SirLeighBastard couldn't have joined SL as he was created in the moment the account was registered. Joining is the act of connecting two existing things. If you disagree with Sartre (which is usually pretty sensible) and maintain that SirLeighBastard had a pre-existing essence you'll have to explain how an essence can perform an action. Make up your mind! The human who joined SL was not the same as the human who typed the original post in this thread, and a different human is now typing this response. In addition, SirLeighBastard does not exist, except as a label to attach to what you seem to perceive, incorrectly, as a coherent single individual. The Many Worlds Implementation applies, of course, although this is only tangentially of relevance in refuting your misconceptions. If you seriously want to get into a philosophical or psychological discussion about "essence", then feel free to do so, but be prepared to defend your beliefs regarding the existence, or otherwise, of a soul, and to explain how it can come into existence and where it might go when its corporeal instantiation is terminated. ***Call me when you can demonstrate a degree of self-consistency
  14. MishkaKatyusha wrote: go watch movies about confucius,or perhaps socrates,and youll soon understand Should I watch them in ancient Chinese and Greek, with which languages I have less than a passing knowledge, but might make more sense to me than your abysmal attempts to express difficult concepts in a language which you are obviously ill-equipped to do, in an online environment with which you appear to have little familiarity. MishkaKatyusha wrote: and also,your opinion is confined to you,while you have a right to it,insisting that everyone else beleives it is a false generalization The above, and the following, is not an opinion; you are making very little sense and have created a thread in the wrong forum. Again. ***Call me when you have the faintest clue.
  15. Benson Gravois wrote: Question: In your opinion and experience, do you feel that you can make as intimate and as strong a conection with someone in sl as you canin rl? Of course not! Although I can not speak for all the socially disfunctional and inept individuals I repeatedly come into contact with inworld and in these forums, whose rl connections may be as inadequate and unsatisfying as the sensorily limited associations that they are involved in here. ***Call me when you get a life
×
×
  • Create New...