Kiera Clutterbuck
-
Posts
427 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Kiera Clutterbuck
-
-
2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:6 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
This is a war mentality. I think you're imagining others have this when you are the one who does. It's projection. I don't have enemies, but I do have people I disagree with and become angry with.
When one is angry at specific peoples and groups for an extended period and even look for them to leave or be otherwise sanctioned, they are typically known as an enemy,
Which specific peoples and groups are you referring to?
Again, I don't think in terms of "enemies".
-
2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:
Because it is the manner in which it is usually done where one group is pitted against another. Not human rights for all but only the right's for one's favoured groups.
If your group does not believe and practice human rights then you will be challenged, yes. You cannot have the right to do what is wrong.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:
The fact that so many people want me and others to just stfu suggests, maybe, that complacency and happy acceptance of "the way things are" is not a notable component of the ideologies of social justice and progressive thought.
Woe be the new forum. LOL
-
5 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:10 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
Are you sure you don't have severe issues with projection?
I realize there are those who without a definable enemy, have a tendency to start eating their own. Do you really think you can be very involved in a forum where there are no people to call out?
This is a war mentality. I think you're imagining others have this when you are the one who does. It's projection. I don't have enemies, but I do have people I disagree with and become angry with.
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:
Are you sure you don't live for the debate against an enemy whether real or imaginary?
Are you sure you don't have severe issues with projection?
-
1
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, blissfulbreeze said:
Newsflash...LL doesn't care if me or anyone else leaves the forum. It's useless to throw that ultimatum around. Some people need to get over themselves. We are dispensable.
I wasn't stating an ultimatum; I was expressing how I feel here now with the new changes. The forum feels deadened, and I feel confused about what is acceptable to say and confused as to how I'm supposed to separate my brain in strange ways in order to post here.
-
5
-
1
-
-
One of the Moles said they were experimenting with these changes. And they have allowed this thread. So it seems a bit of feedback on the changes is still allowed.
The changes could be for the best as I'm willing to accept I can't see all of the big picture! But I do detect that the forum feels deadened, and I may elect to leave if I can't bring my real self into discussions a bit (not that I want to talk Politics or argue, but it feels creepy to exist as only a cartoon character on a forum). Or am I a real person here on the forum who is only supposed to be talking about only my cartoon existence in SL but not about anything real happening within SL?
Can I sue for causing my brain to be split apart in strange and confusing ways? j/k-
4
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:35 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
I have faith that eventually those on the forum who oppose Democracy will be sanctioned and fade away.
When they are sanctioned then it is no longer a democracy.
By being sanctioned on this forum I don't mean they should necessarily be removed or banned; I mean they should be told they are wrong, and this would be the penalty. Eventually I hope they would fade away by frequent confrontations, as their beliefs and actions cause much harm to others.
Some who espouse hate and are anti-democratic actually believe such sanctions would take away their freedom.
But as Lincoln said when a senator espoused slavery and claimed its removal meant his freedom was being taken away:"You cannot have the right, to do what is wrong"
Of course eventually they were forced to do what is right via the Civil War. Sadly that is sometimes needed.
-
4
-
-
15 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:20 hours ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
We need to keep haters from harming others, but that does not mean we should hate them. So I partially agree.
Well there are laws to keep haters from harming others but if one is truly interested in seeing others drop anger, resentment and prejudice, it needs to be put in a context of how it helps the hater to let them go.
I'll first off mention that hate has a root of fear, not indifference. To hate something or someone is to fear them for the potential threat they pose to the hater's core instincts like Self and Social esteem, the sexual and security instincts. These are the primal instincts every living thing is borne with and when those are threatened, there is a tendency to react negatively to whatever is threatening them. It is of no value to order someone to drop the hate as one is then just adding to the threat of a basic instinct. Rather one needs to show how the hate, anger and prejudices are baseless and counterproductive as most negative emotions are.
Better to attract someone to change with honey rather than vinegar through showing the benefits of losing the hate for the hater. Now in my circles that is somewhat easy because for alcoholics, addicts and other obsessive type dysfunctions, anger, resentments, prejudices and fears are the number one cause of addictive behaviours. Without going through a process of discovering what they are and becoming willing to let them go, there is little hope that there will be a long term recovery from those obsessions and addictions.
For those who don't suffer from any sort of external and visible dysfunction but still have a lot of anger and prejudices (repressed or externalized), there are still benefits to letting go of them as for one, those emotions
trigge.. cause increased stress hormones caused by negative emotional triggers, leading to a slew of medical problems. And no, I am not interested in getting into a debate about the validity of that. The point is that until one can promote the potential benefits to a hater of why they should let go off their hate, one is only banging their head against the wall and suffering from the same problems as the hater themselves because it is only hating the hater and self serving in the end. The activist without empathy for the hater, has no testimony that they can promote the "no hate" lifestyle with and wind up just looking like a Pharisee when it is easily seen that the activist also suffers from their own hates and prejudices.If I had been a French citizen near the beaches of Normandy when all those activists in boats came to save me I would care not if they were in a bad mood. They could have egos the size of the Eiffel tower with hatred stretching up to the heavens and that would be fine by me. Just see what's right, and do what's right. No need to be an angel to do good in the world.
Democracy requires vision, not angels. I have faith that eventually those on the forum who oppose Democracy will be sanctioned and fade away.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Keiko Kiyori said:
Sorry wrong day. For some reason I thought it was Tuesday.
You freaked me out by making me think for a few seconds I had to have something done right now that is not due till tomorrow!! 😁
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:
Trying to justify hate on being politically correct or ok because the other is a hater
We need to keep haters from harming others, but that does not mean we should hate them. So I partially agree.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:
Someone in marketing decided parasocial dopamine driven advertiser money was more important.
So instead of advancement in group social tooling that requires a time investment from users to integrate, we have TikTok. A service so perfect it's actually harmful to neuro divergent people.
Discord is IRC, Reddit is Usenet.
It's almost like the "powers that be" (not in some conspiracy sense) don't want people to truly connect and form relationships anymore.
-
2
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Drake1 Nightfire said:
If we still called it Shell Shock perhaps those suffering from it might get the care they need. Take the life out of a condition by changing the words and you take the care out of treating it.
People are traumatized by incidents beyond bullets and war. Hence the change of names to reflect reality.
-
1
-
2
-
-
22 hours ago, Nalates Urriah said:
Anti-discrimination laws are generally made to control the government. As people try to push those laws into personal situations they run afoul of civil liberties. When people can’t force others to do as they want then they try get laws passed and we get a big mess.
Seems few people realize morality can’t be legislated.
Anti-discrimination laws are not made to legislate morality specifically. They are made to protect vulnerable populations from being hurt by others. In our case by the OP, I can't see how child avatars would be hurt, as there is ample room for them to traverse all the Bellisseria roads and attend gatherings there. Now if there truly was no place for them I would imagine LL would make an effort to accommodate them more in concert with protecting private property rights, as it would be good for SL's continued growth (particularly if child avatars in SL were numerous).
Like you, I would prefer the method of help not to be a top-down type (laws, governance), but instead focusing on ways to increase their reputation in SL. Sometimes though we do need a law!
-
2
-
-
On 7/30/2022 at 2:57 PM, Coffee Pancake said:
There is also the point that old school forums are a dying internet breed.
Sad to hear. Do you know why they are a dying internet breed?
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:
ETA: "Trigger" is not a judgement. Some people are ACTUALLY impacted by certain things or topics. That is how the word "trigger" got to be used. It was not "invented" as a judgmental or political or social term.
Many words were fine when invented, but when co-opted to mean something they do not mean anymore, or when used in the present day to insult others, we should stop using them (often the term is used as an insult by those who want to diminish others who are offended by their despicable behaviors. They are called "snowflakes" because they are "triggered").
Another reason not to use it: the word "triggered" was invented in the psychiatric field to denote someone who relives a past traumatic experience due to a present stimuli that reminds them of the past incident. Those with PTSD understand it well. It's an insult to the severity of a trigger experience for those who deal with PTSD when we make light of it.
I have to admit though, I do laugh at that triggered lion of yours
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, AnthonyJoanne said:
It won't work. I hate to be negative, but it just has zero chance of working for the same reason that Meta is never going to create a fully realised Metaverse.
At this time in the world, there are far too many constraints being enforced by a small minority who have artificially amplified their voices through the use of bots/sockpuppets and a rampantly biased legacy media who are willing to lie and expect no repercussions.
Remember that we've already SEEN activists go to Meta, disable all the safety mechanisms, and deliberately PURSUE sexual harassment so they could then claim to have been raped. This from a 'researcher' for an organisation with a deeply vested interest in pushing a very specific narrative. In other words, not a reliable source by ANY metric. The result has been countless clickbait articles loudly proclaiming that the metaverse is a hotbed of sexual violence.
I'll offer you an example to illustrate:
Second Life has succeeded to the extent that it has through user created content. If you were restricted to the stuff that LL provides, everyone would look the same, dress the same, and move the same. Variety is expensive ... LL has neither the resources nor the creativity in-house to provide the diverse range of goods available in world. It has taken many many years for motivated individuals to create all the stuff we have available to us.
Now consider this new Whatever Life. LL would create the infrastructure (ie the land, the base avatars, the mechanisms to 'do things' like walking, the scripting engine, and the mechanisms for building/importing stuff, etc) and that's about it. They would then want the users to create the content. But remember that we're talking about creating content NOW ... in a social matrix where the twitter mob WILL descend on you like rabid ferrets for any perceived infraction.
So picture, if you will, someone deciding to introduce something innocuous into Whatever Life. Let's say high heels, which are a pretty good seller in SL.
Now imagine a small bunch of 'activists' deciding that LL are facilitating the exploitation of women by encouraging them to put their bodies on display for the male gaze by wearing high heels which are clearly dangerously unhealthy and are meant only to objectify women ... endless ad-nauseum. If you can't find a suitable screed saying exactly that on the internet you aren't looking. Said small bunch of activists will then use their twitter bots to repost the same tweet over and over (word for word the same, mind you ... they don't even TRY to mask it) and get articles published on the web and scream like demented banshees.
It doesn't MATTER if women WANT to buy and wear high heels because THEY like them ... such 'activists' will trot out their 'internalised misogyny' and their 'patriarchal oppression' and deny those women any agency for daring to disagree. Same way that so-called 'anti-racists' will attack any black person for daring to disagree ... and trot out such lovely terms as <censored> and <deleted>. If you can't find exactly that on the internet, you aren't looking. The very fact that I have to censor myself rather than quote those terms which you can find on plenty of tweets is indicative that the terms themselves are racist.
Now remember that LL is not an organisation with anything like the fortitude to tell those people to sod off.
How motivated is a creator going to be if suddenly they are being harassed by 'activists' and are getting zero support from LL?
Not going to work. Not in this current social matrix.
I have major concern for you, Anthony, and I can't see how activists would prevent a reputable new virtual world. From this post and a couple others I've seen it seems you fear "activists are after me" a lot. I understand, as I've gotten paranoid myself at times, what with climate change, Coronavirus, restrictions for women and other minorities, and what seems to be a negative change in how we might be governed into the future. Now we add on these forum restrictions adding more uncertainty and fears on top of what we already deal with.
It's just too too much, and fears can easily start to govern our lives. Please step away from Twitter as it's not good for anyone in these stressful times.
It is interesting to ponder whether another SL could work though. I don't think it would work because you need a rather large base to get a momentum going. This is SL's main advantage and possibly why it continues. A new game wouldn't have this advantage and as someone pointed out it's just as likely people would just choose one of the other shiny new games, and one with the established community connections already in place many seek when joining a new game.
-
4
-
-
1 minute ago, diamond Marchant said:
Meta upped the price of Quest 2 by $100 ha ha ha - this post is OK cause the article I linked speaks of Second Life favorably
So what does this mean? It must be selling well?
-
1
-
-
.
-
2
-
1
-
6
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:
So people in the evolutionary paleontologist field even use the term so I think your attempt to cast shade on Rulkan using the term in an unrelated talk is just weak though probably to be expected. There are facts and then there are analogies. One sometimes needs to be able to discern between the two.
If outdated terminology like "lizard brain" is used to excuse murderous behavior in court, or used to denigrate animals, we need to get rid of it. Regardless of whether some amateurs or out-of-date scientists use the term as an analogy. We are supposed to respect pop psychology now and people ranting on YouTube, and scientists who don't know current findings and so add to the confusion?
-
2
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, Krystina Ferraris said:
Just quoting you Maddy but replying about eating dung. Coprophagy......
Hey I said on another thread I appreciated the spontaneous threads where we go off-topic, but this is going a bit too far! 😁😉
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:6 minutes ago, Kiera Clutterbuck said:
What we are seeing so much today is those who simply go against the mainstream or establishment and consider themselves as "free thinkers" because of that. But as you said earlier, mainstream thinking can sometimes be right and so this position is illogical.
That's called being "contrarian" or, in the case of my late brother-in-law, "curmudgeonly".
And a need to have a side to blame does strange things to the mind. LOL
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:
To clarify, that was the post that was specifically called out, but you'd have to go back a bit (days, weeks maybe) for context as to why.
Or have a working memory?
-
3 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:
I won't spoil it for you, but I do recommend the book.
If you read it, you may understand why I don't claim to be a "free thinker".
I will continue reading it for sure.
All we can do is try to be a "free thinker". The first step in achieving this more often does seem to be understanding one is frequently not a "free thinker".
What we are seeing so much today is those who simply go against the mainstream or establishment and consider themselves as "free thinkers" because of that. But as you said earlier, mainstream thinking can sometimes be right and so this position is illogical.
-
2
-
.
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Forum Advice
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Could you define the term "human rights" for me, so we can be on the same page to discuss. And which groups do you think I would not allow to have "human rights"?