Carole Franizzi

rotpaulette Carter wrote: J adore ton accent , vraiment, very sweet. traduction from* Fat arse*? I really do not know:matte-motes-big-grin-wink: they are not talking like that around me! 54kgs this morning with my pajamas.:matte-motes-angry: Oh merci cherie! Pas worry pour la traduction, Je peux voir que M. Peppe' m'a donne' une idea.

"Haha! Nice try Carole, but not a speck of truth in what you state." The only things I stated were my views regarding the activity of debating and my own personal enjoyment of it, the fact that I would AR you if I saw you use such offensive language again to me or others, and that I would consider your enquiry into the state of my intellect a genuine enquiry. Everything else in my post was a question. Questions cannot be lies. So, which of my statements do you consider to be a lie? "I made a list of the various catastrophies that said individual had stated burdened her the last two years." Aww. That was good of you. Warms the cockle of me ole ‘eart, it does. “I simply stated that I did not believe some of her stories.” This has to rank as SL understatement of the decade (beating even Joe “Fatman” Slugsworth, 82 year operator of LovelyLezzie21, who wrote to her soon-to-be-met-in RL girlfriend, “I might not be exactly how you imagined me”). “Still my right to do so.” Since you did what you did on the Internet, the logistics are dramatically complicated, and I have no idea what a person could actually do if they cared to take legal action, but I’m pretty sure that, had you published the same sentiments in a RL paper or similar, you’d have been too busy looking for a lawyer to defend you in a libel/harassment case to make all these posts now. “If you are talking about the accusation of sockpuppeting, yes, I made those and still stand by them. Those took place on the old GDF. But that has nothing to do with RL.” Actually, I’d totally forgotten about your noble crusade against alts and the labels you affixed on various people - “You are X! Don’t deny it! I know!!! I KNOW!!!!!” - but thank you for reminding me. "You have the wrong rope holder, I'm not into BDSM, . I'm sure your BFF SR will be glad to let you borrow hers." Oh no. Absolutely and undeniably not. It was most definitely you who took the rope and used it.

"There is a very distinct difference Carole between stating that you do not believe the claims of an individual and stating that you know the exact truth about that person. I stated, and still state with conviction, that I don't believe the story(s) that the person in questioned tells. I'm not legally nor morally obligated to do so." Ima. In writing, over and over and over, in various venues, you supplied anyone who happened to be reading with your own “truthful and accurate” version of a person’s entire life experience, labelling (Yay! On-theme again!) them a liar! I already got the message many posts ago - only you know the truth. "Yes, your "Did too happen cause I saw the RP with my own eyes!" is so incredibly persuasive and no doubt the result of years and years of concentrated training...It is a wonder that you have not a statue erected in your likeness at every university the world over." Erm…yes… "Ah...when you insulted me by insisting that I was trolling you because you do not agree that I have the right not to believe something just because it is written in this forum and you saw it with your own eyes inworld could as well be considered the actions of a loser. I will not AR you for it though." Uhm. Right. Ima, if you’re finished with that rope now, maybe you could give me it back.

Canoro Philipp wrote: i dont find androgynes attractive, what i find attractive is femininity, that thing that only women can do best, that is not fake or learned, that it comes naturally, those aspects that separate us as genders, physically, psychologically and emotionally. nobody is better then them at that, doesnt matter if an androgyne uses a lot of makeup and even have a sex change operation, men are never gonna become a woman, because our gender is hardcoded from even before we are born. i like women, so i find no androgyne attractive. I’m probably with you on this one. My evidently primordial and geographically-dictated urges make me, as a straight female, respond to the “traditional” body features of a sexually mature male of my culture: bulk (but not the “artificially” produced muscle of gyms), height and body hair. I even prefer dark men over blonde because I perceive fair men as lacking body and facial hair and on some level I perceive that as “too feminine”. A beautiful face is a beautiful face, with the stronger jaw and nose (and stubble!) that primitive me sees as “necessary” on a male. Intelligent, curious eyes, to go with the same sort of personality, because, though my tastes in the appearance may be guided by primitive instincts, I wouldn’t find men who behave like cavemen attractive. Vanity is another no-no. I couldn’t stand if he was always hogging the mirror to sort his hair, or, God forbid, applying his lipstick! So, no, androgynous doesn’t work for me either.

Well, I tried a spot of pole-dancing in real-life, to earn a bob or two extra, but the punters were not impressed by me standing there shaking my bum a bit, whilst announcing, "Me is hanging head-down, whilst I wrap my sensuous legs around the pole, only to slide to the ground, do a cartwheel, and land at your feet, thighs wide apart, gaze with my heavy-lidded eyes into yours, and move finally into the splits". PS CAD, maybe? For engineering, architecture and the like? I'd have thought that the skills were similar.

ClarkStudy wrote: I am new, and hope not to offend. I just wonder about these things. What does an avatar say about you? Do you choose someone who is an optimal version of yourself? Do you choose someone you think others would be attracted to? To whom you would be attracted? There are just so many choices, I wonder what folks base their decisions on. I fear I am a bit overwhelmed by the available options. What descriptors are best to describe me? Or, what do I want others to think of me? Ah, decisions, decisions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doctoral Dissertation in Progress: Developing a Survey to Measure Diet Sabotage by Romantic Partners http://surveys.clarku.edu/Survey.aspx?s=eb8b5da9cb6940d88f2cfd4d48207f56 Well, I'm not attracted to avatars, so I don't much care what other people's avatars are like, though I do appreciate a beautifully detailed or unique one, but as a minor "art" form, and not as something which reveals anything more than creative talent in the person who operates it. My main avatar is elderly, over-weight and is no beauty. She is, however, a figure which, on the streets of real-life, would pass utterly unobserved, because she is one of many possible forms of "normal". She would pass unobserved, unless wearing her slave silks, obviously. I liked the idea of something so normal, so realistic that, in SL, where hyper-beautification is the norm, she would stand out. The initial idea was that she'd attract people with a sense of humour and those more interested in the people behind avatars, rather than those who believed (or wanted to believe) that the avatar was somehow indicative of the real person's physical looks. I am happy to report that the idea wasn't wrong and have met some splendid people thanks to her looks. She does not resemble me in real-life, however, but then, neither do my other accounts, where I take refuge in "hawt" avies when being the sore thumb gets tiresome.

rotpaulette Carter wrote: Heu ...Heu , i dunno why ,but i think i am going to love this thread.:matte-motes-grin: Parce que, ca c'est comme chez toi - moi et quelle pike', Eloise, parlons tres tres bien ta belle langue - comme tu as deja vu. *coughez* Et, maintenant, excuse moi, parce que je dois aller a chercher comment on dit "fat arse" en francais.

Jumpman Lane wrote: naw naw naw! ur skippin the most important part first! u gotta make an enemy outta somebody first! Check!

Perrie Juran wrote: We are all products of the times in which we live. We are indeed. Times, environment and education.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: May I be so bold as to point out that, in order for one human being to personally witness every single event occurring within SL, he would require the gift of omnipresence, which is, as far as I know, still the domain of the Almighty. I prefer omniscience myself, it's less taxing and I don't feel so bloaty. And don't forget omnipotence, that's my favorite! I always knew you were a bloke.... Oh! Omnipotence? I always said I was 100% sure you really were a woman.

Ima Rang wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Ima: Cute twist, but no. Me: Cute? Hey, if you find this going round in endless circles, repeating the same stuff, over and over, cute, who am I to judge? Different strokes and all that, right? Ima Response: Right. Ima: I said I don't spend enough time online to state that I have seen evidence of individuals posing as real life doctors and putting individuals into dangerous situations… Me: But nobody asked you to give evidence, Ima. Are we really still doing the courtroom role-play? May I be so bold as to point out that, in order for one human being to personally witness every single event occurring within SL, he would require the gift of omnipresence, which is, as far as I know, still the domain of the Almighty. Ima Response: Are you learning disabled? I did not indcate that anyone was asking me for evidence. I made a simple statement that was only meant to mean- I can't agree or disagree with you as I don't apparently spend enough time online to have encountered such. Why is that so **bleep**ing hard for you to understand? Ima:…as you stated it to be "the most dangerous" thing occurring in SL. Me: Actually I didn’t. Since you’re a stickler for correct quoting and have low tolerance for sloppy paraphrasing, I feel sure you will appreciate me pointing out that I actually said, “The truly dangerous down-side of believing claims to credentials is when they say they’re doctors, counsellors, etc.”. Ima: I stand corrected. Re: the rest of your post. Just let me recap the situation to date, so I’m sure I have it straight in my head - you, in your series of posts, cumulatively communicate the following: a) You have never witnessed, first-hand, fake professionals operating in SL, hence would be unable to bear witness regarding the matter; Ima Rang: Correct, because I'm not online frequently. b) you have encountered two people who claimed to have witnessed such episodes but you have chosen to disregard such claims, as your stance is, like mine, in line with the Pep directive XXIV section 4iii, paragraph 9, “Believe nothing unless you, yourself, personally, in the flesh witness it”; Ima Rang: No, I said that I saw one instance within the 3 threads that you provided me of an individual stating they had encountered a supposed RL therapist who they eventually determined was just a life coach. I was simply pointing out that directly after you stated that you follow Pep's stance to believe nothing, you provide me with threads: Carole Franizzi wrote: No darlin’ – fearful of the damage somebody posing as a RL medical professional could do when he/she hands out medical advice in SL. There’s that too in SL… ------------------------------------------------------ Ima Rang wrote: I guess I just don't spend enough time online. I have not seen evidence ot this happening. Carole Fanizzi wrote: Have a peek at these then....if you have time: http://forums-archive.secondlife.com/327/9f/255249/2.html http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Lifestyles-and-Relationships/Psychological-support-in-Second-Life... http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussions/Help-in-finding-help-SL-Domestic-Violence-Aub... Just ironic...that's all. c) you object to my belief that fake professionals operate within SL, even though I am one of the afore-mentioned persons who witnessed one such episode first-hand, on the basis of the fact it was me and not you witnessing it, and thus you are over-riding the Pep directive with “Nobody may believe anything unless witnessed by Ima Rang first-hand”; Ha! You stated that you did not know if you witnessing RP or not. You may have eye witnessed a cartoon based soap opera...the horror. I hope you are writing the networks because they slammed a fake epi syringe into the heart of a fake patient on a real TV show just last week! Can you believe that mess? d) you do not care what topics I post about No. e) you have no objection to me opening a thread about the odour of my faeces (though you expressed the concept in a more lady-like way, using asterisks); No. f) despite having no interest in the issue, no first hand experience in the matter and limited on-line time, you make posts which you, yourself, define as a “statement that did not serve to invalidate or validate the discussions”; Yep. See above. g) on the combined basis of the amended Pep directive, “Nobody may believe anything unless witnessed by Ima Rang first-hand” and on the principle that it is impossible for fellow residents to distinguish between role-play and actual criminal intent behind certain actions, you are communicating your disapproval of the AR function which would allow LL to investigate and attempt to verify the actual nature of such episodes, as, in your opinion, the risk of suspension or closure of an SL account is of greater import than the prevention and/or curtailment of criminal behaviour. I don't require proof of anything, from anyone. I have proper perspective when engaging in a cartoon world. I'm sure that my "don't believe anything" even if Carole saw the RP with her own eyes and insists that it is the damn truth will probably cause the world to fold in on me, but, hey, it is a risk I'm willing to take. I don't disapprove of you AR'ing anyone you damn well please for any reason you please. You are very good about putting a lot of words out that I have never stated or even implied. Some people investigate first and take action, and some take action and apologize if they are mistaken. I would have made inquiry before reporting....so what? I'm over it, I hope you make it past it. In light of the above, in future, if ever again I am recipient of a post from you which states, “I don't spend enough time online to state that I have seen evidence of_______”, I will never again erroneously assume that you mean “Oh, really? Never heard of that. Fill me in”, but will be sure to apply the correct interpretation: “Insomuch as I have never been an eye-witness to such an occurrence, I am unable to bear witness either for the prosecution or in defence of the accused”. Good to know. Awesome. I hope that you stick to that. Ima: BTW, I heard and read that LL is going to get rid of accounts that have not logged on in the last 60 days. Me: This must be an in-joke comprehensible only to those who have limited on-line time. Nope, a thread, right here in the Forums. But, it was discussed and turns out it was just a rumor. If capitals in Netiquette amount to shouting, what does blood-red font indicate? An apoplectic fit? Seriously, Ima – all these pages just to say, “I don’t know anything about that”? You declaring, in this very thread, that you “don’t believe anything” makes interesting reading – does that mean that when, in the past, although you were exhorting others to believe that you knew the truth about another person’s life, “knowing” it to be in total opposition to what they claimed, you simultaneously held the firm belief that they should not have believed a word you said? Again, good to know. I enjoy debate. Always have done. The challenge of formulating persuasive arguments is a pleasure to me. If the opponent makes the task even harder because clever, sharper, quicker, better educated than me, I enjoy it even more. Insults have no place in debate. Resorting to them is the act of a desperate loser, and of one who is wholly uninterested in discussion for discussion’s sake, but participates merely as a pretext to express pent-up aggression. However, since you stated in a previous post that you do not troll, I will accept the following as a genuine enquiry: Are you learning disabled? The answer is - no, I am not. I will, however, AR you without hesitation if I ever “witness” you asking me or anybody else that question again.

Cinnamon Mistwood wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: You touch on a sore point with your question. I've NEVER been stalked! Not once! Even though a heap of people know my RL info!!!! What the heck is that all about? What has a gal gotta do to get stalked round here??? I'm sooooo jealous... @Void and Carole - I am feeling a bit left out as well. I have never been stalked - what kind of fun have I been missing out on? /me puts on her emo persona... Someone would have to actually want me and care. Oh, where is the love and attention???? Doesn't anyone out there have the energy to stalk me just a little? We could all make a pact to stalk each other I suppose. Please IM me all you personal and real life information so I can start on that right away. I'll start with anywhere else on the web you post and your hometown, best friends in RL and SL. Provide me with any employers, the names and ages of your children and the names of their fathers. Finally, please send your phone number and Facespace info so it can be used as well. I can't be a credible stalker without something to go on. Oh, and be sure to pretend to get personally upset by every thing I post about you - no matter how farfetched it may be. Without a little feedback and negative response, it wouldn't be proper stalking... Thank you for your attention to this matter, Cinn All the information requested is ready waiting to be posted. I’ve added a hand-drawn diagram mapping the easiest way to my house, because if you use SatNav it will take you a route often plagued by road works and hence subject to delays. Having waited so long to have my very own stalker, I’d hate that she were stuck in a traffic jam for hours. So, send your own address, etc., without further ado, and let the mutual stalking commence! I can hardly wait! PS I’ll leave my bedroom window (large one on the far right side of the back of the house, with vast array of aroma therapy candles on the sill) open so you can pop threatening messages written in red ink inside, onto my desk. If you are planning on doing the boiling thingy, I could leave a stuffed toy rabbit on the same desk. Please advise if this would be acceptable.

Eloise Baily wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: RudolphUkka wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Personally, I would think twice before subjecting native French speakers to my icky French in a French discussion forum. I wouldn't expect them to dumb down the language to make it accessible to me. N'est pas? Je * crois qu'elle est une bonne * idee. *** N'est-ce pas! *** Oh la la la la la! Mais "n'est pas" est une forme interrogatif, pas affermatif et certainment pas esclamatif - pourquoi il y a une pointe esclamatif apres une questione???? (see what I mean? should any Frenchman be subjected to that?) (did I get any of it right?) Oooo, je voudrais des poupon grise, s'il vous plait Carole, depuis que vous demandez. Yep Carole, that sounds right. Tu m’appelle’ une poupon???????? Comment dare-ez vous???? Tu as appelle’ ma mere une pikie?? Tu n’as respecte’ ma famille ….mais je ne suis pas bovvered!!! :smileytongue:

Eloise Baily wrote: Dilbert Dilweg wrote: For a "NEW Resident" they seem to be well informed on how to use the forums and not name names... Newbie? Politics The whole grid would be a much nicer place without some of those "politics" Dilbert. It's supposed to be relaxing right? Amen, sister! (Who ever could have guessed that being/not being a new member of an on-line Internet game fell into the category of politics!)

Ima: Cute twist, but no. Me: Cute? Hey, if you find this going round in endless circles, repeating the same stuff, over and over, cute, who am I to judge? Different strokes and all that, right? Ima: I said I don't spend enough time online to state that I have seen evidence of individuals posing as real life doctors and putting individuals into dangerous situations… Me: But nobody asked you to give evidence, Ima. Are we really still doing the courtroom role-play? May I be so bold as to point out that, in order for one human being to personally witness every single event occurring within SL, he would require the gift of omnipresence, which is, as far as I know, still the domain of the Almighty. Ima:…as you stated it to be "the most dangerous" thing occurring in SL. Me: Actually I didn’t. Since you’re a stickler for correct quoting and have low tolerance for sloppy paraphrasing, I feel sure you will appreciate me pointing out that I actually said, “The truly dangerous down-side of believing claims to credentials is when they say they’re doctors, counsellors, etc.”. Re: the rest of your post. Just let me recap the situation to date, so I’m sure I have it straight in my head - you, in your series of posts, cumulatively communicate the following: a) You have never witnessed, first-hand, fake professionals operating in SL, hence would be unable to bear witness regarding the matter; b) you have encountered two people who claimed to have witnessed such episodes but you have chosen to disregard such claims, as your stance is, like mine, in line with the Pep directive XXIV section 4iii, paragraph 9, “Believe nothing unless you, yourself, personally, in the flesh witness it”; c) you object to my belief that fake professionals operate within SL, even though I am one of the afore-mentioned persons who witnessed one such episode first-hand, on the basis of the fact it was me and not you witnessing it, and thus you are over-riding the Pep directive with “Nobody may believe anything unless witnessed by Ima Rang first-hand”; d) you do not care what topics I post about; e) you have no objection to me opening a thread about the odour of my faeces (though you expressed the concept in a more lady-like way, using asterisks); f) despite having no interest in the issue, no first hand experience in the matter and limited on-line time, you make posts which you, yourself, define as a “statement that did not serve to invalidate or validate the discussions”; g) on the combined basis of the amended Pep directive, “Nobody may believe anything unless witnessed by Ima Rang first-hand” and on the principle that it is impossible for fellow residents to distinguish between role-play and actual criminal intent behind certain actions, you are communicating your disapproval of the AR function which would allow LL to investigate and attempt to verify the actual nature of such episodes, as, in your opinion, the risk of suspension or closure of an SL account is of greater import than the prevention and/or curtailment of criminal behaviour. In light of the above, in future, if ever again I am recipient of a post from you which states, “I don't spend enough time online to state that I have seen evidence of_______”, I will never again erroneously assume that you mean “Oh, really? Never heard of that. Fill me in”, but will be sure to apply the correct interpretation: “Insomuch as I have never been an eye-witness to such an occurrence, I am unable to bear witness either for the prosecution or in defence of the accused”. Good to know. Ima: BTW, I heard and read that LL is going to get rid of accounts that have not logged on in the last 60 days. Me: This must be an in-joke comprehensible only to those who have limited on-line time.

Snugs McMasters wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: So, lemme get this straight, your “counter-point” consists in you insisting that you, tu, thou, in person, in the flesh, must be present as an eye-witness at any event a poster writes about in the forums for it to be considered a valid discussion point? Even that's not good enough for me. I share a cranium with Maddy (though she hogs the amygdala) and I don't believe half the stuff she says. I'm going to make an exception in your case and will avoid asking for notarised photoraphic evidence that Maddy hogs the amygdala, as it sounds utterly revolting.

RudolphUkka wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Personally, I would think twice before subjecting native French speakers to my icky French in a French discussion forum. I wouldn't expect them to dumb down the language to make it accessible to me. N'est pas? Je * crois qu'elle est une bonne * idee. *** N'est-ce pas! *** Oh la la la la la! Mais "n'est pas" est une forme interrogatif, pas affermatif et certainment pas esclamatif - pourquoi il y a une pointe esclamatif apres une questione???? (see what I mean? should any Frenchman be subjected to that?) (did I get any of it right?)

Persephone Emerald wrote: ^ I Like this. :smileyhappy: Unfortunately, unless you can comply with the new Standards for Legally Binding Forum Posting, by supplying the notarised results of a lie detector test, with attached photocopy of the qualifications of the official who carried out the test, proving that you had an emotional response within the parameters of the official definition of “liking”, we are obliged to request you to retract forthwith. :smileyvery-happy:

So, lemme get this straight, your “counter-point” consists in you insisting that you, tu, thou, in person, in the flesh, must be present as an eye-witness at any event a poster writes about in the forums for it to be considered a valid discussion point? Ergo, I surmise that you are disinterested a priori in the topic of fake professionals in SL per se, but are only interested in challenging my right to discuss the topic in the first place. There are literally thousands of posts contained in a huge number of threads going on in the SL forums right now. Might I suggest that you work your way through every single post which contains the expressions such as: “I heard”, “I saw”, “I read”, “I was told”, or any retelling of any event, episode, occurrence, issue, problem, complaint and glitch and demand to be given empirical evidence of what occurred before the discussion is allowed to continue. Then get back to me and tell me how many called you the “T” word and accused you of attempting to de-rail the thread.

Ima Rang wrote: ETA: So, reply to your point, although those specific posters may have been inventing the episodes they wrote about, I saw with my own eyes that the problem does exist. And I do have one exception to my rule – I do believe me. Most of the time, anyway. You, by your own admission you stated that you do not know if it was RP or not, so you don't know if what you saw on your screen was an actual problem or not. “By my own admission”??? We playing fake law courts now? Gimme a break, Ima, ya gotta keep me up to speed on the changes in the RP programme. I thought we were doing Mistress and wayward subby tonight.

Black. (waiting for you to say “white”…) I mentioned people labelling themselves as professionals in RL were a menace in SL… You said you’d never heard of such a thing. I gave you some threads where people discussed this matter… You said you didn’t see any actual fake professionals in the threads claiming their claims so you could witness it with your own eyes (duh! They may be immoral but they wouldn’t be so daft as to play their games publicly). I repeat that the issue has been tackled, is in those threads but won’t go pulling the posts out one by one for you…. You then claim that your point is actually that I am taking the “witnesses” words for it when, previously I’d said I believe no-one. I explain how and why I know it to be a real occurrence in SL…. And you tell me off for wanting to AR something which may have been a role-play when the much more serious consideration remains valid – that some fake doc might have been issuing incorrect dosages to people with serious disturbances. I know SL stuff can sometimes seem really important to some people, and the “injustice” of taking action over dodgy role-playing may seem greater than standing by while there’s the risk of somebody doing very real harm to another, but frankly, Ima, I’m not one of those, and I would have done better to be a bit more on the ball and at least let LL investigate what was really going on in a sim which presented very much as a “serious” and really, really NOT a RP one. You done trolling me now? Cuz I think we’ve done to death this topic and we’re de-railing the OP with your pursuing of a channel in which to win points over me and have ended up discussing whether it’s moral to AR iffy RP in a thread about identity labels. Try this: Black!

Mm? Not following you… Docs…rl…advice...claim….claim…advice…rl…docs….?? Ah! Gotcha! Now your complaint is NOT that the threads don’t contain references to the whole medical credentials thingy, but that although they DO, you’re challenging my willingness to believe the claims of the posters. Is that right? Have I got it? Well, Ima, I hate to spoil the splendid point you were trying to make but, back in my very first few months of SL I wandered into a psychology-related joint, and found a “group-therapy” meeting going on. I sat and listened while a group of people, which included a couple who claimed to have borderline personalities, discuss the pharmaceutical treatment they were following. I was rather perplexed, as this wasn’t what I was expecting – the blurb had talked about group therapy and I wanted to see how that worked in SL - but then I was utterly gob-smacked when the one claiming to be a RL psychiatrist-therapist (but had no RL info or credentials on his profile) suggested different doses of these treatments based on his “professional opinion”. I couldn’t figure out if this was some weird RP, felt VERY uncomfortable and left. Only afterwards did I realise what a twerp I’d been not to AR this guy. In truth, I was so new that it didn’t immediately dawn on me that I did have the option to do something about it. Only, when I went back to try and track the place down I couldn’t find it, nor could I remember the name of the avatar (I have never kept chat-logs, and didn’t then either). But the chilling memory of the potential consequences of such a dangerous RP (or ego-trip for some guy who thought he could have been a doctor if only he’d passed those exams) stuck in my mind and, since then, I’ve always been interested in the theme and read whenever a thread touches on it. I’ve also kept my eye out for similar “cases” but the only things I’ve ever come across is one person posing as a life-counsellor and a couple of people telling me about slightly dodgy conversations with folks claiming to be RL psychologists and docs, using what I’d describe as bullying tactics, as they played on their “experience” to try to manipulate the others. But then, now I tend to hang out in sex places when I’m in-world and keep away from both real and pseudo-academic sims. So, reply to your point, although those specific posters may have been inventing the episodes they wrote about, I saw with my own eyes that the problem does exist. And I do have one exception to my rule – I do believe me. Most of the time, anyway.

Ima Rang wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Have a peek at these then....if you have time: http://forums-archive.secondlife.com/327/9f/255249/2.html http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Lifestyles-and-Relationships/Psychological-support-in-Second-Life/td-p/875981 http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussions/Help-in-finding-help-SL-Domestic-Violence-Aubse-Organisations/td-p/421704 The first thread, I saw people discussing the depression someone's mom suffered, an accusation of a "life coach" that was posing as a therapist in world-- with nothing to support the accusation...but no indication of anyone claiming to be a doctor and dispensing medical advice. Second thread-Psychology student asking for information about those who utilize SL related therapeutic support-A lot of the typical insults of students seeking information-But again, no one claiming to be a doctor and dispensing medical advice. Third thread I am intimately familiar with-Again, discussion of various and sundry, but no one claiming to be a doctor and dispensing medical advice. I saw no potential for danger in any of the threads you provided. Well, you'd have to have ploughed your way through all the posts to find the relevant ones, but of course you wouldn't have time for that, and I certainly won't be copying and pasting them for you. You'll just have to take my word for it that the issue of people who claim to be health professionals "operating" in SL is one which has been acknowledged and discussed by others, if not by you. You can't expect to have your eye on every ball when your online time is limited, after all. Or - you can simply not believe me. Your choice. No skin off my nose.

Have a peek at these then....if you have time: http://forums-archive.secondlife.com/327/9f/255249/2.html http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Lifestyles-and-Relationships/Psychological-support-in-Second-Life/td-p/875981 http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussions/Help-in-finding-help-SL-Domestic-Violence-Aubse-Organisations/td-p/421704

Ima Rang wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: The truly dangerous down-side of believing claims to credentials is when they say they’re doctors, counsellors, etc. I think it was Pep who used to repeat “Believe nobody!”. He was dead right. Wonder what happened to old Pep – haven’t seen him around in ages…. . Really? Fearful of avatar surgeries going dreadfully wrong and fake attorneys not being able to win the cartoon malpractice suit? lol. No darlin’ – fearful of the damage somebody posing as a RL medical professional could do when he/she hands out medical advice in SL. There’s that too in SL…