Madelaine McMasters

This is why I keep two viewers at the ready. If something weird happens in one, I switch to the other for confirmation. If they match, I blame the server side. If they don't match, the problem is probably in one of the viewers. A cache clear and or/reinstall generally fixes my viewer problems.

...sets the BBC lady on fire and adopts the orphaned Uncle Roger.

There are a few tell tale signs including posters mentioning a post or thread should be closed and locked as well the IBTL! posts that sometimes start appearing just before a thread is actually locked. Then there is the ones thanking and liking the Moderators closing post that give a pretty good indication who and how many are quite happy with a thread closing. Concrete evidence no but circumstantial evidence can be a pretty good indicator. An ability to recognize conditions that will lead to a lock is hardly evidence of a desire for the lock. Do you also see popcorn as circumstantial evidence? It pairs well with IBTL, but suggests the munchers are not anxious for the entertainment to end. I have thanked moderators for closing threads in which people I agree with were hurting the cause by running too hot. Once again, correlation is not causation. Your turn to conjecture? I haven't seen anyone yet posit that something would be lost if we did have a LGBQT+ forum area so maybe your could link to ones that lead you to this belief? One thing though that is being lost as a result of this thread is any sense of LGBTQ unity where we have two groups in disagreement about a need for it. Empathy is a funny thing in that it is personal for each and what may make you laugh might make me cry and what makes me say pfft has you ready to fight the good fight. All dependent on our respective past experiences and how someone else's experience may impact on it. Several posters have described the creation of a sub forum as an attempt to exclude, divide, or restrict via moderation, even when Coffee and others have explicitly stated that's not the goal. If we believe Coffee's actually attempting those things when she isn't, we're looking at bogeymen and claiming deception. Her ire in response wouldn't be surprising. On the other side, people who've a history of being harassed, marginalized, and excluded might not grasp just how that's happening, but they aren't seeing bogeymen. If I ignore what I've seen here and believe your claim that nobody has posited something would be lost if the sub forum were created, why is there disagreement? I also wonder (conjecture) if some people might see this as a threat because they skate over the edge of ToS already and don't wish that to be further illuminated. I am one of the forum's most prolific posters, butting heads with others for over 12 years. I've never been suspended and have had two posts pulled for sneaking naughty words past the filters. I don't see the creation of a sub forum of any kind as threatening my ability to speak freely. The ToS is no burden to me and I have no desire to leverage moderation via AR. This is LL's house. The sides that have dug in here are approximately the same as those that dig in on other discussions. I don't think many of us are surprised to see where the likes, thank yous, and scorn laughter come from. You and I can generally count on each other to butt heads, and might appear to be in out-groups that don't actually exist. I think that's at work in this thread, meaning that LGBTQ+ is not the only factor in play.

I envy you, Persephone. Lucidity often eludes me when awake.

There's probably some of that at play, Malibu, but I don't think that's the whole story. Some of the anti sub-forum contingent are LGBTQ+. Still, they imagine vitriolic bogeymen coming for their freedoms, and will rail against anything that even rhymes with that. I get the sense that empathy is a factor, and the presence or absence of that is fairly independent of gender identity and sexual orientation.

How do you know that "so many report posts or threads"? LL doesn't reveal such things and most of the people who've admitted to reporting claim to do so quite sparingly. Other than reporting spam, I think I've ARed one or two posts in my dozen years here. I might wonder about moderation by AR at times, but I'd not claim it, much less claim "many" are doing it. Conjecture is not evidence.

Early in my career, I'd often wake with some brilliant idea in my head. I'd resolve to remember it, but by morning it was gone. So, I purchased a little notebook and put it on the nightstand. I was excited the first time I woke in the wee hours and was able to jot down my revelation. At rise time, I looked at the pad and discovered that, although I'm a genius while sleeping, I write in a language that's indecipherable to the morning me.

60% on one side.. 20% on the other .. I miss a lot of stuff, nightmare in shops or doctors offices where everyone whispers at you. I have always had difficulty comprehending speech in the presence of noise, which is one reason I dislike parties. I went to see the duo "Civil Wars" ten years ago. The opening act was so f-ing loud my hearing was damaged. I came away from that concert with significant but tolerable tinnitus in my left ear, with virtually no sensitivity above 6KHz. It's only been in the last year or so that I've started noticing the loss. I do sometimes enable CC when watching movies, but then I notice that my eyesight is going. ;-).

I actually get more attention when I'm in world as a non-human. My little devil and "Spontaneous Moral Decay" particle avatars seem most popular. I think @Ayashe Ninetails is right to think that hair has something to do with it. For most of my 14 years here, I've worn short messy styles and gotten fairly little attention. Those few times I've donned my blonde bombshell hair, I have received compliments. The thing that's elicited the most IMs over the years is my mention of Dr. Richard Feynman in my profile. That makes me happy. As for why people behave the way they do, I'll have to fall back on the McMasters Family Motto, which we recited any time someone did something inexplicable... "People are weird". The unspoken part of that motto has always been... "And we are people".

I had to read Peresphone's post twice, just to make sure I hadn't missed anything. Nowhere in the description of her encounter with Mr. "Get off my street!" did she label or characterize it as an attack. Yet somehow you drew that conclusion. Though she did question the imaginations of people who seem intolerant of residents in non-human avatars, and did justifiably describe the fella as a "rude little yahoo", there was no framing of anyone as ill-intentioned, hostile, or aggressive. Yet again, that's a conclusion you drew. You then went on to accuse Persephone of being uncourteous. I think her response was light hearted, civil, and measured. There is framing going on here, by you. I believe an apology to Persephone is in order. At least your behavior is consistent. Eleven years ago, in your very first post in these forums, you railed against LL for the "theft" of your money by a billing glitch that had been explained four days earlier in the same thread. Your participation in that thread (and another) that day is an example of both framing and senseless vituperation. Meanwhile, the rest of the people in that thread had the good sense to presume there was no ill intent on the part of LL. Though I surely don't see your behavior as representative of good sense, and hope it's not representative of common sense, as an example of something else entirely, I'll join @belindacarson in saying. Well done!

Absolutely, Fluffy. Empathy isn't something that can be granted or required. We can hope for, appreciate, and encourage it. When that falls short, we can hold people accountable. The rough and tumble of forum life would, I think, be recognizable to Thomas Jefferson and John Adams.

I don't know that I'll be likely to visit it either. I have little understanding of the issues and interests that I imagine might be discussed there, and probably little to offer. Granted, that doesn't always stop me, but people have been gracious enough to tolerate my occasional interjections.

Well, there ya go. Escape the absurdity of your argument by noting that it's immaterial. There is no Bill of Rights in SL. There is a Bill of Restrictions (ToS and Community Guidelines). What I'm seeing here is considerable whinging over a request that would make no changes to that Bill of Restrictions, but affords increased opportunity to be censured for behavior that violates it. I actually do share the concerns of others here that the creation of a sub-forum might invite some to court censure. Thankfully, those concerns have been tempered by the arrival of several who give me reason to think such a sub-forum might be a delight to watch. I hope they stick around, regardless of the outcome of Coffee's request.

Empathy is an ability. Accountability is an obligation. The First Amendment is the opening salvo of The Bill of Rights. If one understands the meaning of the terms, no explanation is necessary. If one doesn't understand the meaning of the terms, no explanation is sufficient.

Why have you surprised me? First, you made, with great certainty, a claim that is manifestly false. It is possible to read tone in text. I know that because I do it, with varying degrees of success, and literature depends on it. So, your knowledge of my knowledge doesn't agree with my knowledge of my knowledge. I admit that my knowledge of my knowledge is incomplete (Oy, now I'm hearing Donald Rumsfeld in my head), and I have encountered people (I was raised by two) that routinely proved it. Still, I don't think you are on firm enough ground to make your claim. If you were speaking your truth, I have difficulty understanding how, absent the ability to read tone, you sense vitriol. You even sense that I sense it! That is why you have surprised me, So.

I never claimed I was personally attacked. I find the attitude of many of these self-proclaimed representatives disturbing, because they demand controlled speech for everyone but those sharing their exact opinion. Where are the "many" examples of people claiming to be representatives? Would you please provide an example of anyone "demanding" anything. I haven't read every word of the thread, but so far I've seen wishes, requests and possible pleading, but no demands. Would you provide an example of anyone's exact opinion, so that I might determine if I share it? As someone who has difficulty forming an exact opinion on most anything, I find the concept fascinating. While I'm not seeing the evidence you claim, I'm seeing plenty of hyperbole. I can excuse some level of that in serious conversation, but I think you're overdoing it.

I make that read as well, but I'm much more careful about what I do with it. I have friends that suffer from depression and anxiety, and sometimes show telltale signs. To the extent I can read those signs correctly, I hope I'm able to offer support, even if only by listening, or giving them space. As for the general insanity of humanity, I contribute my fair share.

If your claim were true, it would be very difficult to explain literature. I read tone here all the time, with varying degrees of accuracy. This is also true for my read on people's underlying beliefs, temperament, and emotional/intellectual intelligence. Some people are easier for me to read than others, but overall, the benefit of my doubt over potential misreading generally goes down as my exposure to a writer goes up. Though this thread has produced considerable illumination, I have seen few surprises. You were one.

Regarding that self illumination I mentioned in my previous post, I gotta say I'm pleased to see a few new faces in this thread, emitting the warmest of light. Thank you all.

Anyone can get into the star parties. They succeed by being uninteresting to most people. Granted, that might not work in the forums, but that is, I think, the reasoning behind Coffee's request for a welcoming little corner of the world that is generally more interesting to LGBTQ+ than to others. That won't stop those who are interested in being unwelcoming. I don't propose moderation for that. I can hope that self illumination does the trick. That's been working for me so far.

I find the continual asking of this question revealing, since it’s been explained several times that there’s no intention to keep people out. It’s very much like the astronomy club star parties we hold out in dark quiet places, compared to our community outreach at the county fair. The former, though open to all, attracts only those interested enough in star gazing to drop in. The latter puts us right in the middle of a melee, where people with no interest in astronomy try to show how much they know by showing how little they know. We persist in doing that public outreach because a live view of Saturn’s rings, or Jupiter’s storms and moons have a magical ability to wake people to the beauty and wonder of the universe.

Well, they do jump into SL. I haven't seen new-user-signup data in ages, but back in the Mark Kingdon days, he bragged about attracting 30,000 people to SL each and every day. Somehow me missed the fact he was losing 30,100 each and every day. The question has never been why they don't come here, it's always been why they don't stay.

Do I thank you for further diluting my claim to nefariosity?

Ya know, I clearly and constantly claim to be nefarious. Still, and to my everlasting annoyance, there are some people who don't believe me. Have you any idea how they get such contrary ideas into their puny little heads?

You know quite well that no such proof will be required. When I haul my telescope out to my local amateur astronomy club's summer star parties, I needn't show proof of membership. Everybody is welcome. I can, however, be fairly certain I won't be bothered by the drunken moon landing deniers who've nearly poured their beers into that telescope at the county fair while looking in the wrong end and asking if they'll see aliens.