Madelaine McMasters

6-28-2013 Strong Rock Christian School CEO Patrick Stuart was struck by lightning during a football practice session, after banning female student Madison Baxter from play on the team. Stuart, who earlier explained that his decision was the result of prayer and that he was concerned that boys on the team would have impure thoughts, was rushed to an area hospital with 2nd degree burns to what students described as his "groinal region".

oberon Zuta wrote: Hello and hi If i check depht of field then is important to bring the most important part of the image in the focus layer. It works automatically if i do alt+click on the subject i like to have sharp. But in same time if i cick on that subject it centers itself on the screen - if i drive around the focus keep itself even if is out of center. But if i like to refocus - afain is centered. I wist to drive softly the focus layer farward and backwards - does anybody have an idea how to make this? Thank u very much for each little help I'm not sure I understand what you want, Oberon. When I wish to compose a photo that has the focal point not in the center of the image, I first alt-click the thing I want in focus, then manually tilt/pan the camera with the hud or key equivalents. I use Firestorm, I don't know if my instructions will apply elsewhere. If you want a slow change in focal distance when you select a new focal point, you can change DOF Focus Transition Time in Preferences->Graphics->Depth of Field->DOF Focus Transition Time. I don't know of a way to manually set the focal distance, other than alt-click. I don't think this would be needed except for either machinima, or for personal enjoyment when camming around SL. For a static image, you can always move the camera after focusing it. Anybody out there know a way to manually focus the camera, other than by pointing at things?

Orca Flotta wrote: With Nvidia it's like that: the higher the number the better! Period! The first number shows the generation of cards. So right now the new cards are 7xx. The second number shows the performance of the card: x1x = crap, x8x = can't be much better, x9x = SLI. Cards with a 5 at the end are for laptops, the even numbers are for desktops. And while you can't compare the performance of a, say, 6x5 to a proper 6x0, it's still the same numbers game in their respective setups. Cards up to x50 used to be GT and above that they were GTX. In the latest editions nVidia starts the GTX series with their x50s cards already So without any reasearch and nitpicking the answer is an easy one: laptop 1 is the preferred buy over laptop 2. Simple as that! :smileyhappy: . Orca, by your description, nVIDIA would not be able to produce a new generation of chips until the lowest performance in that generation exceeded the highest performance of the previous generation. This benchmark page (which is not the be-all and end-all of measurements) shows plenty of examples where higher numbers are worse... http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php Examples (higher benchmark number is better)... GTX 285 = 1248 (Here, by your description, the 5 indicates "laptop") GT 730M = 1062 (Here, by my description, the M indicates "mobile') For currently available cards... GTX 680 = 5687 GTX 760 = 5198 and GTX 660 = 4104 GTX 680M = 3579 Here's how I think it works... Within a generation (most significant digit) and a kind (same prefix (GTX, GT, etc) and suffix (M, X, etc)) higher numbers are better. But there are usually at least two generations of chips in the marketplace at any time (currently 6xx and 7xx), and several variants of the family (mobile, X, etc) so the comparisons can be more difficult than you suggest. M indicates "mobile" which emphasizes low power over high performance. X seems to mean "eXtra" something, as all X versions of a thing are faster than non, as in... GTX 680M = 3579 GTX 680MX = 4394

UncommonTruth wrote: I just watched a video I need to share, I'm sending it to everyone I know in RL as well. I'm bawling my eyes out from it still. Grab tissues before you hit play :matte-motes-dont-cry: It's a moving story, Uncommon... but I wonder if the "reversal" helped to tell it. I am frustratingly analytical, and I feel the reversal loses traction because it ignores the fundamental biology that opponents of homosexuality use to pin their arguments. It is hard to wrap my mind around the conceit that breeding would be found universally necessary and generally objectionable. I am able to empathize (to some extent) with people who suffer discrimination for any number of reasons. Although I had a fairly sheltered childhood, I did see friends suffer for their differences (sexuality, color, affluence, intelligence...). I never had to turn the world upside down to understand what they felt. I'm in the choir here, so I'm really more interested in this message being preached to the others. I wonder if torturing the logic makes an impression on people who do it every day. As I'm writing this, Ceka has posted a single image with text that introduces an idea that may stick with me as long as the video. Thank you for bringing this story to me, and for enduring my critique of it.

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote: OMG... instead of getting closer to understanding it all I just get dizzier. The CC licenses don't address the source/object software issue directly. I suspect a key reason the CC people recommends a GNU license for software. Quote from the CC website follows. ---------- "Creative Commons recommends and uses free and open source software licenses for software. To use the Free Software Foundation’s GNU General Public License, see how to use GNU licenses for your own software." --------------- Regarding algorithms - the U.S. Copyright Office says an algorithm (, program logic, method or layout) cannot be copyrighted. Only the copyrightable expression embodied in the program will get protection. Of course this leaves me mystified as to what is being protected via the GNU license. Just kidding - it's all of the copyrightable expression - obviously. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ61.pdf Really it's not clear at all. Here's some real world info: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&ved=0CFYQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Feuro.ecom.cmu.edu%2Fprogram%2Flaw%2F08-732%2F2012Slides%2Fcopyright14.ppt&ei=5HrMUaKCMsepyAHf8oHYCQ&usg=AFQjCNHsaQojgiQmy2HsMMvlWkh5XX4nJA&sig2=CLVHRQWbsOH7LC4N99eP9Q&bvm=bv.48572450,d.aWc It was primarily the GNU (Stallman) licensing that drove us batty, I'm probably confusing that with CC stuff that also drove us batty. We had the algorithm/expression discussions as well, and found it sometimes difficult to sense the boundary and often easy to blur it. I remember reading of a novel way that Nintendo used to prevent third parties from producing unlicensed games for their Gameboy handheld system. At turn-on, the Gameboy would look into the game cartridge for a specific sequence of instructions that (If I recall correctly) spelled out "Nintendo" on the screen when executed. If the sequence was not there, the game would not run. Because the algorithm contained the trademarked name "Nintendo", wrote it to the screen, and had to be expressed in exactly the right way (because the toy matched the algorithm byte for byte with the copy it maintained), Nintendo covered every angle a third party might use to produce games for the toy without paying Nintendo the royalty on the little verification algorithm. As with patents, what's ultimately copyrightable is determined not by the copyright registration, but by the courts.

Dillon Levenque wrote: The default option on the Battalion is the GT 740, but there is an option to upgrade to the GT 750, if the link here is accurate: http://www.ibuypower.com/Store/Battalion_101_W650SR_Gaming_Laptop. The OP says 750. That card (once I finally found it) tests out at 1685, even better than the GT 765. That would make the Battalion 650 even more attractive, I'd think. ETA: Since that made no sense (I've been told more than once that Nvidia chips have performance directly related to their number sequence) I noticed that you checked the GT X 765—the OP's example used a GT 765. Possibly having an X in there indicates a lower level of performance, although I would have assumed the opposite. I think the OP's computer description for the first laptop is wrong. nVIDIA does not make a GT-765M, just the GTX-765M. http://www.geforce.com/hardware Here's another comparison of the GTX-765M and the GT-750M which doesn't quite agree with the first benchmark site I linked... http://gpuboss.com/gpus/GeForce-GTX-765M-vs-GeForce-GT-750M

Rolig Loon wrote: Well, in RL the pins wouldn't know the name of whatever knocked into them. If some rowdies got into the bowling alley and started lobbing softballs down the alley, the pins would still fall over if they got hit. Why should SL be any different? Just make the pins physical, roll the ball into them, and see what's standing when the fun stops. If someone cheats by throwing a softball, kick them out of the game. Hey! They were out of nine pound balls, Rolig. You try rolling a 16 in heels. I'm still waiting for you to return my bowling shoes.

Jesus1254789 wrote: Thank you so much for taking the time to answer guys! I really do appreciate it I chatted with my friend again and he told me that their (750 and 765) differences..isn't THAT huge. I mean sure it's better, but not by much and it's not worth paying another 100 bucks or so. So will the 750 2GB be enough for what I'm looking for in my SL since I think SL is the heaviest program I run. Thanks again in advance! From the benchmark page I linked elsewhere in this thread, it seems the 765 is about 50% faster than the 750. I believe SL is limited to using no more than 512MBytes of GPU RAM. If you will not be running other graphics intensive programs at the same time as SL, 2G of GPU RAM might be overkill. If you can configure your laptop with 1G of GPU memory, you'll save some money that you could apply towards the faster GPU, or pizza with friends.

Bree Giffen wrote: The only difference seems to be the video card and about $70. The cheaper one has a 740M and not a 750M. The 765m is apparently much better than the 740m from what I am reading. http://www.ibuypower.com/IbpPages/Laptop.aspx http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-765M.92907.0.html http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-740M.89900.0.html From this benchmark page... http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php You can scroll through the page to see all GPUs, or enter a query at the top of the page. The scores for those two GPUs are... GTX-765M = 1546 GT-740M = 1038 Higher is better.

Whether overclocking is "bad" depends on the circumstances. While nVIDIA guarantees correct operation of its chips within some operating envelope of parameters (voltage, temperature, speed, etc), there are tradeoffs between the parameters. There is some safety margin in the specifications to allow nVIDIA to be certain all devices will meet the spec, without needing to push every device into all corners of the operating envelope during test (imagine how much it would cost if you had to heat and cool every chip on the production line during testing). It is generally the case that computer chips will operate at higher speeds if you lower their temperature and raise their operating voltage. A GPU card manufacturer might design an overclocked card with a cooling system that keeps the GPU much cooler than on a standard card. They may have negotiated with nVIDIA to do so, spending a bit more for the chips to cover additional testing or sorting or whatever it is that keeps the warranty burden with nVIDIA. They may take on the risk themselves, calculating that the added cooling will keep them out of trouble or that the added profit will more than cover increased warranty costs. You may also find that the card's maximum ambient operating temperature is lower than for a standard card. In that case, they've placed the added risk on your shoulders. I don't know how you determine the circumstances of the overclocking. I would probably avoid such things unless provided by a reputable manufacturer with good reviews. ETA: I was so busy sounding knowledgable, I forgot to answer your question! Overclocking results in the GPU working faster than at the standard frequency (whatever that is for the chip in question). So the advantage is higher frame rate. The disadvantage is higher price for the card and potential reliability problems if the card manufacturer didn't do their homework.

Qwalyphi Korpov wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Welcome to the world of legal conundrums surrounding "software", the pinnacle of which appears to be software patents. All this licensing lingo could be seen as pointless posturing given the exceptional ease with which one can do whatever the hell one wants with code and go absolutely undetected. I think you're also witnessing that most people have far less understanding of the law than lawyers, if that's possible. ;-) Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this Madelaine. And I'm sharing them here again - by attribution. And I'm about to share some of mine in a similar manner. Which is pretty much what the Creative Commons By Attribution Share Alike license is all about. I must say though I'm a bit unsettled to not be speaking exclusively to myself. Like you said - it's so easy to do whatever you want with the code and go undetected. For example - suppose I was to get a script out of the WIKI. Easy to do. Per the WIKI TOU it's licensed under CC-BY-SA. Source is available. I can use it to create a derivative work (modified script.) Because the original script was licensed CC-BY-SA I'm required to license the derivative using the same or a similar license. Quick reminder in simple terms of what CC-BY-SA license provides You are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work to Remix — to adapt the work to make commercial use of the work http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/ That's simple in a way. Now suppose I make a prim product and include in the contents my derivative script. Per the CC-BY-SA the script must be free to copy, modify & transfer, So any products sold in SL that use scripts from the SL WIKI Script Library (or derived from those scripts) must set the attributes to COPY/MOD/TRANSFER. LOL. Now I suppose some reading this are thinking that's all BS. No - it's CC-BY-SA. I hope I've provided a good example of the hopelessly unenforceable aspect of the whole software licensing situation. It's a bit difficult to chase down the language in the CC licenses that apply to scripts (software.) That's because the CC licenses are not designed to be used with software. The people at Creative Commons in fact say their licenses should not be used for software. Yes, and this has been a common complaint about the "free as in speech" interpretation of software licenses. It's as if producing an algorithm, then applying CC licensing to it, makes it impossible for anyone to ever again use that algorithm (in any form, as you could presumably claim it traces back to the original, even if it was derived independently), without being encumbered by the license. When I worked for a medical instrument manufacturer, there were internal discussions about using open-source software. Some licenses stated that inclusion of the code required us to publish ALL source code for the product it was used in, not just the licensed bits. When I moved out on my own, I had a client who did work for the Defense Department. They had a product that used algorithms produced by researchers working under an NSF grant. The algorithms were published under a license that required any modifications of the code to be made public. Making the source code of the product public would have been a violation of federal law. There are Creative Commons licensed implementations of virtually every popular algorithm, from "quicksort" to "Bresenham's line drawing algorithm" (which is Bresenham's!) to libraries of code to implement FAT32 on memory cards. Since the license allows "remix", how does anyone prove that their particular implementation of an algorithm was not a modification of something with a CC license? It's been more than ten years since I left that company, but at the time the recommended solution was to avoid any code snippet containing any licensing verbiage. Of course it was often easy to find versions of almost anything that had been modified and posted online with all licensing verbiage removed, so plausible deniability was generally within reach. It takes only moments to pass an algorithm through a scriptable text editor to render it unrecognizable as a copy of the original, and most products do not ship with source code. Catch me if you can? ETA: It's been years since I've thought about CC stuff, but I do recall conversations in which we wondered whether "distribution" of the code meant in source form. If so, taking a CC-BY-SA script and embedding into a prim set to no-mod might be allowed, as you have distributed only the compiled algorithm, not the source code. You'd only be confined by the source license if you distributed the source. This may have been wishful thinking. I do that.

Bone Ashbourne wrote: Firstly :cathappy: I'm not going to get a desktop just for SL I'm looking for a decent laptop that can run SL with shadows and advanced lighting. 1. What are the specs I should look for? 2. Core i5 or i7 ( heard i7 does not make a difference for gaming) 2. Is 4GB enough or is 8GB necessary? What's dfference does it make? 3. Which graphics card will support shadows and advanced lighting (How to know if which graphics card will support shadows and advance lighting?) Are these ok? NVIDIA Geforce GT 730M NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 4. Suggestions on what laptops are good ( renders SL well and good price) I'm not familiar with Windows laptops, so can't really recommend a make or model, but... If all you are going to do is run SL, 4G is probably enough memory. If you want to run other applications at the same time, you may want more. SL is graphics intensive, so your money is probably better spend on the GPU than the CPU. For that reason, i5 is probably good enough. From this benchmark site... http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php At the top of that page, enter the model GPU you're interested in and you'll be taken to the line in the chart reflecting the performance specs. Or you can just scroll through the table. You'll find that the GT 650M scores 1283 and the GT730M scores 1062. So, all else being equal, the 650M is faster. You'll want a minimum GPU memory of 512Mbytes. Unfortunately, I don't know how those scores translate into SL playability. My iMac does quite well in SL with everything turned on, but also has the GTX 680Mx, which scores 4394. The nVIDIA website does sometimes list laptops that contain their GPU chips. Navigate there, select the GPU you are interested in, then see if that product's page lists any laptops using the chip. http://www.geforce.com/hardware Hopefully someone with recent laptop/SL experience will have more to say. Good luck with your purchase, Bone!

Hippie Bowman wrote: Good morning all! Happy Thursday! Peace! Good morning, Hippie. I thought I'd go flying today. I can't let you have all the fun...

Perrie Juran wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: I've now been here for more than five years. While I hear of people who've made a comfortable living in SL, and from some who supplement their RL income to some degree doing work they greatly enjoy, I'm still a good country mile from recommending to anyone that SL is where they should job-shop. Rodvik's claim that the last year saw SL residents exchange half a billion dollars is impressive. I wish I understood what that really means. If that includes money that people are spending renting or buying from private land owners (i.e., Estates), that could account for a large chunk of change. Madelaine McMasters wrote: The economy of Philip Rosedale's SL is still difficult for me to really understand and his follow-up effort, "Coffee and Power", leaves me just as skeptical. It now appears he's moved on from there to "High Fidelity". I listened to Philip's Burn Man 2013 interview. He still has a lot of vision for Virtual Worlds, not only what they are but what they can be. Yeah, how does that half billion break down? As you state, real estate might be a substantial portion of that half billion, and like RL, it requires investment to make money. It's easier to scale up and down (no inspections and remediations, no title and credit checks, no closing, etc), but the returns are smaller. Does real-estate stratify in the same way as creation? I imagine it does, with Ansche Chung and Stilletto Moody being examples of the highest levels in each economic domain. How many people make an RL living from SL, either via creation or real-estate? That six year old WSJ article made it sound like virtual worlds might be viable places for an average person to make a living in the future. I don't see articles like that anymore. I've not heard Rosedale's Burn interview (I'm listening as I type), but I've watched several others over the years where he's described "Love Machine", "Coffee and Power" and now "High Fidelity". He paints a pretty cool picture of both virtual reality, creativity and collaboration, but has yet to produce anything that brings economic benefit to the average participant. Love Machine was derided by some as nothing more than a reverse labor auction that drove down the value of intellectual endeavor. Oh, listen to Rosedale at 4:50 say "how many people are logged into SL right now? about 100K?". Is there another SL I'm not aware of, that has twice the residents of the one I visit? He then waxes rhapsodic about the incredible feeling he gets of "being there" while voice chatting with the interviewer (a two person chat) while logged into SL. He then says that nobody does anything that cool via phone conferences. Well, that's nonsence. I abhore voice in SL, yet I do two party phone calls every day, and I also do conference calls when necessary, using GoToMeeting to do things I could only dream of doing here. Rosedale does understand the squishy interpersonal stuff that makes us feel warm and fuzzy, but I think he oversells the power of virtual reality (or undersells the power alternatives) to make that happen.

I first heard of SL in the Wall Street Journal, which published a story of the real economies of virtual worlds. Shortly after that, there was a story of someone selling an island with a hotel on it for USD$1Million. I was both curious and skeptical. I'd also read that SL was an interesting place for virtual relationships. I found that easy to believe, after my experience watching relationships bloom (and bust) in chat venues like IRC. I've now been here for more than five years. While I hear of people who've made a comfortable living in SL, and from some who supplement their RL income to some degree doing work they greatly enjoy, I'm still a good country mile from recommending to anyone that SL is where they should job-shop. Rodvik's claim that the last year saw SL residents exchange half a billion dollars is impressive. I wish I understood what that really means. But you will find me right here with the rest of you who claim that SL can be a magical place. While I might have had that hope, I did not have that expectation. The economy of Philip Rosedale's SL is still difficult for me to really understand and his follow-up effort, "Coffee and Power", leaves me just as skeptical. It now appears he's moved on from there to "High Fidelity".

Welcome to the world of legal conundrums surrounding "software", the pinnacle of which appears to be software patents. All this licensing lingo could be seen as pointless posturing given the exceptional ease with which one can do whatever the hell one wants with code and go absolutely undetected. I think you're also witnessing that most people have far less understanding of the law than lawyers, if that's possible. ;-)

Snugs McMasters wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: I admire the efficiency of taking yourself to task in a single avatar, Qwal. I seem to need Snugs for that purpose. Need? That's a welcome admission, though it doesn't explain why you're always trying to get rid of me. See what I mean, Qwal? Now I'm wondering, is Snugs the chicken or the egg?

I admire the efficiency of taking yourself to task in a single avatar, Qwal. I seem to need Snugs for that purpose.

IvanMaximus wrote: Im lucky, because they posted fake advertisements for events. They deserve to be banned, wasted time for nothing. I thought this is a serious game with serious players. Im wrong. I don't need Lindens? What im doing here then? lol I thought it's possibile in some time to earn real life money in this game, im living in effed up third world country. So, it's immposibile to get a job in real world, and its immposibile to get a job here in game. This life is effed up. Ivan, if your goal is to earn enough money to make a difference in your RL life, RL is the best place to do it, effed up or not. It is possible to earn significant money in SL, but that requires as much or more effort and talent as in RL. Most of that money is earned by people who create the things others buy. There are claimed examples of people leveraging their "social skills" to make money here, but they're rare. If you have digital 3D construction skills, or wish to acquire them for use in RL as well, then SL might hold some promise. Otherwise, it's probably best to think of SL as a (hopefully) pleasant diversion of whatever spare time you have after applying yourself towards employment in RL. I hope your circumstances and outlook improve!

claudiasoftcloud wrote: hee, i hope to see you all on sl , so if you see a small white or red fox with the name "little claudia" that would be me! I'm not in-world much these days, but when I am, I'll collect up the mice that infest my lighthouse and put them in a hollow pumpkin on my front porch. If you get there before they tunnel out, they're all yours! Welcome to SL, Little Claudia!

Ceka Cianci wrote: Darla Hadisson wrote: Hi, I was in two clubs last night, and in one club, some user (whose name remains anonymous) was causing trouble, and in another, one user was not only causing trouble, but also using racist terms (along the lines of the N-word, the F-word (the other kind, not the one with 4 letters or its other forms), etc.).. I have a feeling that this sounds like the behavior of teenagers there are lots of adults that act like kids.. it's easy to get the feeling they are actually kids.. SL where adults can be kids too Yep, I've been here for more than five years and did not notice an increase in childish behavior with the arrival of teens. I think it's more a matter of the venue and the response that griefing gets. "Wisdom comes with age, but sometimes age comes alone." - Oscar Wilde

Siofra Highmist wrote: Really the only thing that is pushing me away from Mac is the pricing. Poking around on their website the other day, it looks like they do not offer a computer under USD$2300 that contains an actual grapics card over integrated graphics chips. I'm currently on intel's newest incarnation of integrated graphics and I can tell you that it really can't run anything efficiently. It takes sometimes 15+ minutes to load my own house let alone anything else in SL. Obviously I could have missed something as I did not go in store to ask, just poked around online. But if that is in fact what's going on I can happily say we'll be going PC again in this house.. Edit: And no, it's not another problem causing my inefficient running of SL... that's really the only substandard part of the computer I own. It's true that you have to step up to the $2200 15" MacBook Pro-Retina to get a laptop with nVIDIA graphics, but you can get a destop iMac with GT 640M and 20" screen for $1300. The horrific price comparison for a Mac Pro, given by another in this thread, it not typical of Apple pricing. While even the most rabid Apple fan will often admit that increases in memory/disk capacity are pricey, the basic machines are not terribly more expensive than similarly configured computers from the competition. And the Mac Pro has always been expensive, as it's targetted at professional users. I just looked at Dell all-in-one computers and find that their 27" machines are about $200 less ($1599) than Apple's ($1799) for roughly comparable configurations, with the exception that the Dell computers have touch sensitive displays. It's often difficult to make direct comparisons because Apple's machines are atypical, omitting things like optical drives and including things like SSD.

Aethelwine wrote: Quite, no matter how much money we throw at sl I can't make sims take more than 15000 prims (or Li), and I could happily do with another 5000 to fit in some more race tracks and expand the space stations. Expand the space stations?! Doesn't Hippie have enough walls to walk into already? ;-)

Oh Emma, I should also point out that Apple is rapidly heading away from optical drives in their products. The only computers left with CD/DVD drives are the 13" MacBook Pro laptops (non-Retina). If you still need access to CD/DVD, you'll have to purchase an external Apple USB Superdrive for USD$79. I haven't needed one in years, Apple software updates come over the internet and all modern Macs can re-install the OS (even if you completely erase the hard drive) without needing an optical drive.

Malanya wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: claudiasoftcloud wrote: I just try to be neutral your statement indicates that furries are annoying burdens to the general population of SL. Drake, did you mean that you interpretated her statement to indicate that furries are annoying burdens to the general population of SL? My interpretation is different. claudiasoftcloud wrote: i'm pretty shy but i am a little foxie, i guess i am a furry but i wont ever annoy anyone or be a burden, i am sort of quiet and out of the way as i mentioned but i am very friendly. and i hope to meet you all in game. I don't think she meant it that way either. Her sentence above seems to be run on lacking punctuation. It's a shame when people post that are new, the first thing that happens is the dissecting of their post and then getting replies that are judgemental and really don't have much to do with the OP lol. It's like your parents yelling at you. edit to add OP quote Yep, Claudia joined SL today, appears young and friendly and is pushing through her shyness to post here (I remember my angst when I first started online). That she knows she's a "furry" suggests she may have some experience in another game, or from friends (or as we learn in another post, her brother). She would not be the first person to introduce herself with "I won't annoy or be a burden". If I were in-world with any regularity, I'd ring her up and give her some encouragement. Claudia has posted a flurry of questions today and I hope people jump in to help her along. We could use more people who are excited to be here to remind people like me how magical SL is. Now, as for being yelled at by my parents... I assure you, I had it coming. ;-)