Madelaine McMasters

Sephina Frostbite wrote: Thank you and hope you have a nice day. I stopped wishing people a "nice day" long ago. Even when I mean it, nobody believes me. Now I tell them to get into trouble and report back. Even when I don't mean it, they often go off and do exactly that. Humans! The trick I'm still learning is how to detect when I am damned if I do, and damned if I don't. ;-)

Saraya Starr wrote: Caitlin Tobias wrote: Lucretia Brandenburg wrote: My impression from the OP is that most of those dumping her like a hot potato are "friends with benefits" or why dump her because they won't be getting a piece of the cookie any more? While say, sending out a group announcement or posting it on adboards would be a bit much, I don't think letting her friends know she's not interesting in bumping pixels anymore constitutes a desire for drama, especially if those friends are used to sticking their hand in the cookie jar ... sort of a warning, get away from that, or the lid is going to smash your fingers. OK, let me put it this way then: this whole OP is about the dramaz. Losing 'friends'over an 'announcement' or how you want to call it and then wonder wtf happened? But hey, that could be just me eh? Ok, I wasn't going to post in this thread, but my thoughts exactly, Caitlin. I have thought from the OP's first post that this is all about the drama. For the life of me, I cannot see why you (OP) even felt the need to come post about this at all. I don't see evidence that Sephina felt a "need" to post. I'm not even sure how a need to post reveals itself. You and I also posted here. Similarly, I don't see from Sephina the sort of shock or indignation that Caitlin's "wtf" insinuates. When a curious observation attracts a lot of attention, it can be difficult to see that it may have been little more than a curious observation. I've not read the whole thread, and so may have missed the mark, but it seems that Sephina has maintained her composure amidst the usual amount of misinterpretation. There may have been attempts to bring drama here, but she seems to be defusing them.

Trinity Yazimoto wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Trinity Yazimoto wrote: Thanks Maddy ! Well now you pluck feathers ? and no more hands in pockets ? :smileywink: hugs Birds have pockets? Lol you use to say it yourself ... pockets are not really needed to put your hands in lol That's right. All I need to put "hands in" is hands! And between Snugs and me, we've got four of 'em! Cover your bums, everybody!

Good afternoon, Kids!!! Anybody seen Lia?

Trinity Yazimoto wrote: Thanks Maddy ! Well now you pluck feathers ? and no more hands in pockets ? :smileywink: hugs Birds have pockets?

Czari Zenovka wrote: ...Trinity Yazimoto (4 years) and... Me! (6 years) Birds of a feather have Rezdays together...or something like that! Happy Rezday, Trinity!!!! :heart: ...plucks a feather from each of you as a remembrance. Happy RezDay, Czari and Trin!

Dillon Levenque wrote: Perfect timing! It's someone else's 75th birthday today: Bugs Bunny. And because the Internet is so useful I even found a clip to share. I don't know that we have a Bugs on the Forum but I'm pretty sure that other guy is here somewhere. There's even a little something to remind us of 16—I just know she'd have loved those scooters :-). ... swoons.

Valen Serpente wrote: Life before the internet... sunlight and strange creatures. If you do it right, that's also life during and after.

Porky Gorky wrote: Life before the internet was one of standing around looking suspicious in newsagents waiting for the shop to clear so one could sneakily purchase a top shelf publication (obscured beneath a newspaper) with minimal embarrassment. All hail the interwebs and it's smorgasbord of free pornography!! For me, life before the internet was one of chatting with people on "The Well". Before that, it was chatting with people on the campus mainframe's inter-terminal messaging system. Before that it was chatting with people on local bulletin board systems. Before that, it was chatting with Dad at the terminal in his office from the terminal in my bedroom. There are days I think I haven't advanced one iota... nor need to.

Janelle Darkstone wrote: I wonder how many students finally graduate college, enter the real world and find out it's just easier to lie or not tell the whole truth unless you happen to be in front of a grand jury ( and even then you'll have a lawyer and, if he's a good one, lies and half-truths with the best of them ). Lying. It works for politicians, lawyers, policemen, ad executives, insurance salesmen, clergy, used car salesmen, new car salesmen.... Note to all students conducting surveys here: don't say anything, just ask your questions, form your statistics and bend them to suit your purposes like you would anyway. I think that's why it's incumbent on all of us to think critically, and to encourage and teach others to do the same. If you don't want BS to rise to the top, you've got to detect it at the bottom. I was lucky enough to work in engineering, where the laws of physics are strictly enforced by the greatest BS detector of all time... Nature.

Perrie Juran wrote: "The World Wide Web is enjoying its twentieth birthday today, having been made available by its creators on a royalty-free basis on the 30th of April 1993 - a move without which the modern internet would look very, very different." http://www.bit-tech.net/news/bits/2013/04/30/www-birthday/1 I think I climbed aboard minutes after they opened the doors. I clearly recall the magic I felt when clicking on links in those early pages, which looked exactly like this. Thanks for the heads-up, Perrie!

Hippie Bowman wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Hush all of you, I'm trying to sleep... OMG Maddy! That picture is so funny! Peace! Funny? ...opens one eye to glare at you.

Hush all of you, I'm trying to sleep...

Zenephobe wrote: VRprofessor wrote: The LL terms of service are not the same as federal requirements for the protection of human subjects. Common sense says that you should follow federal requirements for the conduct of research. The only issue I raise with student research is the failure to meet those basic requirements. I say nothing about the research posted that appears to be following those requirements. All of us have some responsibility to assure that students make the most of their education. We do? Since when? What do you propose that we do, alert the Federal Government that a person is asking questions on a video game forum? Evolution appears to have selected for cooperation. I think it's okay to express that as "All of us have some responsibility to assure ___insert social good here___". We could argue whether we actually have the free will to be responsible or just do what we're wired for, but that would want another thread. The methods we use to achieve those social goods are many. The feedback the OP got here was, I hope, illuminating. VRprofessor provided some of that feedback, so I'll guess he was fulfilling the responsibility he feels, just as I was.

Marigold Devin wrote: It's a shame that when you change your forum badge again, anyone coming back to this thread won't quite get your joke, so I'm taking the liberty of screenshotting it in here. Too many have been lost before. Since childhood, I've been sandcastling, carving pumpkins, building snowmen, stacking little cairns (in places nobody goes) and sticking red reflectors on the noses of deer in deer crossing signs along the roads, usually by myself. I've learned not to ponder whether anyone sees what I've done, nor that I might leave a little trail of confusion when things evaporate, or not. It's enough for me to have been there and done it. It's transient, it's ephemeral... it's all practice for tomorrow. I'm glad (and I'm presuming) it made you smile. Thanks for the bonus. ;-)

VRprofessor wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: The point I'm flailing to make is that critical thinking continues to be important. I don't know if it's more important than ever before, but it's certainly no less important.. Searching for information on the internet is one example of where critical thinking is more important today than it was in the past. Instead of having a handful of teacher approved sources available, you have the entire world of information and misinformation available at your finger tips. I vote for more important. I lean towards more important, too. But it's only a leaning. I had pretty good teachers (I was home schooled) until college. Some of the teacher approved sources there were crap, as were the teachers themselves. It might seem like critical thinking is more important when the library (internet) is filled with books written by your neighbors (or me). But I'm not ready to believe that the subset of the public that teaches the majority is somehow blessed with superior wisdom. Caveat mathitís? Google translate says that's Greek for "learner" but I'm skeptical ;-)

Janelle Darkstone wrote: Sooooo... Seph, are we still on for "Dress Like a Hussy Night' at Club Fun Time? :smileytongue: ...fetches her reading glasses.

VRprofessor wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: I've no problem with exposing students to the IRB process, but I suppose I'm worried about universities expending IRB resources on research that apparently hasn't been reviewed for efficacy. Is wasting resources to insure ethics... ethical? An interesting question. Some argue that the IRB should evaluate both the ethics and potential efficacy of research. I prefer closer faculty supervision for the efficacy side of the question, but situations like you describe strength the argument for those who want to broaden the IRB's responsibilities. FWIW--the typical student survey would be "exempt" from full review. A single staff member would look it over, decide there was nothing particularly threatening, and approve the study to go forward. Pretty minimal use of IRB resources. Over the twenty years or so that I've been loosely connected to IRB research, I'd say that efficacy has been a greater problem than ethics. It's been frustrating to see the IRB crawl all over privacy/safety issues for research that crashes to the ground on peer review. I'm surprised by the pervasiveness of innumeracy in academia. But why should academia be different? It's full of people! ;-)

VRprofessor wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: Perrie Juran wrote: Personally speaking I prefer Wikipedia as a launching point when I want to look at a subject in more detail because Wikipedia requires citation and it is those citations that I want to look at. So it becomes my 'card catalogue' on a topic. But even then I do not consider it an 'end all.' Given the increasing use the potentially unverified Internet by everybody, I'm not sure there is an "end all". That's okay though... there never was. <snip> ETA: Your observation about Google's tailored search results is important. Google is turning search into a "yes man". Those fellas are seductive... and dangerous. Am I allowed to agree with people? Hope so. You gotta start somewhere and more often than not Wiki is a reasonable starting point. I love Wikipedia, so I think we're all in agreement. The point I'm flailing to make is that critical thinking continues to be important. I don't know if it's more important than ever before, but it's certainly no less important. When I read that 27% of the US respondents say in a survey that they thought the Mayan Apocalypse was real, I'm skeptical no matter how I parse it. I've no reason to believe the survey was any better thought out than anyone's supposed belief in the wisdom of the Mayans.

Orca Flotta wrote: Wireless increases the latency to the modem. Which is just logical according to the laws of physics. Also the thoughput is considerably slower. So why bother pulling the plugs out if the modem is situated only half a meter away from your machine on the same desk? When I use a laptop and play SL from my garden I go wireless as well, but then I know that I can't expect it all to run super smooth. The OP has indicated that he's had no trouble running SL over Wi-Fi on the laptop his daughter uses. Radio signals propagate through air about 0.03% slower than in a vacuum. Electrical signals propagate through Ethernet cable about 33% slower than in a vacuum. If we're speaking of the physics of raw signal propagation, wireless is better than wired. The additional latency of wireless comes from the work done by the radios and corrections required to accomodate the higher error rates generally encountered in free-space systems. My cable bandwidth tops out at about 22Mbps. The wireless link from my computer to my home's central router typically runs about 125Mbps. Until I upgrade my cabling, wired connections from my computer to that same router run at 100Mbps. Again, for me, wireless is faster. I get reliable connections from anywhere inside my house and can wander at least 100ft in any direction outside before my bandwidth falls below that of the cable modem. Without full analysis of the situation, it's not possible to state categorically that wired is better than wireless.

Conifer Dada wrote: Someday SL might look this good..... I looked at the picture and it struck me as ironic that people develop better graphics which end up being used to portray ugliness more realistically ! This reminds me why I appreciate radio. It delivers a better picture.

Perrie Juran wrote: Personally speaking I prefer Wikipedia as a launching point when I want to look at a subject in more detail because Wikipedia requires citation and it is those citations that I want to look at. So it becomes my 'card catalogue' on a topic. But even then I do not consider it an 'end all.' Given the increasing use the potentially unverified Internet by everybody, I'm not sure there is an "end all". That's okay though... there never was. That said, one can hope (and I do) that, with patience and perseverence, one can make splendid use of the rough and tumble. If the student's professors won't critique their research methods, they'll have to rely on us! ;-) ETA: Your observation about Google's tailored search results is important. Google is turning search into a "yes man". Those fellas are seductive... and dangerous.

Sephina Frostbite wrote: So I have decided to not have "fun time" on sl. (Or Very Limited) Well it seems like because of this my friends list has minimized and people I would have thought were my friends are dropping like flies. I even was attacked because of my decision. I was told I should make my avi ugly then or shouldn't dress sexy. Its not like a dress like a hussy. So now I am looking for places with like minded individuals because apparently I befriended all the close minded pervs. lol I have a "fun time" pushing people over edges, pinching them, and setting them on fire... and I have more friends than I can properly appreciate. One or both of us is doing something wrong! ;-)

VRprofessor wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: I want to know how it is that all of these "students" have been assigned a thesis paper on SL. I highly doubt there are all that many Professors that study Sl or even know what it is. Why aren't there hundreds of "surveys" on the WoW forums pages? Why is it only SL that gets the students? Shouldn't WoW get even more, seeing as they have more players online at any given moment? I have a couple of reasons for all of these surveys: 1) In recent years there has been a push to involve more students in research. A noble goal, but a goal that is an "unfunded mandate" at its core. As long as the student is interested in the research project the faculty member is motivated to allow it without much thought, especially when they have 10 or 15 or more students all needing to conduct research. 2) a failure on the part of lots of people resulting in students who don't know how to use a library. Students are used to just asking their questions on message boards or searching Google. 3) lack of planning. These are most common at the end of the semester because students have failed to plan ahead and are desperate to get a paper in by some deadline in the very near future. They slap together a survey, hope to get 50 or 60 respondents, and impress their professor with their last ditch effort. Sadly this works often enough that students are reinforced for it. These are certainly not the only reasons, but they are some. And I should mention that there are examples of people doing good research on/about/in SL. Not all research efforts are a waste of time and bandwidth. But rarely (never?) are these projects the result of a quick survey. The ones that I am aware of take several months, at a minimum, for data collection. My biggest complaint about the "research" I see conducted on us here is the terribly low quality of the questions. Granted, as an insider I can see what the questions miss, but it goes well beyond that. For instance, in this particular survey we had the following question: "Question for everyone. How do you think the playing experiences differ between playing as a male or female avatar?" If this question was truly intended for "everyone", I'm not sure what value the answers would have. The OP is effectively asking people who may have NO experience with something to describe that experience. Where I come from, we call that nonsense. I've no problem with exposing students to the IRB process, but I suppose I'm worried about universities expending IRB resources on research that apparently hasn't been reviewed for efficacy. Is wasting resources to insure ethics... ethical?

Hippie Bowman wrote: valerie Inshan wrote: Happy Monday to you my dear friend! I'm gonna love this week: no work on Wednesday! And next week will be even better: two days off on Wednesday AND Thursday! woot, I'm loving May! YAY! Enjoy your time off! I am off today too! DR. Appointments. Arggg! Peace! Happy Monday!!! Pinch a nurse for me, Hippie! Enjoy your time off, Val!