Madelaine McMasters

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!

I'll second your reassurance on wireless. I've been wireless my entire five years in SL. That's never been an issue.

Janelle Darkstone wrote: Is common sense dead? I'm working on it. These things take time.

Dillon Levenque wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: As for hair, in SL I've been wearing the same unisex style for years. It's short enough I don't have to worry about it entering my body and now longer than my RL hair, which is a lot easier to manage when it's boy cut. I won't say I've got either style or sophistication, but my friends, both SL and RL find me reasonably easy to locate in a crowd. Although that was never my goal (I'm a natural introvert) I've seen more than a few people here wonder how to attract attention. It has always seemed logical to me that if I'm attracted to people who are comfortable in their own skins, I should probably be comfortable in mine. For about a year I never saw you in hair different from what you had the first time I met you. I completely identified it with you. Once a long time later you were wearing a similar but different style and I needed you to pose for a snapshot. You had your back to the camera because your identity was supposedly secret. Thing is I really wanted everyone to guess who you were and you had that different hair, it was even a different color. I was trying to figure out a way to ask you to wear the hair you usually wore without making it seem like you always wore the same hair (though of course you did). You asked, "You mean my 'Maddy' hair?". So I guess you identified it with you, too. The current hairdo is terrific, by the way. And if you won't say you've got style and sophistication I'll say it for you :-). You are too kind. Your look is easily identifiable (and pleasing) to me as well, but I wonder if you'd call yourself either stylish or sophisticated. Could we simply claim to be consistent in a meaningful way?

Suella Ember wrote: Janelle Darkstone wrote: If a social world is so in need of having processor-killing trees, why not just turn your computer off and go outside? There's REAL trees outside you know? I've SEEN them! (Who me? Noooooooo. I'm not *that* Suella Ember. I'm a totally different one. Don't know what you're talking about!) :smileytongue: I've seen 'em too. Including this one... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glochidion_ferdinandi Now get out of here and pick some cheese!

Ariel Vuissent wrote: As for skins, there's also nothing about the mechanics of SL skins that's changed, other than the tattoo layers which now allow you to change makeup without altering the rest of your skin. I don't know about the mechanics, as I don't create skins myself, but I do know that if I put on a skin made even back when I joined, in 2010, then put on a skin made this year, I can definitely tell the difference. If I put on a skin made back when SL first started, I can most definitely tell the difference. I see much more detailed shading and really, just general detail in skins made more recently. That's not just from adding tattoo layers and make-up; it's the skin itself, even if the two were made by the very same creator. Some of it's increased skill, but I imagine some of it's just the level of detail people can achieve now that they couldn't achieve then. I change my hair frequently, although recently I'm more into one particular style I just purchased. I identify more with my shape and face, and with my skintone. (I'm quite pale in SL; I'm also quite pale in RL. I've tried on tanned skins, and they just don't feel like "me." I always find it a little bit odd when my friends change their skins completely, as I feel like I have to get used to them all over again!) I agree, however, that people whose avatars display a consistent style make the most "sense" to me. And I greatly appreciate attention to the little details that make a person unique. Avatar skins are comprised of three 512x512 textures. That's it. Nothing has changed about that in at least the five years I've been in SL, with the exception of tattoo layers that allow the separation of makeup from the skin. My old Minnu skin had lovely detail in the face, freckle and non-freckle versions, nice detail on the body and some tasteful eye and lip treatments. I'm sure that skin creators improve their products over time, but there were very good skins available five years ago and nothing has changed that allows one to achieve greater levels of detail now. If there is greater detail now, it's because the creators have been adding things to keep us coming back for updates! My RL skin has vitiligo, so if I want my SL skin to mimic it I'd have to blotch it up myself (and I might someday). Instead, I adorn myself with moles arranged like my favorite constellations. I'm currently wearing Orion, Ursa Major and the Pleiades. I thought I might add the Andromeda galaxy as a port wine stain ;-) I also wear a prim "Anne Francis" mole near my mouth, which is a little spinning nighttime globe of the Earth. I like knowing I can lick the world whenever I wish. I too appreciate attention to the little details, especially when I imagine seven billion people live on them. :-)

Reallycuriousgeorge wrote: Hey everybody I’m a student doing a research project on the gender bending experience in online gaming and I would like to ask anyone who is interested some questions on the subject. You don’t have to answer all the questions just the ones you are comfortable with. Questions don't make me uncomfortable, it's my answers that sometimes bother me. My definition of gender bending: players who create a virtual identity of their opposite sex What is the opposite sex of someone born with both sets of gender bits? What is the opposite sex of someone born with one gender's bits but the other gender's self identity? Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. It's nice to be appreciated. Thank you in advance. ;-) Questions for people who don’t gender bend Why do you think that people want to play as their opposite gender on an online game? I suppose I'd have to ask them, which would require I know who they are. I don't think I'm terribly good at detecting them. I don't recall asking those who have confided in me, nor those who make it public. When people ask me why I'm kinky, I give them the same blank expression I see in the mirror when I ask myself. How do you think people respond to players who are not the gender they play as? Although this gets discussed frequently in the forum, I've had no direct experience with others "responding" to this issue. I don't know if that's because it's not an issue or because it's not an issue (Yes, that's obtuse, but I can't think of a better way to word it. Okay I can, but sometimes I enjoy being obtuse). How would you respond? That would depend on a lot more than just this particular revelation, so I can't answer. Do you think people who gender bend are forth coming or do they wait to be asked? If I knew one who volunteered the information and one who waited to be asked, how would I answer your question? Also, is waiting to be asked not being forthcoming? Question for everyone. How do you think the playing experiences differ between playing as a male or female avatar? How could this be a question be for everyone? Only those who've played both male and female would be able to answer it. I appreciate your curiosity, George, but this is an interesting subject that might want the finesse one could imagine of The Man with the Yellow Hat. I hope that you'll get enough responses from others to sense a shape to this creature. So far it feels like a shmoo to me.

Rolig Loon wrote: One of the first things to do when you are working on something like this is to step back and take a deep breath. Ask yourself how much detail you really need to provide. Is this an object that many people will zoom in on tightly? Are they likely to spend more than a brief second looking t it? If so, then it's worth spending time and your prim allowance on making it super-realistic. If not, you're putting too much effiort into it and you're creating something that will just add to the rendering load for people who look at it. Personally, I'd suggest applying a tassel texture -- maybe 128 x 256 pixels, graded to 100% alpha -- to a single conical flexi prim. Rolig, you are absolutely right! Here are a pair of prim tassels I made myself, in just a few minutes!!! They are simple alpha textures slapped on cubey prims with rotation scripts. They spin in opposite directions, which keeps anyone from paying attention to the icky alpha texture and displays my extraordinary dancing skill!

Czari Zenovka wrote: Dresden Ceriano wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: Orca Flotta wrote: These forums do not represent an effective cross section of your target group anyway since you find here mostly tired oldbies who prefer to blabber in forum over logging in. :smileywink: I've been trying to figure out why, for approximately the last 6 months or so, I log into SL and many times am not motivated to do anything so I log back out. You hit the nail on the proverbial head. :matte-motes-wink: No kidding... what's even sadder is when I sometimes log into SL just to sit at my virtual computer desk and do nothing but post to the forum. ...Dres Oh gosh! I do that too! This is really bad. Maybe we need to form a support group. I grew up online in text venues, campus computer terminal IM and bulletin boards at first, then usenet and IRC. Now I find that when I'm in-world, I'm usually balancing on my ottoman, or standing in my fireplace as I chat with others in IM. I sometimes wonder if Philip Rosedale underestimated the power of the written word.

Sephina Frostbite wrote: Btw you are right its amazing what a good hair and shoes will do. About twenty years ago, as a blushing bride and rising young businesswoman, I found a pair of basic but quite high heeled pumps that were suprisingly comfortable and available in a rainbow of colors. Sensing the opportunity to avoid years of trend following, I purchased two dozen pair in various colors. I don't wear them as much as I once did, but they are still the foundation of my modest shoe collection. In SL, I have a favorite pair of prim feet high heeled ankle strap sandals (in various colors) from Kittie's Lair that I've been wearing for years. I have a pair of flats (again in various colors), a cute pair of pumps (strawberry) and some oversized work boots Ceka Cianci gave me for Xmas long ago. I think that's it! I'd wear prim feet pumps, but haven't found a pair that gets the ankle/prim foot joint as seamless as I want. As for hair, in SL I've been wearing the same unisex style for years. It's short enough I don't have to worry about it entering my body and now longer than my RL hair, which is a lot easier to manage when it's boy cut. I won't say I've got either style or sophistication, but my friends, both SL and RL find me reasonably easy to locate in a crowd. Although that was never my goal (I'm a natural introvert) I've seen more than a few people here wonder how to attract attention. It has always seemed logical to me that if I'm attracted to people who are comfortable in their own skins, I should probably be comfortable in mine.

Jolene Rae wrote: About 3 or 4 years ago, when I first started SL, I spent a lo t of time and money creating my avatar. Now, people tell me I l ook like a noob. My theory is that the skins and sh apes have improved so much, that even though I got a top notch skin/shape back then, it now looks like a noobie one. I will gladly shell out the Linden to update my skin and shape but here is the problem. I don't want to change my face. I've learned that if one changes the s kins and shape , the face will change. Also, my shape is a custom made Brazillian one (I am a big woman) and I'm very happy with it . How can I magically make m y self look more sophisticated (the opposite of a noob) and keep the details of my avatar ? There is nothing about the mechanics of SL shape that has changed since SL started. There may be trends in avatar shape, but I don't advise following them unless they're heading in a direction that pleases you. I don't gain and loose weight in SL to follow the fashion trends, I just try to maintain a healthy physique. Since you are happy with your shape, keep it. As for skins, there's also nothing about the mechanics of SL skins that's changed, other than the tattoo layers which now allow you to change makeup without altering the rest of your skin. When I first entered SL, I purchased a Minnu (which has changed name) skin that I think would have served me fine right up to today. I currently use a makeup-free base skin (obtained somewhere on the web years ago) that I've modified and upon which I layer makeup to match my mood, just as I do in RL, and with similar infrequency. I'm hardly an expert on sophistication, but I do appreciate avatars decorated with attention to detail that, over time, exhibit a distinctive style. I'm all for experimentation, but throwing on different looks day after day, with no apparent underflying fashion sense, turns me off. Sophistication is not magic, it's the result of thoughtfullness. ETA: For me, hair is central to the look of an avatar. As I approach a group of friends, I recognize them first by their hair. Those friends who switch styles generally do so in a way that makes sense to me, and that contributes to their style. If you know who you are, show it! If you don't, spend some time thinking about it. That effort will serve you well in both SL and RL.