Adrian Harbinger

Trying to obtain a response from Linden Labs that resembles anything more intelligent than the sounds of a brain damaged babboon makes while deficating is about as likely as Linden Labs offering all resident landowners a year of free tier.

Ziggy21 Slade wrote: Adrian Harbinger wrote: Judging requires one to give a rat's ass, which I don't. I was merely correcting your misinformed blather. You have a lot of extremely derrogatory things to say about something you apparently don't give a rat's ass about, and given that you don't give a rats ass I wonder how you have the knowledge to state that I am misinformed. What we know for sure is that breedables have existed for close to 3 years and people have continued to enjoy them and invest in new systems during this time. If I am right this is because they enjoy them. If I am misinformed as you claim, all these 1000s of people are being repeatedly fooled by a scam which you can see right through even with no involvement. Its perfectly obvious to anyone I am NOT the one who is misinformed. Every argument I have made has been reasoned and backed up with evidence and/or examples, you are the one who is posting pure opinion with nothing to back it up whatsoever. No knowledge of creating breedables, no knowledge of using breedables, know knowledge of selling in the marketplace. But if you insist on labouring this point BACK IT UP WITH EVIDENCE, reveal the source of your information, you apparently know all these people are being ripped off, demonstrate how you know this. Ziggy, Ziggy, Ziggy... You are way too worked up over this issue, so I will ignore your ill-informed diatribe and simply recommend that you get bred. It has a calming effect, in case you didn't know. Carry on my wayward son.

Ilyra Chardin wrote: In terms of legal recourse IF anyone wanted to sue, I believe that a case could be made that Linden dollars have a demonstrated US dollar value (as demonstrated on Marketplace, which facilitates purchases of items in both US dollars and the equivalent linden dollar amount.) That being said, I believe that most attorneys would advise you not to pursue any legal action as the amounts that we're discussing are negligible. 1000 linden dollars is roughly 4 US dollars. It makes pursuing cases cost MORE than the original value that you might want to sue for. It's possible that is what Adrian meant. I’m not sure. You’ll have to wait and see if he replies. That is precisely my point, Ilyra. It is not a question of whether anyone should take legal action to seek remedy with regard to L$ transactions, the nominal dollar sums connected to SL transactions would make such a course risible at best; it's a question as to whether someone could take such an action and successfully argue a given value in L$ represents a fractional amount in US$. I can assure you that they could. However, this whole discussion is rather academic at all levels since there is absolutely nothing even remotely illegal about the 'Breedables' industry and someone would have to be barking mad to invest enough L$ in the franchise(s) to make seeking legal remedy in any way worthwhile. My guess is that such a person would be too busy hoarding Slankets and Sham-Wows and feeding their eighty cats to find a lawyer willing to accept the case.

Ziggy21 Slade wrote: Adrian Harbinger wrote: Good question. I personally don't see taking advantage of suckers as an actionable legal issue any more than P.T. Barnum did. Describing the perfectly legitmate act of creating an entertaining product that other residents love to buy and enjoy as 'taking advantage of suckers', in the Merchants Forum is frankly disgraceful. As I have pointed out many times now the vast and overwhelming majority of users have not been suckered into anything, this is just some perception that you have invented based on what is clearly extremely limited or more likely non existant contact with breedables and the breedable community. Your complete arrogance over this issue is quite astounding, as apparently you are the only one who has spotted this great con, while 10 thousand blissfully unaware breedable owners log on every week to enjoy their pets and be further taken advantage of. Perhaps you can explain why you consider yourself to be a greater judge in this issue that so many other people?. Judging requires one to give a rat's ass, which I don't. I was merely correcting your misinformed blather. Adrian Harbinger wrote: "IF" someone commits an actionable offense, I hope it is never you; because I think you will be sadly astonished at the failure that your "legal tender" argument will represent in your defense. Here it seems you are accepting that no laws have been broken "YET", so your objection to Breedables is what exactly? You havent bought any, you don't know anyone who has any, and yet you apparently know all about what a terrible rip off they are, isn't it time to admit that you bit off way more than you could chew by entering this debate, and actually you have no idea what you are talking about. Please explain specifically what is "unethical" about breedables I am not going to bother repeating the contents of my last post, since you were incapable of reading it the first time, but just to remind others at no point have I presented a "Legal Tender" argument as a defence. My point throughout has been that there is nothing to defend. Someone incorrectly stated that Linden Dollars were Legal Tender, I pointed out that they are not and produced a nice quote to back this up, rather than admit to being wrong Adrian has decided to overlook this and try and twist the argument into something else. Here's to hoping you never have to find out. Adrian Harbinger wrote: Not my problem. You go girl. 'Nuff said. No it's not your problem, you don't and haven't owned any breedables, you don't know anyone who has any and since you don't actually have any listed products you don't compete with them in any way, I wonder if your own total failure to be part of the business community here is the reason for your weird bitterness towards those who are amongst the most successful in that community. I know people who sadly got sucked into that cabbage patch, despite my warnings, but alas, such is Second Life. I am not a girl - Dumbass My apologies, but you were acting like someone had yanked your ponytails. I was going to call you a wit, but I would have only been half right. Enjoy. .

Ziggy21 Slade wrote: Adrian Harbinger wrote: Ziggy21 Slade wrote: So please let us know when you start your legal action against breedable creators - I will be watching with interest That comment is equivalent to saying, "In case of nuclear attack, run in here, it's never been hit." No, it really isn't. Adrian Harbinger wrote: Secondly, you can play the semantics game all you like, but I'm pretty sure that if you stole a bunch of poker chips from a Vegas casino, a dollar value would be assigned to your larceny charges. Those plastic chips are representative of legal tender within the venue of the casino and can be readily converted to legal tender both inside and outside of the casino. its not a semantics 'game' , the law is the law, something is either legal tender or it isn't. You can draw any analogy you like, Linden Dollars will never be Legal Tender and neither. for that matter, will poker chips, it doesnt matter if you have to pay for them, it doesnt matter if you can sell them to someone else, it doesnt matter that they have value in one or several casinos, it doesnt matter that you can be arrested for stealing them, it doesnt matter that you can pay for your shrimp cocktail with them, they aren't legal tender. Legal Tender is the officially and legally recognised form of payment for a particular country or geographical area, in the USA, dollars and cents are legal tender, here in the UK, pounds and pence are legal tender, Pounds and pence are not legal tender in the USA, neither are poker chips, bank cheques, coupons or Linden Dollars Adrian Harbinger wrote: I simply want to point out to you the obvious fact (supported by the real world precedent I provided in my earlier post which you seem to have dismissed) is that Linden Dollars are equal to their conversion rate to real world US dollars. I wont be making a further comment on this because I really don't see its relevant, this part of the argument started because someone was suggesting taking legal action against breedable creators, and someone else suggested the fact the payments were made in Linden Dollars meant such action was impossible, (for the record, I think this is incorrect), someone else then disagreed with this stating the Linden Dollars are legal tender, I just wanted to point out that this is incorrect, and thats it. From a taking legal action standpoint, I agree with you, whether purchses were made in Linden Dollars, Dollars and Cents, Pounds and Pence or those little beans they use in the Maldives makes no difference whatsoever. Apart from that as far as I am concerned the point is irrelevant because i think legal action against breedable creators would be impossible for another much more compelling reason, that is the not so insignificant fact that no laws have been broken. So for the sake of reasoned debate, lets pretend that every single breedable purchase made, was in fact made using legal tender, whatever your personal defintion of that may be, so what!?, now progress the argument, on what basis are you going to start your hypothetical legal action? Good question. I personally don't see taking advantage of suckers as an actionable legal issue any more than P.T. Barnum did. Legal and ethical are terms that only sleep with one another now and then these days. I will say that "IF" someone commits an actionable offense, I hope it is never you; because I think you will be sadly astonished at the failure that your "legal tender" argument will represent in your defense. As for my my "In case of nuclear attack..." simile? You and any reader here may dismiss it at will, but the casual dismissal of a possible risk is, after all, the subject of the simile, is it not? Not my problem. You go girl. 'Nuff said.

Rene Erlanger wrote: Depends which part of the world you are from...here in Europe, we don't threaten people with law suits for every discrepancy or misdemeanor....we're not a "Sue" happy culture! Rene, I wish our civil judicial system had half common sense that yours possesses.

Ziggy21 Slade wrote: So please let us know when you start your legal action against breedable creators - I will be watching with interest That comment is equivalent to saying, "In case of nuclear attack, run in here, it's never been hit." First of all, Ziggy, I think that your rather condescending and snarky tone here does little to bolster your faulty arguments here. Secondly, you can play the semantics game all you like, but I'm pretty sure that if you stole a bunch of poker chips from a Vegas casino, a dollar value would be assigned to your larceny charges. Those plastic chips are representative of legal tender within the venue of the casino and can be readily converted to legal tender both inside and outside of the casino. This is an apt parallel to the function that Linden Dollars serve. They may be traded in and out of Second Life for real US dollars, Yes, Euros, what have you. You can buy them with dollars and sell them for dollars. They are as much legal tender as a bank check, a coupon, stock, etc. I have already stated my view in regard to legal vs ethical issue of the "Breedable" franchises within SL so I am not going to discuss that any further. I simply want to point out to you the obvious fact (supported by the real world precedent I provided in my earlier post which you seem to have dismissed) is that Linden Dollars are equal to their conversion rate to real world US dollars. Just because few people are willing to take a $4.75 grievance to court, it doesn't mean the facts change. Imagine if that grievance was in the millions of Lindens/thousands of US dollars. I am pretty sure that if you were the victim of some SL scam or fraud that involved such sums, you would have a very different view on the matter. A tiny speck of poison won't kill you, but that doesn't mean it's not poison.

Ziggy21 Slade wrote: Breedables are not 'investment operations' and are not presented as such Returns are not even an essentail part of the game and are not paid by subsequent investors. just by other people in the game. The organisation running the scheme does not aim to or pretend to earn profits which it will return to its customers. Users are not enticed by offerings of higher returns than other investments All that is required to keep the game going is a flow of money, not an ever increasing flow. It would be hard for you to be more wrong! It would only be possible if Ilyra agreed with your argument above. While 'breedables' are indeed not any form of 'Ponzi scheme', they do flirt with a 'pyramid scheme' by definition, but they really aren't that either. They are more like Cabbage Patch Dolls or Beanie Babies or Magick cards, etc. They are the latest exercise machine, diet, or household gadget that, if you "call now" you can double your order and save a value of $150; as long as you pay the extra shipping and handling. In short, 'breedables' are simply capitalism at work, albeit capitalism in its lowest form; that which feeds at the bottom of the gene pool. But hey, it's just business, right? With regard to the question of monetary jurisdiction, it is risible to argue that Linden Dollars are not based on their proportional value in US Dollars. When one can purchase virtual goods or services with, not only Lindens that may be acquired with legal US tender, but via PayPal (real world bank account or CC), then I can assure you that those purchases fall under to the commerce laws that pertain to transactions with that legal tender. I would point you to a relevant case: However, Second Life has shown a legal example which may indicate that the developer can be in part held responsible for such losses. Second Life at one stage, offered and advertised the ability to "own virtual land", which was purchased for real money. In 2007, Marc Bragg, an attorney, was banned from Second Life; in response he sued the developers for thereby depriving him of his land, which he – based on the developers' own statements – "owned". The lawsuit ended with a settlement in which Bragg was re-admitted to Second Life. The details of the final settlement were not released, but the word "own" was removed from all advertising as a result. (It should be noted that Bragg purchased his land directly from the developers, and thus they were not an uninvolved third party in his transactions.) Link I would submit that the moral of this story is: Money is what you say it is, a fool and his money are soon parted, and before you dismiss someone as being 'wrong', you had be damned sure that you're right. Hold that thought.

Ilyra's idea makes good sense. It would not only obviate issues of proper listing placement, but it would make it much easier for Marketplace shoppers to find the theme-specific items they are looking for. I, for one, find shopping the Marketplace to be like an Easter egg hunt much of the time. Designations like this will only enhance the shopping experience in my opinion.

Amen, Argus.