Jump to content

Phil Deakins

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Phil Deakins

  1. She did go on to say that. She said it late in the thread when lots of people had answered her question. She wrote that because she learned the answer here. BilliJo seems to he perfectly happy being 'not nice' in other people's opinions. I dislike her, but that isn't influencing my posts and opinions in this thread. Personally, I don't think there's anything not nice about the unexpected swarm, but that's me. Oh, I do think that she's just causing some splashes now that she's back as her real SL self. I've written that somewhere. It does seem to be her nature to be as you described, but even people with such natures aren't in the wrong all the time
  2. Another thing... I think the idea of swarming hornets is amusing. Even if there are signs saying ' you are welcome here', and a swarm of hornets attacked me, it would still be amusing. So would a piano unexpectedly falling on my head. There is nothing bad about it. There is nothing bad about it even when it isn't forewarned. Every whichway you look at it, it's amusing.
  3. This thread has become very silly. BilliJo asked a simple question - 'is it griefing?' She got loads of answers saying that it isn't griefing. That was the end of it as far as the question was concerned. Why so many people want to be so critical about how not nice the practise is, and continue repeating it, is beyond me. You'll get bored BilliJo doesn't let go. She's been (wrongly) suspended in the past when she wouldn't let go of something. In that particular case, she was wrong. In this case, she is right. She asked a question, she got the answer from many people. And that should be that.
  4. With the addition of her 3rd thread, I thought it was just publicity. Sort of - I'm back as the real me now, so l'll make a few splashes so that everyone knows I'm back.
  5. Already ruined! lol And there's no way for us to know which of the two of ruined it. Bith 'thanks' are timed 6 minutes ago (as I write this).
  6. Well, now that we know how it ends, there's no need to watch it
  7. I don't think anyone has said that they're offended by them yet. I find that using the laugh as scorn is idiotic (stupid), and I do have a chip on my shoulder about it, as I've said a number of times in the past. It's an offensive act but I'm not offended by it. I just see it as being done by those very few people who are perhaps a bit short up top to discuss the topic normally, but yet they do want to mak a statement.
  8. And it's true. Simply because you've run out of arguments against what's being said, and have to resort to name calling and such. And, yes, the word was soc what you said.
  9. Actually, it wasn't me lol. It was on page 9. I merely agreed
  10. LOL. And I do love that programme. It's due back very soon now, I think. I watched a recently reaired full length one last night - with Ziva and Tony in it. I was ok with Ziva leaving, but it's not the same without Abby and Tony - especially Abby.
  11. 'Stupid' might a bit harsh for them. But maybe not. Anyone with the mentality to do that, rather than risk an actual conversation, does give me that imprssion. I do look down on such people here. Love's Dunning-Kruger post was silly. It was like saying that anyone who thinks themselves intellectaully superior to someone else must therefore be intellectaully inferior, regardless of their intellects. As I said - silly.
  12. OOoooohhh. LOL. I scoured that short post of mine that you quoted and could only see the word 'said' that starts with an s. And that other word was there all the time. But in my defense, I only added it for those who call handball football, and would be confused by the post. It's not their fault. I think that, back in the day, some people who emigrated over there thought the things on the end of your arms are feet. There weren't many schools around back then.
  13. I wonder who that certain someone could be 😲 Imo, some people do some things here that merit those words said against them. I actually look down (intellectually) on them. That's absolutely true.
  14. You gave me the impression that you'd followed the discussion. It's a phrase than Kanry used. To me it means kicking or tripping (fouling) the player instead of kicking the ball - in football (soccer). Its useage here means ignoring what was said and, instead, focussing the response on the person who said it.
  15. Who claimed that? I haven't seen anyone claim that. This has been a sensible thread, so there's no need to invent things now. Let's keep in factual please.
  16. Nobody would question your right to use a zero-time security device, but probably everyone would tell you that you shouldn't do it.
  17. There is absolutely no chance of that happening. Not so much that it's you, although that would be a good enough reason, but because I rarely set foot outside my own place.
  18. lol. And I can predict how one particular person will use scorn - since she learned more about it, and has been practising it, in the last days Are you looking to take Solar's crown? You need a lot more practise if that's your aim lol. As I said, allowing people onto your land, and then auto-attacking them, isn't exactly in the spirit of open access, is it? It's just playing silly beggars with them. You did ask. Oh and, please put me on your black list if I'm not already on it. It'll make us both feel good lol.
  19. @BilliJo Aldrin First you want to know if pouring scorn on someone is against the rules here, and now you want to know if physically interfering with people is allowed in SL when it's done on your own land. It says a LOT about the questioner. If nothing else, it indicates that you're scared as hell of being suspended again, and maybe even banned, but it also says a lot about you, yourself - that you really do enjoy being bad to people. However, as far as I know, neither of them is against any rules. In this case, why not just use a security device if you don't want people on your land, instead of playting silly beggars with them? Your method isn't exactly the spirit of "open access"is it?
  20. A laugh emoji, used as scorn, is very much like, "he didn't tackle what I said and disagree or dispute it he went straight to playing the man not the ball", which is what Kanry posted. Hence my reply to him. I.e. laughing AT a person scornfully is playing the person, not the ball.
  21. You mean like pouring scorn on someone by using the laugh emoji inappropriately, and saying nothing? And so we come full circle
  • Create New...