Jump to content

Phil Deakins

Resident
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    13,617

  • Joined

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Phil Deakins

  1. Phil Deakins
    I agree woith Cindy. It's a sploder in another form, and against the gaming rules.
  2. Phil Deakins
    Stephen Fry was a tough act to follow, but your countrywoman, Sandy Toksvig, is doing excellently. So good in fact that, imo, she's actually better than Stephen Fry was.
  3. Phil Deakins
    You must be mistaken, unless you only hang around with Americans. There's a massive number of non-Americans in SL, and I think it's safe to say that we don't generally lean towards either wing of U.S. politics. Perhaps you were meaning only what U.S. people say.
  4. Phil Deakins
    Can any political party, anywhere in the world, be trusted? No. What can be trusted in the UK is that no polical party would dare to sell the NHS off or get rid of it altogether. That is cast in stone here, at least for foreseeable future.
  5. Phil Deakins
    It also leads to the springing up of blatherers who just like to hear their own voices and see their own words in public.
  6. Phil Deakins
    This far more interesting than discussions about the various colours of politics
  7. Phil Deakins

    Animations

    Phil Deakins replied to QveenEnvie's question in Avatar

    If the animation in your inventory has the dance icon as shown in the pic if Coffee's post, double click it while it is in your inventory listing. A small floater (box) will open, as shown in Coffee's post. It has 2 buttons - Play Inworld starts you animating and everyone around can see your animating. Play Local starts you animating but only you can see you animating. If it doesn't have that icon in your inventory, it's in a box, and you need to open the box, put the animation into your inventory, and do as above.
  8. Phil Deakins
    And not very often it seems. Maybe they just look in when they get an RIC, unless they are at a loose end.
  9. Phil Deakins
    It's not ok in my book to keep on borrowing. Both parties here have continually dug that hole, and the hole is very very deep. The best that either party offers is to cut the rate at which the hole gets deeper. The NHS, which is what this thread is about, has suffered, and still suffers, because neither party has it as a top priority - except when the elections come round, as I said before. At those times they all con the people by giving assurances that they immediately slide down the priority scale as soon as they get elected. The NHS suffers through a lack of adequate funding.
  10. Phil Deakins
    I'm astonished. I posted the above post after reading only the original post. I was surprised when my reply appeared on page 3, so I read the whole thread. Nobody, but nobody, made any attempt to answer the OP's question - until me, that is. It looks like everyone who posted wants have a political argument, and ignore the question completely. In view of what happened in 'the other thread', I'm absolutely amazed.
  11. Phil Deakins
    No it's not true. All parties here spend our taxes on unnecessary things. And all parties don't consider the NHS as a top priority - except during elecyion times, of course. No party would dare to privatise it. They may use private businesses to supply some services. They probably do that now. But the NHS is safe from privatisation. It sound like you've read a very biased article - probably Labour party allegance. A few weeks ago, the Conservatives announced that they'd be putting an extra £20 billion into the NHS when we're out of the EU. The Labour party may very well put more money into it, but they only do it by borrowing more. All parties here borrow, and the national debt is horrendous, but the Labour party seem to have been the biggest borrowers of the two though the decades.
  12. Phil Deakins
    It was in the LL viewer. Other viewers had it because they used (and still use) the LL viewer code. Emerald was banned because every time someone logged in with it, it accessed a completely different server as it did so - a competitor's server. The code that did it was hidden from most of the Emerald's developers, so they weren't aware it was happening. One of them discovered it and blew the whistle. It was described as a DDoS attack on the other server, but it was never that. A DDoS attack needs a massive number of accesses to achieve it, and there's never been anywhere near that number of Emerald logins at around the same time.
  13. Phil Deakins
    It wasn't a misquote. I cut out all the superfluous stuff but that's what the post I quoted said. It still does because it hasn't been edited.
  14. Phil Deakins
    I've just had a scan through the thread and it looks like the posts that have gone are those that discussed theft and fraud, and those that were part of that bit. There may be others, but I do remember those. So some of my posts have gone too lol. It's a pity because it's exactly what threads in General Discussion (and previously RA) do and always have done to often make discussions in the forum so generally interesting. Just out of interest, that part of the thread was entirely about the OP's topic as written in the original post.
  15. Phil Deakins
    I agree with that, except I'd say that a lot depends on who looks at it. A pattern is discernable. My guess is very similar. I'm guessing that generally stuff of this nature comes about because someone complains ("look what they've done to the thread, ma") and, when nobody complains, it doesn't happen, even though it's the same thing. That's in keeping with what's been happening in recent times. E.g. someone complains that there's a difference of opinion going on and on and on - no flaming, insulting, profanity, or anything like that, but boring for everyone else. So a complaint goes in and action! Instead of suggesting the sensible thing - not to read it if it's boring - action! In your case, babies and bathwater spring to mind - good stuff down the plughole. I know for certain that nothing you ever write could possibly be construed as breaking any rules, although it's possible that you'd quoted from posts that had been removed, and your posts were flushed along with them, or they didn't make sense. Things just don't make any sense sometimes. All of this is off-topic, of course, so these posts will disappear with the rest. At least a few of us have had a brief opportunity to post about it
  16. Phil Deakins
    That was the phrase I was tying to remember! Google was 'google-bombed' so that George W. Bush was ranked #1 for 'miserable failure'.
  17. Phil Deakins
    Perhaps it depends what paths the 'off-topics' take, but even political ones make interesting discussions - for some people, anyway. I never join in with them.
  18. Phil Deakins
    If you mean a thread within a forum, not that I'm aware of. But if you mean something like, you want to only view certain sub-fourms within a main forum, then yes. And example of what I mean by the latter is, the People forum is a main forum, and General Discussion is a sub-forum of that. You can select only to have new threads and posts listed in the General Discussion sub-forum.
  19. Phil Deakins
    @Callum Meriman lol. Not yet, but some people are still asleep, so give it time. If I go missing, you'll know why What I found ridiculous about it is:- It's normal in this forum for threads to go off-topic after the topic has been dealt with, and it has been since the very first forum. It's precisely how the most interesting conversations come about. And, of course, many threads do go off-topic but remain unmodded, so it's ridiculous (that's the nicest word I have for it) when it happens to one thread out of the blue, and out of the many. This is the 'General Discussion' forum after all, and not a forum for a specific topic, and the thread isn't a question in Questions & Answers (if that still exists). Trying to change the age-old nature of the forum, so that everything must remain on-topic, should either be done religously (in which case I'd be one of those who stopped using it, due to it being ruled with a rod of iron), or not done at all - prerferably the latter. But doing it once in a while is ridiculous. Dealing with flames/insults, rows, bad language, that sort of thing, is all that's needed in a General Discussion forum.
  20. Phil Deakins
    Ridiculous. Apart from anything else, the post does not "have anything to do with the OP in this thread" so, by the same criteria, it should be removed, as should this one, of course, since it also has nothing to do with the OP in this thread.
  21. Phil Deakins
    Summary: The OP asked a sensible question. Correct answers were given, the answers being 'no'. The OP hasn't been back for a while, so it can be assumed that s/he has finished with the thread, having got the answer. Comment: Whether or not the answer was the one that the OP wanted or expected is known only to the OP, but I suspect it is not what s/he wanted.
  22. Phil Deakins
    That's what it pretty much said when I looked, as can be seen in the pic above - after it was said to have been removed.
  23. Phil Deakins
    I didn't see the profile earlier, and I don't see Klytyna's posts, but could it be that the profile had more details earlier, and it's them that have been removed and replaced with "ask me if you have questions"?
  24. Phil Deakins
    No wonder there was friction between you. They could hardly come in dressed and naked, could they? Some rules can be just too confusing for the rest of us
  25. Phil Deakins
    Naa. You're the most calm, rational, and sensible poster in the forum, and have been for a great many years. You could never be guilty of anything - except breaking the mainland, of course lol.
×
×
  • Create New...