Phil Deakins

I arrived in SL at the end of 2006, and female clothing has always been like that. It's not jusr "nowadays". I don't have any reason for wearing the type of clothing you described, because I don't wear it. But I do have an opinion on why people dress that way. My opinion is that it's because they would like to wear such clothing in RL but they don't because society might (probably would) be too judgemental, and/or because they don't have body shapes that suit it. Also my opinion is that many, perhaps even most, of we RL people would really like to be much more sexually free in RL than we are. By "sexually free", I don't just mean promiscuous, although that's a part of it for many people. I also mean stuff like the revealing clothing we wear, and clothing we don't wear.

They come with the dance animation and the script to operate it, but not with music. The idea of them is that you hear music, perhaps in a club, or from a stream on your land, and you get on a dance ball to dance to it. The animations don't have any connection with the music, so they don't aren't designed to dance in time with it.

For once we are in agreement on something. I used to have land surrounding an empty 16m plot. Then one day vertical ads appeared on it, so I put prim walls up around them, so that they couldn't seen. He raised the ads, so my walls went higher. Eventually he IMed me. My walls were just a very tall square chimney but I said, "I'm building a castle" to which he replied, "It's a beautiful castle". In those circumstances, he was trying to be really nice lol. I don't remember how it ended, but he was never able to display ads that could be seen on that plot, and they disappeared. No Linden ever told me that I wasn't allowed to make the ads on his 16m bit unseeable.

I've never claimed to have a great memory Quite the opposite, in fact. Dakota's post, on its own, does look as though there will be no first name changes. If what Patch said is correct, then she simply wrote the post poorly.

I probably am out of the loop. Her post looked to me pretty much like the definitive information on the topic, and I treated it as such. I hope I've been totally wrong about it. I'm only going by what Dakota wrote, and what she wrote doesn't even hint at being able to change first names. It strongly suggests not being able to. Perhaps she is also out of the loop, or maybe what she wrote is dead right, and the info in the loop has changed.

If that's true, she didn't say it. Judging only by what she wrote, which is what I replied to, there will be no changing of first names. Maybe she missed it out. I can only go by what she wrote, and the only change indicated was the last name. She wrote about using the first name but not about choosing (as in changing) it.

Nope. She only talked about using the first name that was created when the account was created, not choosing (changing) it. From what she wrote, the only time a person can choose the first name is when the accfounbt is created, and it goes together with the 'Resident' last name. But it must exceedingly rare that someone can choose a "preferred" first name at that point because all the last names are the same - Resident. That's the point I was making - it's near impossible to choose a preferred first name.

That's not what she wrote, and it's not what anyone at LL has been saying. There will only be an option to change the last name - not the first name. That was my point, because she dressed it up are "preferred first name", and preferred first names haven't possible for years, and still won't be possible. The only first name action she mentioned was using it, not choosing it.

Wrong. You tried to make it all sound very good, but you were wrong. It isn't good at all. Since all new account last names will continue to be 'Resident', one's "preferred, chosen first name' will almost always be unavailable, just as it's been for many years now. People have not been able to have a "preferred first name", and that will continue. That's why you are wrong. It might sound good, the way you wrote it, but it isn't good. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the way last names are being brought back is bad. That's assuming that what you wrote accurate and not mere speculation, of course. And that's not a joke.

@AyelaNewLife From what I've been able to make out so far (but my memory is never perfect), it looks like it's going to be what you call a double-dip; i.e. you have to have a premium account to change your name and, if you have that, you'll have to pay for the name change. That's what I've understood so far, but, as far as I know, it hasn't been set in stone yet. On the plus side - for you... Since you're new to SL and won't have become too far entrenched yet, and because you didn't realise that your login name would be your avatar's name, there's nothing to stop you creating another account with a name that you'd prefer, and use that one instead of the one you have now. That doesn't cost you anything. It's not even a single dip

nop

I was just posting in another thread and another past Linden came to mind. Harry Linden. He was the AR team's manager, and he was a really good guy. Unfortunately, he's no longer at the lab.

You could AR it weekly. Once upon a time, after I'd tried, unsuccessfully, to contact the neighouring landowner, I ARed a building of his that encroached on my land. Nothing happened, so after a while I ARed it again. Still nothing happened, and I started to get annoyed because I was unable to use the land it covered, and I was paying for it. So I upped the frequency to daily, then to several times a day, and each time I said that I would increase the frequency until the building was either gone or moved off my land. And that's what I did. It got down to hourly, but nothing happened. So I decided to IM the AR team manager, and the building disappeared minute later. He was a good guy. Your case is different though, but it wouldn't hurt to AR it on, say, a weekly or fornightly basis. You never know. I might eventually work.

So you're not that static robot Alexa. Good!

Ooo it looks like we've made a match , Alexa. But I just thought of something that may or may not be good for me. Are you the Alexa that stands on the coffee table only does what you are told to do, such as turning the TV on and changing channels? I'd prefer a more independant match, but I haven't decided yet

I'll take Alexa Linden - Kyle Linden isn't to my taste

If you get it, be sure it's not a cheap fake. Fakes have a space (Super Tom), whereas the real McCoy doesn't (SuperTom). I see from your post that you've already encountered fakes

Is his land in search? If it is, you can report it, and keep on reporting it until the bot disappears. BUT make sure that it's actually counting for traffic first. It may be registered.

I think I've explained well enough why a 'scripted agent' is not necessarily a bot. It doesn't matter what LL write on their pages. As long as I can register myself as a scripted agent, 'scripted agents' are not necessarily bots - and that's all that matters. Of course LL would write that, because the 'scripted agent' flag was brought in specifically for bots, to curb the gaming of traffic. They didn't imagine that non-bot avatars would register themselves as scripted agents, and maybe none did, but that doesn't take anything away from the statement that scripted agents are not necessarily bots. The terms 'scripted agent' and 'bot' are not interchangeable. It's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of fact.

Oh yes, there's definitely a distinction between the two. It's not merely opinion. Bots don't have to be registered as scripted agents, so bots aren't 'scripted agents', even though they are run by programmes. The words 'bot' and 'scripted agent' aren't interchangeable. They can be scripted agents on a voluntary basis, but they don't have to be. Of course they must be registered as scripted agents if they spend time on land that's set to show in search. For the reasoning why a scripted agent isn't necessarily a bot, I'm going back to when scripted agents came in, and people were publically wondering whether or not they should register themselves when they want to leave their avatars on their land, which plenty of people do, including me, some even going to bed for the night, but the land is set to show in search. They didn't want to get into any trouble. Some may have actually done it, and maybe some still do. I never did, but I never left my avatar logged in when I went to bed or went out. Going to watch TV for an hour or 3 is different though. I stay logged in for that, even though I'm in another room. An avatar doesn't have to be a bot to be registered as a scripted agent. Anyone can register themselves as a scripted agent, for whatever reason they choose. So a scripted agent isn't necessarily a bot, and bots aren't 'scripted agents', though they often are. A 'scripted agent' is an avatar that is registered as one, that's all. Very few of my bots, for instance, are registered as scripted agents, and I have dozens of them. It all makes sense

How do you know it's a scripted agent? They might just be people using alts to spam. And maybe nobody thinks to AR the practice, anyway, but, instead, people tell the group's owner so that the account can be kicked out of the group. Note: bots aren't 'scripted agents' and scripted agents aren't necessarily bots. Anyway, scripted agents aren't a part of this discussion.

Only if it's a bot - not the owner

I like that It's existed for many years. There was a time when they'd do bank transfers when it was less than US$10,000, but that ended many years ago. Since then, they only do it for U$10,000 and above. I can't imagine why though. It's not like it's big job because such tasks are computerised. Google do it for US$100. At the time, LL distanced themselves from their customers, and that was just another way to lengthen the arm that they pushed us away with. It was just another thing, among many, for them to scorn us with.

Look. A bot is a bot. All bots are bots. What else could they be? And bots are as allowed in SL as you and I are. If you are wanting to know something specific about bots, you need to ask a more specific question.

Sorry, but Britain is a country. Great Britain to be more precise. ('great' refers to size, and not to anything else). It's like the U.S. in that it's a conglomeration of states/countries. I've no idea who Iidris Elba is, but I descibe myself as either just British, or British-English, or just English, depending on why I'm saying it. Heck, there are sports teams in London called London-Irish, London-Welsh, etc. I really don't know what point you are trying to make, but to be personally proud of skin colour is nonsense. You can like being white, or black, or whatever, but it's nothing to be personally proud of as though you did something to achieve it. Just out of interest, Cyprus is yet another country that does what you said only the U.S. does. It's main population is made up of either Greek-Cypriots or Turkish-Cypriots, and they descibe themselves as such. All are Cypriots.