Phil Deakins

LOL Dillon. If I hadn't read your intro to that article I would have found it interesting as I read it, because every word makes perfect sense. But I was laughing out loud when I read it and imagined someone like you, who has no knowledge at all of cricket, trying to follow it. Brilliant! FYI, England did very well on that day according to the article

Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Personally I don't understand why the secrecy and why bots are not required to have something in their profile saying they are bots and who the owner is. Everything else in SL has the owners name on it Bots have no RL, so it isn't a matter of the bot's privacy. Bots invade real people's privacy when they show up on your land and 'survey' it and take pics without permission Bots are not humans. There is no reason they have to be protected. I see nothing in the TOS or Bot policy that says that it is against any rule to know if a avatar is a bot. Bots are avatars, so we can all know that an avatar is an avatar It may that LL decided that there are good reasons for us not to be able to discover whether or not an avatar is registered as a bot (scripted agent). I.e. good uses of bots that would be spoiled if we could discover its scripted agent status. A bot is just an avatar and, therefore, has an RL person behind it, and some good uses of bots may be ruined if we could find out that it's 'related' to another avatar. Bots may "invade people's privacy" but an avatar with a person at the keyboard, controlling it, would be a much greater invasion of privacy. Avatars are not human either

You can't delete a thread. You can't lock a thread either. You can delete your own posts and if your post is the only one in the thread, you can effectively delete the thread. It is right that a thread starter can't delete the thread once there are other posts in it. It's also right that nobody but a moderator or administrator can lock a thread to prevent other people from posting in it.

You can run but you can't hide. Cricket is in the genes so there is no escape

Second Life isn't tacky - not even in your eyes. It's the avatars in it that may be tacky in your view. You are actually saying that the people (or many of the people) who use SL are tacky, because they make their avatars look the way they want them to look. And it's my opinion that most people make their avatars look the way they themselves would like to look in RL. So be careful what you say. You are actually talking about real people You did remind me of something that happened not long after I came to SL. A female friend had a female avatar that looked quite sexy - short skirt, etc. One day she decided to show her mother round the place - her mother simply looking over my friend's shoulder. It didn't surprise me that my friend's avatar was suddenly dressed a lot like a librarian for that demo

You make a very good point, 16. I think your cricket team leaned it from we English, but not quite well enough. Cricket should be played in such a gentlemanly way that merely allowing the guest team to draw isn't good enough. The guest team should be allowed to win, of course, because they are guests and should be treated as guests. England were very good at that not many years ago, but in recent times, young yobos have managed to get into the team and they are so ruthless that they sometime beat (win) our guests. The whole country feels shame when it happens but the world is changing for the worse. Actually, I do think your team learned gentlemanly (proper) cricket well enough but, even there in NZ, times are changing and your team's principles are giving way to those who put results before the spirit of the game - hence 3 draws and not 2 or 3 losses.

I'll believe it when I see it

I don't believe it. Aliens from New Zealand can't even win a totally won game of cricket so how can they possibly fix the climate change?

Get rid of all the cows to stop them farting. That'll fix it.

Yes, it is perfectly fair to people renting a Mainland Sim that's hosted on the same server. No you should not go around reporting them because there is nothing to report. You don't have a programme that can recognise bots. You have a programme that makes an attempt at recognising bots, but that's all you have.

Freya Mokusei wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: That's an undisputable fact. It is not fact by any stretch of the imagination, your analogy makes no sense. Disciplinary procedures are entirely separate to having script behaviour curtailed in this fashion, especially without warning. See the explanation in my previous post. Further, yeah, LL are expected to give an explanation to disciplinary proceedings. It's part of the ToS, a part to which they generally hold themselves accountable. And this programmatic system you're describing doesn't exist; you would need a phenominally high volume of llHTTPRequests per object per sim in order to attract any attention - there is no automatic function that would cause scripts stop receiving data via HTTP grid-wide (because that would be crazy). I'm sorry but you're wrong. I'll try once more... 1. An owner of a system (LL) puts the blocking of something in place. A user's system is blocked because of it. The user redoes the system, using URLs that haven't been blocked. That's circumventing the system owner's system. 2. A system owner ban a user for something. The user does something to circumvent the ban. Both acts are the same in that they both circumvent the system owner's actions. Furthermore, the system does not need to inform anyone of any actions. You may expect to be informed but it not a requirement for the system owner. You are wrong all round. Incidentally, nobody suggested that blocking the URLs is a "penalty", so that bit of your post was useless. In AnnMarie's latest post, she says that Maestro Linden acknowledges that it is a bug. Fair enough. It doesn't change you being wrong though.

Alright, I'll put it another way... If LL has added AnnMarie's HTTP destinations to a list of ones to disallow, then AnnMarie circumventing it is no different to someone circumventing a ban by creating an alt and continuing to use SL. That's an undisputable fact. LL doesn't have to give reasons to any individual. The addition of AnnMarie's HTTP destinations to the list (if the list actually exists, and if that's what happened) may well be programmatic, in which case a personal explanation would be unlikely. Either way, the lack of a personal explanation from LL is irrelevant.

They would need to share IMs for an AR to be effective. Merely stating an intention to share is not against the ToS. I don't think that anyone who puts that in their profile is as stupid as it makes them sound. I think they put it there to wind people up.

If what AnnMarie said is true, then circumventing it is no different to a banned person circumventing the ban by creating and using an alt.

So we'll be back trying to get further in the challenge soon, eh?

Paddy wasn't feeling well, so he went to see the doctor. The doctor examined him every way he could - temperature, blood test, heart, etc. He examined him from top to bottom and side to side until there was nothing more he could examine or test. But he couldn't find anything wrong with him so he said. "I'm sorry Paddy, but I've examined you in every way I can and I can't find anything wrong with you. I'd have to put it down to the drink." Paddy said, "That's alright. doc. I'll come back when you're sober."

I agree, 16. If LL put a destination on the list, then there was a reason for it. Circumventing it is no different to someone circumventing a ban by creating and using an alt.

Tari Landar wrote: As for long underwear, we also all have those, just not the buttflap sort. Hey, we live in the snowbelt, it gets friggen cold sometimes. When you go sledding, or even playing outside, your butt gets really cold really fast. We like layers. We're like onions......or something. But it is fun to race peeling off layers after coming back inside because we have one bathroom and EVERYONE has to pee the moment we come in. Oo that reminded me of something that happened weekly many many years ago... I was working on the Lincolnshire coast (Skegness) here in England and I had one day off each week. When I finished work the night before my day off, I'd ride my little motorbike to my home - about 80 miles - to spend my day off with my girlfriend. It was cold in the night on my byke so I used to put 4 or 5 pairs of trousers on. During the journey, I always needed a leak so I stopped for one. Feeling the need to stop for a leak while riding my byke was one thing, but getting off the byke and standing up was something else again. That was like I should have stopped 15 minutes ago - the need was so great. It was always touch and go whether or not I got through the layers of trousers to the correct department in time :smileyfrustrated:

Thank you folks. According to Maestro's post in the thread that Perrie linked to, it occurred when work was being done on the inventory system. Today is Sunday so such work in not likely to be the cause, but they may have been up to something..

I have an IM from a customer who bought an item from me. She said that she got a message saying that she had paid for it and then another straight away saying, "cannot derezz object due to inventory fault". I've never come across that message before and none of the things I sell are one-offs, so customers get copies. Derezzing an item never comes into it. The reason she IMed me is because she said that she didn't receive the item. Anyone any ideas?

Anyone with the surname Scout isn't a Linden Lab employee. He wrote to you on behalf of Billing and he no doubt gave you a stock answer because he doesn't have the ability to do what you need. You can phone Billing and get a real Billing employee. The numbers are listed somewhere but I don't know where. perhaps someone will post them for you. I found the numbers:- Note that phone support is for billing issues only. If you're having technical issues, please use technical support. Billing support phone numbers Toll-Free (US/Canada) 800.294.1067 Long-Distance 703.286.6277 Our Billing team is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Local Toll-Free numbers France: 0805.101.490 Germany: 0800.664.5510 Japan: 0066.33.132.830 Brazil: 0800.762.1132 Spain: 800.300.560 UK: 0800.048.4646 Support is in English Only If you do phone, ask the person's name. If it's Scout, ask for an LL employee.

It turns out that no ad-blocker is needed for IE10, as it has a built-in ad blocking system. It's better than the one I first downloaded and installed. That one left gaps in the pages where ads would show, but the built-in system doesn't leave any gaps at all. So no the 'Welcome, <name> etc.' line is right at the top of the browser's viewing frame again.

Nova Convair wrote: This forum has ads? Never seen any. (ad blocker of course) It's everyone's own choice to see them or not to see them, so why complain? My post wasn't a complaint. I decided that I don't like the animated ones so I installed an ad-blocker. My post was just some thoughts of mine.

So far, I've defended that ads in the LL sites, and I'll defend the ads in the forum too, but I don't like them at all. The reason is they are animated. It's just that I don't like animated stuff going on when I'm looking at any page. If the other ads are animated, I don't know about it because I hardly ever use the parts of the site they are on (I never use the marketplace and I rarely use my user pages). But I use the forum a lot so the animated banners rattle my brain. I don't even see the vertical one on the right because my browser opens to the width of the forum so it's off the side of the window, but the one on top is a bit of a nuisance because it's animated. So I've just installed an ad-blocker for IE. No other site has ever made me want to not see ads like the animated banners here have.

You've misunderstood a few things... Anshe doesn't have any power over the average resident. None at all. She is just a user, like everyone else, but who has bought so much land, and pays so much tier on it every month, that LL probably gives her thoughts more credence than they give to others. I think she owns about a third of all the sims in SL. She doesn't get cheaper deals on land because of who she is. She is no different to anyone else as far as the cost of land and tier is concerned. Anyone can get cheaper deals on land if they buy enough. It's called quantity discount and is normal when buying anything - RL and SL. She can't buy mainland cheaper than anyone else though. It's only private sims that she gets deals on because she buys in bulk. Anyone can do the same thing if they want to, and if they have the money to do it. Anshe got a head start on everyone else because she was in SL very early on and saw the potential - and did it. She may have been like me - only much much bigger; i.e. I started a small furniture store as a small sideline to my skybox rentals business. But the store kept growing the extent of earning a very nice RL living from it. I was totally amazed that so much money could be made from low prim furniture. It was totally unexpected. Perhaps Anshe was also amazed at how much she could make from her business, and kept right on to make a fortune from it. I doubt that she would have realised that there was a fortune to be made when she started the business. Anshe forged ahead in her business when there wasn't anybody significant ahead of her, so she didn't need to put a lot of money into it. The growth was paid for by the business itself. It can still be done in the same field, but it would need a fortune putting in and there is the competition of Anshe to contend with. The reason it would need a fortune putting in is so that the monthly tier for sims would be low enough to compete with Anshe on a level playing field. (It's assumed that Anshe pays lower tier than other people because of the bulk of land she has).