Jump to content

Phil Deakins

Resident
  • Content Count

    11,766
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Phil Deakins

  1. @Luna Bliss There were no emotions involved in that 'discussion', and nothing else involved that could remotely be considered as being worthy of a penalty. There was no reason for either person to be suspended from the forum, and definitely no reason for a suspension from SL. One of the participant's penalty was overturned, but not until after it had been served because I was penalised and couldn't get in to make an appeal. I don't know whether or not the other participant's penalty was overturned after it had been served. Just out of interest, the other person served the penalty and
  2. So that states very clearly that the Username is the "account information", which doesn't even hint that it might also be used as the avatar's name. The stupidity knows no bounds.
  3. Back in the early times when users had a last name, perhaps informing new users that the name they choose will be their avatar's name wasn't so necessary, because common sense told us that having to jump through hoops to find a reasonable first and last name combination simply wasn't necessary if it's just an account name. So it was reasonably clear that the name would be the avatar's name. Unfortunately, some people at LL don't have the wherewithal up top to realise that, since new users now only choose one username, it is necessary to tell them that it will apply to their avatar. It's just a
  4. I suppose it can still be a topic in 2019 because LL don't always enforce their ToS when breaches are pointed out to them. That's my guess, anyway.
  5. Be careful there. LL will auto-renew your premium account so, unless you've taken steps to prevent that happening, they'll take the money if you haven't downgraded.
  6. Suspending people from SL accompanies being suspended from the forum. I don't think anyone gets suspended from the forum these days without also being suspended from SL. And you don't have to break any rules or guidelines for it to happen to you. Example: A says to B, you are a member of a group. B says no I'm not. A says yes you are, B says no I'm not, and this goes on maybe a dozen times. Both participants were suspended from both here and from SL. That actually happened. That's how stupid some of the moderation here is these days. People are suspended without breaking any rules or guid
  7. Oh I'm sure there are some hobbyist net-nanny tattlers (I've never heard that expression before) here. I don't mind them. It's the penalties that should never be issued that I object to. Heck, more than one of mine were subsequently overturned, one of them without me even suggesting it lol. Issuing such penalties wrongly is abominable when it includes a suspension from SL. Many such suspensions are illegal, and would cost LL if they were taken to court. Not having enough time to learn the forum rules and guidelines doesn't excuse it, and not having time to check if a post breaks the rules isn'
  8. You can judge it. In times past I've had the odd penalty - way back. But, until recent times, I hadn't had one for years. Then we get the current crop of moderators and suddenly warnings and suspensions become common to me, some of which are subsequently overturned. And that's what's so idiotic these days - penalties that should never be issued, but are issued because some moderators ignore the fact that the forum rules and guidelines haven't been breached, and penalise just because they want to. And what makes it really bad is them being in the new habit of suspending people from SL and well
  9. Addition: I can't complain though. I made a lot of money out of SL, and I spent plenty of years throughly enjoying SL. It's only in recent times that I've run out of things to interest me in it. If I were still enjoying it like I used to, then I'd just stay away from the badly-moderated forum and carry on inworld. I'm not quitting to make a point - as if! lol. SL has run its course for me, and I've no desire to hang around in a place where the stupidity that I've mentioned reigns. That's all there is to it.
  10. I don't mind you asking, Luna. It's no secret. It's mostly because I don't really do much of anything in SL any more, and I haven't done for years. Because of that, it didn't need much for me to decide to leave, and my quit switch was finally switched by some of the idiotic moderating that occurs in this forum, this forum being pretty much all that I've had to do with SL for quite some time. Both the previous Admin leader (Tommy), and the current one (Kristen) know about it but they've done nothing to stop the rogue moderators, other than overturning bad decisions when they become aware.
  11. What other people have done is of no interest to me. But I do think that downgrading an account that's been premium for over 11 years indicates some strong intent. Having said that, I can't say that I won't look in the forum occasionally. It's SL that I'll be done with. I won't even have a viewer. I know it doesn't take long to download and install, but that's a whole lot longer than just popping in because it's there.
  12. OH YEEESSSSS! That was a thread. It really was. It's the funniest thread ever in these SL forums. I wonder who eventually put her out of her misery by explaining to her what was happening 🙄
  13. That's what I've said many times, but apparently most people use Firestorm, and I think that Firestorm defaults to the legacy search. If it doesn't default to it, the way that Firestorm's search floater is arrange it's highly likely that a heck of a lot more people use the legacy search than I, and possibly we, imagined. Possibly most people who use Firestorm use the legacy search and, of course, that ranks places solely on traffic. ETA: Of course inworld traffic doesn't help marketplace listings, but I'm sure than there are many people who shop inworld.
  14. It's working out very well. Last month Phil Deakins was downgraded to basic, after being premium for over 11 years, and in March my other annual premium account will follow suit. Then I'll be gone. Thank you for asking.
  15. And some dish out penalties when, by the rules and guidelines, none are merited. If you haven't come across it, good for you, but it's absolutely true. That's what my post was about. It wasn't about when everything is working fine. ETA: Also, if you haven't been penalised, then you won't know from your own experience that they will not tell you what they say you've done wrong. They just won't. As I said, stupidity reigns.
  16. That's not surprising, as you have been a victim of what might well have been a bad hair day.
  17. The mods job is easy enough as it is. The problem is that they don't always do it properly, sometimes not even trying to do it properly, and that's the fault of those who don't do it properly. Some of them do it with personal bias/preference, regardless of any rules or guidelines. I'm sure that it sometimes has a lot to do with which side of the bed they got out of on the day. It's no wonder that different people have different ideas about what gets penalised. The mods don't need it made any easier. What they do need is to be instructed to only moderate according to actual forum rules and
  18. Nope. That's against the rules, isn't it? lol
  19. Please try not to be so silly, Janet. You posted a post on page 3. I quoted it in its entirety. You said you didn't write what I quoted. I said you did, and that it's still there. What silly game are you playing? If you think it's ridiculous for someone to have a different opinion/view than you, that's alright. I think everyone knows exactly who is being ridiculous here
  20. What you consider top be facts are just your opinions. Don't confuse the two. Example: you wrote "48 hr turnaround is perfectly reasonable for an issue". That's your opinion. It's also a fact as far as you are concerned. But it's not some people's opinion, and it's not a fact as far as they are concerned. Another example: it's a fact that you wrote and posted what I quoted, in spite of the fact that you say you didn't You see, Janet, the very data that was presented fails to satisfy many people's criteria for good customer service. So you are mistaken about what pales in comparison to wha
  21. Exactly! It's company policy. Crap customer service init?
  22. @Nyll Bergbahn Yes, Nyll, I posted that I agree with what's been said about live chat. I'm really just grinding an axe that I have, but it's a 'correct' axe. In fact it's one that finally pushed me away from SL altogether. This month I downgraded this avatar to Basic after being Premium since the start of 2007. And in March I'll downgrade my alt to basic too, and then I'll be finished with SL. The company is bad for customers. So much so that for most of my time in SL I've said (posted) that I wouldn't lift a finger to help LL. Some, probably many, of the staff are excellent, though, but
  23. Janet. Different people have different views AND experiences. Some of the views and experiences don't agree with yours, so there is no reason for you to write what I've quoted. It may well be that LL's practises are just fine with you. I have no doubt that up to 48 hours and more is just peachy for some people. But it's not for others. So try to allow for people whose views and experiences are different to yours.
  24. Does that mean you have chosen to:- a. employ more people (new company employees)? b. bring more existing employees into the customer services section? c. move some existing customer services people from other customer services parts to the land operations part? If a, then well done! If b, then also well done, depending on where the people have been moved from, of course. If c, then sorry, but that's no good (for customers) at all as far as customer services is concerned.
×
×
  • Create New...