Scylla Rhiadra

Happy (Belated!) Rez Day, Skell! Nonsense. You look fresh out of the box!

Well, I guess this would include me. So, you think that the best way to avoid the venality and corruption that you say was rampant in the old system is to . . . well, institutionalize it, with sold advertising space that routes newbies straight to where they can start buying, buying buying? Really? First, who exactly do you think is mostly likely to be able to afford such space? Small, independent merchants? Or the really big merchants and creators? We already have near-monopolies on things like mesh bodies and heads -- this will be a fine way to ensure that the bigger stores in SL just get . . . bigger. And really, seriously, this is the impression of SL you want people to start with? "Your imagination, your shopping dollar"? Welcome to the world's largest and most successful virtual shopping mall? Do you imagine that the artists, the musicians, the educators, the people who just build beautiful sims because they want to share their creativity with others . . . are they going to be able to afford advertising space? If not, who will visit them? The newbies will all be too busy trying to figure out what a "demo" is, and how to open and wear it . . . all the while wondering why the hell anyone would want to go "virtual" just so that they can go shopping, because they'll be damned if they can see anything else to do here. Brilliant Prok. You've figured out how to monetize and commercialize the Newbie Experience! Your Nobel Prize in Economics awaits.

lol, it's all good Carter, thank you. I didn't mean to suggest that you owed me an explanation for how you conduct yourself. Your sex life -- or lack thereof, if that's the case -- is none of my business. I was just struck by the odd comparison you seemed to be making between the real people of SL and the NPCs in games like GTA. And I'm delighted to hear that you've met the love of your life! Congrats, and hugs! I'm more interested, honestly, in your response to my thoughts about the visibility of sex in SL. To make my point maybe a bit clearer -- in most mainstream MMOs that I know of, you have to go looking for most sexual content. Or, as in GTA, you have to use mods to access and/or provide it. Whereas in SL, frankly, you have to choose not to be exposed to sexual content. It's true that that is relatively easy to do (although, as I say, more and more sexual content is filtering out into Moderate sims these days), but Adult isn't merely extremely easy to find, it's almost the default. Again, take a look at the MP. Yes, I can filter most adult content out if I choose to do so, but it is present, and easy to access, in a way that is simply not true of Minecraft (*snort*), Elder Scrolls Online, or other mainstream MMOs. That surely must be Twitch's thinking too?

Well, sure? Sorta, kinda, vaguely? That's not really the point. I'm not suggesting that using sex mods in GTA is particularly weird or awful or anything. What I'm suggesting is that comparing that to dating or sex in SL is just odd. They're not the same kind of thing. If you think they are, then you either think that the women you are engaging with in SL are like the AI for NPCs, or you think that the NPCs with whom you're involved are like real women. The latter is odd and a bit, I don't know . . . concerning? The former is less odd, but much more disturbing.

I was passed the link to it by an in-world group at least a week or more ago. I'm a bit surprised by the response here. There are some annoyingly whiny aspects to it, and the whole anonymity thing, as well as pretending to speak for everyone, kind of bothers me, but . . . isn't it just asking for more dialogue between LL and residents?

You've never been to one of the more grotty "urban" RP sims? You're welcome. Wait . . . you're comparing engaging with, you know, actual live women in SL, with using mods to simulate sex (and whatever) with NPCs? Flattering! I'm going to assume that this means you're not that much interested in that whole "talking" or "relationship" thing? (Or do they have GTA mods for that now?) I have no opinion whatsoever on Twitch's TOS, nor on their decision to ban SL. But I will say that pretending that SL doesn't have a fair amount of very explicit, and sometimes very violent sexual content is a bit silly, maybe? I tend to think that those who are in SL primarily for sex over-estimate the importance and prevalence: there's a whole lot here that isn't about sex, as I and others can attest. But . . . it's hard not to trip over it pretty frequently. I haven't bought anything sex-related in SL in probably 8 years, but my MP page is flooded with explicit sexual content for sale. I go to sims of all ratings, including adult ones, but what I'm noticing a great deal recently is a slipping of the enforcement of LL's rating standards here: it's not at all uncommon, for example, to find publicly accessible furnishings and objects with sex animations in Moderate rated sims nowadays. I could certainly say the same about clothing and nudity. What I'm suggesting is that . . . maybe Twitch has a point? Personally, nudity and sexuality doesn't bother me, but if they are, for whatever reason, trying to avoid association with it, they might well be right to steer clear of SL.

Me, I'm just getting tired of Twitch banning Second Life. It seems like once a week I see it popping up here again: "Twitch bans Second Life"! Can't they just ban it once and have done with it? Does it refuse to stay banned or something?

I hope it's all as momentous and exciting as his remarks on Friday, memorably summed up by Garnet thusly: Stay calm, people! Too much jumping up and down could crash the sims!

Indeed; welcome to the club! But I'm glad you dropped in anyway. ☺️

Well, yes! Given how difficult it is to even get into some of the shopping sims, or move around when you do get in (although I didn't find it too bad this morning), the idea of getting a demo, taking it somewhere to try it on, and then getting back in, and finding the store . . . is a disincentive to be sure

Speaking of which . . . Don't you just hate it when you're shopping at SL16B and grabbing all of the free gifts but you feel guilty if you take the gift without grabbing at least one demo, because you don't want the merchant to think that you're some kind of deadbeat freeloader (because you KNOW they check, right?) and then you get all of the demos home and decide you might just as well try some of them on and it turns out you really like one but of course you have NO idea which sim the store was in or where it was?

It's actually very difficult to take you seriously when you wiggle your eyebrows.

ACK! OMG, so there is! /me checks in mirror to make sure she is presentably attired. Sure. No one is likely to deny that there are people who dress inappropriately, or even what you call irresponsibly, for particular contexts. But, again, you're sort of treating those who make poor clothing choices as the flip side of the behavior of those who actively and deliberately harm others, through harassment, sexual assault, etc. Neither is good, but they are also not even close to being the same thing. And when you talk about them as you do here, rolling them together as twin causes of harassment and rape, you are implying, really, that they are. It's not that I disagree with your basic insight. it's that the way you are framing it at least implicitly involves victim blaming. And, frankly, the history of serious crimes like rape is absolutely replete with that particular line of defense. Rapists have, literally, been found "not guilty" because a jury decided that the woman was inappropriately dressed. Can you not at least concede that these are two very different issues, and discussions, and that conflating them like this provides those looking for excuses or justifications for criminal behaviour ammunition? Do you not think that this has been, for the greater part, a "reasonable discussion"? I think it has.

Careful! This isn't GD, Lindal. Do you want to know what we do to people who make bad puns over in this neck of the woods? It isn't pretty. ORWAR!!

I had a really lovely time at SL16B tonight, just wandering. The highlight was definitely the Shui Mo Chinese Brush Art, but everything I saw was pretty cool. For me, what made a HUGE difference was going to Midnight. Suddenly, I felt like I was a teen again, visiting the Canadian National Exhibition at night, going on rides, playing games, and just generally getting gloriously lost in the glitz and the noise. One observation, though, which I'm sure a lot of people will shrug off, and which I'm only sort of half-serious about myself. I had no problems getting into the exhibit sims at all -- I only had minor problems on the first day, in fact. And although the exhibit spaces were, by SL standards anyways, fairly busy, I didn't actually have a big problem with lag tonight either -- and that was with my settings at Ultra. However, I couldn't get into any of the shopping sims at all: they were all, always, completely full. Now, in and of itself, I don't care that much. I'd like to check them out, but I won't be crying myself to sleep if I can never get into them at all. But it is kind of telling about the nature of SL these days that the shopping sims are, apparently, that much more of an attraction than the exhibits themselves?

Nonsense. I'm have ridiculous amounts of fun . . . over here. Where no one can see me.

Aubade

Sure. BUT WHERE'S MY LINDEN BEAR???

You have said nothing that is in any way "not ok" Rose. Your contributions have been thoughtful, positive, sensitive, and much appreciated. You have nothing at all to apologize for, and I hope you continue to speak your piece here.

Well, Jagix is welcome to correct me, but I think his warning relates to two things. First, the back-and-forth and exchange of "insults" with another (in this case, recent) contributor to the thread, and second, the discussion of pornography. In the case of the former, it's often safer just to ignore any apparent provocations, prevent things from escalating, and just keep the more civil discussion going without reference to the other things that may be popping up. In the case of the "adult" material -- LL considers the GD forum a "general" forum, meaning that a discussion of "adult" topics is prohibited. Talking about gender roles, connection and interaction, respect, and so forth is usually going to be fine. A discussion of the impacts of porn is likely to lead into some distinctly non-PG territory, however, and so is verboten.

CATRIE!!! Make him stop! For Twilight Sparkle, if not for me . . .

If anyone is looking for me, I'll be watching reruns of My Littlest Pony. And sobbing quietly.

It's going to be a HOBBY FARM, Orwar. HOBBY! With cute animal PETS. That are LOVED and CHERISHED and definitely NOT BUTCHERED. Just so we're clear, should you choose to drop by for a visit. (Which you're not permitted to do unless you bring Catrie.)

I actually seriously have NO idea why I bought them. I guess in case I decide that I want to do a bucolic farm scene???? Maybe because they are kind of cute, in a "OMG DON'T EAT THAT!" sort of way? But, actually, the pack is a pretty good deal, with animated and static cattle in a variety of different poses. You can resize them, and, for the static ones, choose the animation frame that is captured in pose. I say Go for it! If only so I don't feel like I'm the only one who decided that she should invest in cattle . . .