Scylla Rhiadra

Yes, this. I don't much like non-alphabetic characters, or unreadable fonts, but I can certainly see a case for the inclusion of non-Latin characters, such as Cyrillic or logographic writing systems.

Hi Mary I think you might need to be a bit more precise on what you mean by "donations." Are you talking about donations, fundraising, etc, for RL causes and organizations? As, for instance, Relay for Life? Most fundraising for RL causes and organizations happens through special events, such as RLF. There were a few stores that worked together a while ago -- I think pre-Covid, although I might be wrong -- to raise funds for BLM, for instance. There aren't many "groups" as such that are primarily about that, though. In general, I don't think there has been a big change in this sort of thing. I'm an administrator in a couple of activist / advocacy groups (not service ones), and I've seen a slight uptick in interest and participation, but not in donations to the groups themselves. I think events like RLF make public information about the funds they've received. You could see if you can find those, or identify the main organizers and contact them in-world.

I wonder if explicit muppet sex is against the ToS or forum guidelines? 😏

Woot! David Grohl for the win! (Take me, David, I'm yours!) People next door having noisy sex? Just a guess.

Love Tram.

I think this is probably safe here. I'm not actually showing any bits.

I think this may be your best ever, Pante. It's quite stunning!

I had a few direct interactions. I followed the Hush episode, but I have no idea who was in the right or wrong about this. Most people seemed to side with Curio, but that's mostly, I think, because they were a very popular and well-known brand, and Hush wasn't. The settlement they came to, for what it's worth (which is probably not much, because . . . "the law") was pretty much a victory for Hush, though.

What @TrophySpousesaid, and more! This is adorable. It's really lovely to see someone using their photographs to reach out in RL (or SL for that matter). I love that your mother smiled when she saw it. It made me smile too.

On the larger issue of Focus Magazine and their in-world group (somewhat confusingly called "Too Sexy for this Group"), I just want to add that anyone, regardless of how "accomplished" they feel they are as a photographer, should get involved. It's a very large group of really supportive people who are just interested in SL photography, and who are happy to share their time, their work, and their expertise. The group includes a really wide range of talent, from the novice to the OMG-THAT-IS-THE-BEST-PHOTO-I'VE-EVER-SEEN, and everyone in the group that I've met is very friendly and accepting. In fact, I think it's particularly useful for novices, as it is a great place to learn (in the past, Angela has run a couple of "workshops" on photography), to connect, and to share you photos with an always appreciative audience. They have nearly weekly (and sometimes more) social events featuring DJs and live performers, that are always well attended, so it's a community in a very real sense. They have two galleries, as well as outdoor exhibit areas, with rotating exhibits, so it's also a terrific place to see people's work (I've met up with and friended some astonishingly nice and accomplished photographers that way), and the magazine itself, published monthly online and in-world features not merely new photographs, but also articles on the art of photography. They are just really really nice people. If you like photography, you'll like this group. Seriously. I'd love to see more people from this thread popping up in group chat, because you people totally belong in this group. Disclaimer: I have no official standing with Focus at all -- I'm just an ordinary member and beneficiary of the cool things they do. And Focus itself is an entirely free and non-profit organization: no cost, no risk, and lots of great stuff, including, incidentally, monthly themed photo contests with prize money that are free to enter.

I was not exactly a big fan of Gala even before that . . . for other reasons.

Sure. I've met one or two I wanted to strike hard.

Definitely. We could produce a very long list without too much effort, I think. It's not, to be clear, that I think it's at all a bad thing to honour mothers. (Although, like all of these things, it's become something of a commercial racket in RL.) It's that it's just so typical that the only time LL makes the effort to single out the achievements of women, it's on the subject of motherhood. Where were the new name choices on International Women's Day, for instance?

Agreed. Mums are great. I adore my mum. I love mums generally. They are enormously special (at least most of them are), and they do vast hours and hours of uncompensated extra physical and emotional labour. They totally deserve to be honoured (and compensated) for their enormous sacrifices. But honestly . . . these names? And wouldn't it be nice to find some last names that honour women in fields that aren't the ones traditionally associated with womanhood? Earhart, for instance. Parks. Franklin (after Rosalind). Behn (after the first professional woman writer in English). Truth (after Sojourner). Etc. Womanhood: It's not just about making babies anymore.

That's been the case, though, for various periods during the forum's history. There's a reason why we called them "Friday threads." /me goes off in search of the insane posts and threads Lil has obviously found somewhere.

Haven't done one of these in a while! In this one, I'm featuring Lux Aeterna's newish "The Harlow" silk gown and duster coat. The gown is very nice, but it's the duster that makes this outfit. Before taking this one, naturally, I did some research, looking at pics of Jean Harlow, after whom this outfit has been named. The best photographer of Harlow, in my view, was George Hurrell, who used light and shadow beautifully. The Hurrell pic I latched on to almost immediately is a full-length portrait of the star in a long criss cross-topped white gown, and framed in an oval of light. You can see the pic here. I liked the lighting a lot, but was not so keen on the pose, in which Harlow stands looking down, away from the camera, with her hands behind her back. I discussed it with @Madelaine McMasters, who similarly noted that she looks somewhat submissive -- the standard "Starlet" pose of a woman who has been created by the Hollywood system, a consumable good for the cinema-going public. Maddy usefully compared the way that Harlow is packaged in this shot with photos of "strong" women actors, such as Lauren Bacall. So, I have deviated from the pose in the original shot (as well as some of the other details). I think the fascinator (which was actually somewhat out of fashion in Harlow's day) adds a touch of sophistication and power by subtly masking the eyes. I used a combination of directional lighting (from two projector lights) and point lights to produce highlights. I wanted to suggest, as Hurrell does in his picture, that the light is almost emanating from the garment and model; I think that this in particular focuses attention upon the sheen and cut of the duster (which, as I said, is the stand-out piece in this ensemble). In addition to a bit of a frame from the stone monument within which I am standing, I've employed a leafy tree to add a bit of texturing to the otherwise dark background. Credits Lux Aeterna - Bias Silk Slip (Black) Lux Aeterna - Silk Duster Coat (Dusty) Violetility - Cage Veil Fascinator (Black) Old Treasures - Moonlight Earrings (Green) erratic - Triangle Necklace Ingenue -Rosalba Heels (Not shown) VANNIES - Pantyhose Vintage 5 (not shown) [MJN] - Maven Gloss {GEN-8} VELOUR - Selena Eyeshadows #6 Magika - Lyric (Hair)

Yes. With medically proven treatments. Your approach is like blindly throwing mud at a wall in the hope that some of it will stick. And risking the patient by so doing.

God no, please. You'd become even more insufferable than you already are!

Nalates, basically this is what that entire long post comes down to: that you can't offer actual proof of corruption on the part of Fauci . . . but hey, he could be profiting from it! Maybe! You do understand that this entirely conjectural bit of fiction derives not from any actual facts, but from your own predisposition to assume that anything to do with government is necessarily corrupt? I'm all for transparency, critical thinking, and not taking anyone merely at their word -- and that certainly includes Fauci -- but there is absolutely NO shred of actual evidence here. Just the teeny weeny little possibility that he might be -- which you take to mean that he is. And none of this has anything to do with the actual science, which is being published almost daily, in credible sources and peer-reviewed studies, and none of which conclusively suggest that these sorts of treatments are actually beneficial. That might change! Maybe tomorrow will bring out a ground breaking study about HCQ! But until that happens, Fauci, and all of the other stuff is a red herring: the science doesn't support your position. Period.

Another option, of course, is to create your own community. I live with three other women on a small island (a quarter region) that we rent. We're by no means always in-world together -- we live, between us, in three different time zones -- but we are nonetheless very definitely our own "neighborhood," and we talk to each other every day, in-world, or through external platforms. We also frequently get together to go clubbing, or take pics. I'm a pretty gregarious person, and I have lots of friends and distinct "communities," but this one I helped construct, and it's the bedrock of my SL experience.

So long as the pics are still visible, Cris.

All. The. Time. The problem in SL is that so many people rely upon the sales and events to furnish them with their wardrobe . . . until the next sale or event rolls around. So, you buy this wonderful new dress (at an event that is being attended by thousands of other women also looking for a wonderful new dress), and are excited to wear it to the club that night . . . and invariably there is at least one other woman who has had exactly the same thought. I'm probably a little stupid about this. Another woman wore a new dress I'd been saving to show off to a club I go to every Sunday night. This was about 2 months ago . . . and I still can't bring myself to wear this dress i love to that club because someone had already worn it there. Yeah, that's me. The anti-consumerist, pro-sustainability socialist. Can't you tell? /me sighs.

I think this is true. Sort of a general thought: one of the more interesting but also somewhat disturbing phenomena relating to the breakdown of relationships, in RL as well as SL, is when one of the two no longer wants to have anything to do with the other. And of course, there may be lots of reasons for that, ranging from abusive behaviours to something more akin to disgust. What bothers me about these is that sometimes the partner who is being avoided decides that their "take" on the nature of the relationship trumps their former lover's desire to be left alone. Because, of course, the shunned partner knows better what their former lover really wants and needs than they themselves do, and if only they would put up with more of the same things that drove them away in the first place, they'd see how really really wonderful the relationship actually is, and besides, "I've changed! It won't happen again," etc. etc. etc. And so they engage in what is essentially stalking and harassment, convinced somehow that this is going to make everything right again. What is paradoxical and telling is that the one in such situation doing the stalking will generally profess that they "love" the person they're harassing, and want what's best for them -- all the while engaging in obsessive harassment that is making the one they supposedly love more and more miserable, if not actually stressed and (in RL, anyway) sometimes even fearful. I've often wondered why, in such cases, the harasser/stalker can't see that their behaviour is in fact demonstrating that they don't care about the well-being of their former partner. If they did, they'd surely be abiding by the wishes of that person, rather than seeking to make their life a living hell by continuing to thrust themselves upon them. It's sort of the ultimate selfish behaviour, and often a pretty good indication of what was wrong with the relationship in the first place. Of course, I don't know if any of this applies to the OP. Nor do I need to know: I think her privacy and her reasons should be respected. Just thinking aloud.

Priceless. I knew there was a reason I kept you around.

My read is certainly that selling photos is permitted by the ToS. I suppose, were this my intention, I might take the precaution of getting a waiver from the landowner and/or any avatars in the scene -- but honestly, I don't know how you would do this in a legally meaningful way without RL disclosure. Generally, I should think that LL would be thrilled to learn that artists were making RL money from their SL art. In terms of legal issues, however, it might be worthwhile checking to see if this is ground that has already been covered. There is a lot of video game and Minecraft art out there already. I'm not sure how much of it has been monetized in quite this way, but it might be worth a look via Google.\ One last thing: it occurs to me suddenly that I know of at least one SL artist who has announced that he is making NFTs. I don't know if he's doing so using his RL art, or his RL work (of which he has a lot), but I'll shoot you his name in-world. You may, of course, already know him, but one idea might be to contact him and see if he has looked into this at all.