Scylla Rhiadra

Absolutely beautiful shot, Moira. I love the . . . WL? EEP? Whatever it is you're using, it's perfect: everything is both glowing and subtly muted. Lovely.

Of course not. I'm the darling of the 6th Fleet. All the boys love me.

And that's actually a shame. It would be, managed well, by someone with some integrity, a great thing. (And don't look at me. I have no integrity whatsoever.)

No, and LL won't touch this sort of thing with a 5 metre barge pole. But that cuts both ways: unless there is demonstrable harassment occurring here on the forums, in the feeds, or in-world, they won't do anything about any possible "harassment" aimed at merchants either. One of the reasons why a thing like this exists is that there are literally no protections for consumers in SL. Except in very rare cases, such as outright financial fraud, hacking an account, or things of that nature, consumers are on their own. And that's why a thing like this might potentially be useful. But, again, only if it is done in a fair, even-handed, and transparent manner. Yep. Agreed. I want to know what that actually means. Writing something nasty about them on a blog or web site? The proper way to approach this would be to document the entire process, and provide public and verifiable proof that something is not as advertised.

I don't see it, myself, but again . . . I'd certainly like to see some clarification from them about how they intend to go about this, and in particular, what actions they intend to take if they do ascertain that the merchant is at fault. At the moment, there just isn't enough information here to either cheer, or throw rotten veggies.

lol Well, speaking as a card-carrying SJW . . . that term, "White Knight"? You're using it wrong. A White Knight is someone who, unasked and uninvited, more or less hijacks someone else's grievance as a way of virtue signalling, or just being a pain in the ass. This person is not seeking out merchants, but rather waiting to be contact by disgruntled consumers. In other words, they are providing a service -- apparently for free. It's not at all the same thing as "White Knighting." I don't see anything in their language to suggest that they are being "crazy internet warriors," or that their motives are particularly suspect. You might, of course, be correct -- I don't know this person. But neither do you. What are you basing that on?

Again, yes -- there's that danger. I've talked about something like this in the past, and one of the things that I stipulated, and that is absolutely vital is that the process / investigation be transparent. It's not clear that any of this process will be . . . the more I read this, the less it looks like a sort of "better business" thing, and the more like vigilantism -- which, I'll agree, is not good. But it does look as though the intent is a good one: they've said That they require proof of a deficiency in goods or services That they will contact the merchant to hear their side of the story That they will try to mediate a resolution between merchant and consumer before taking further action. Now, to that I'd add: That they will, when appropriate, test deficient goods or services themselves to ascertain the validity of the complaint That they render the entire process transparent (i.e., public) And, importantly, that the "action" they take is simply to provide a kind of online database of problems that they have, to a reasonable degree, ascertained are valid and legitimate complaints. "Blasting" someone isn't going to help anyone. And all of this assumes that they are in fact going to follow their own procedures. If they don't, then it is certainly bound to become a waste of time and possibly as stupid and useless as Virtual Secrets. I'd like to hear from them, tbh.

That is certainly possible. But that is not what is suggested in their description of their procedures. That said, I'm unclear what "blast them" means. Again, not how I'd handle it, and not actually a very effective way of dealing with a problem.

Well, they ask, as you say, for screenshots and logs. I'm not sure that's sufficient to prove something actually doesn't do what it says it is supposed to do . . . I think they should examine it themselves. But, they do seem to be trying to establish the legitimacy of the complaint. In other words, they aren't simply taking a disgruntled customer's word for it. No, it is not. Not so long as it is not on LL's platform. Do you have any idea how many blogs and web sites include screenshots and conversation logs? Check out Virtual Secrets, for a start. (On second thought, don't. It's really really stupid.) Not how I would handle it, I'll confess. I'd just make it public. But, again, it's not against the ToS unless it is actually happening on one of LL's platforms.

Well, first, this doesn't break the ToS. Second, how is this not legal? Third, it looks like they are making real attempts to validate complaints, reach out to the creators, and help resolve issues between merchants and consumers. So, assuming that they are actually doing this (and do you know for a fact that they aren't?), your problem with it is . . . ??? PS. "Report them" to whom? LL won't touch it -- it isn't on their platform. And, again, there is nothing whatsoever illegal about this, that I can see.

Maybe. After further study. But it's no miracle drug, and some of its side effects can be dangerous. "Among patients with non-severe COVID-19 and no risk factors for severe disease receiving a single 400 mcg/kg dose of ivermectin within 72 h of fever or cough onset there was no difference in the proportion of PCR positives. There was however a marked reduction of self-reported anosmia/hyposmia, a reduction of cough and a tendency to lower viral loads and lower IgG titers which warrants assessment in larger trials." In other words, don't try this at home, kids. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(20)30464-8/fulltext

Yeah, this pretty much exactly. What someone does in the privacy of their own bedroom, dungeon, or skybox is, so long as it's fully consensual, none of my business. (Although, you know, if the thought of beating up women gives a guy a hard on, maybe he could add that to his Tinder profile so that I know right away which way to swipe?) But when it's in the public eye, even in an adult area (excepting areas that are clearly marked as devoted to such activities, like BDSM clubs or CARP sims), representations of violence and abuse run the risk of re-traumatizing victims, and tend to normalize sexual and domestic violence. Do it on your own dime, sweetheart, and don't make me an unwilling witness to and, by extension, participant in your violent kink. (And of course, by "you" I don't mean you, Rowan.)

Well, Belinda has gone with B.E.S.S. (Belinda, Eva, Saskia, and Scylla.) Which is fine. Although I'm sort of holding out for Sonic Avatars, or BoM Kill.

Years ago, a then-major skin maker, whose name I won't mention, came out with a group of skins called "Battle Royale." In those days, there were skins that simulated injuries of various sorts, but they were mostly for RP (although I remember, and still have a screenshot, of one entitled "Raped" that featured the word "WHORE" carved with a knife into the chest). The creator claimed the skins were for combat RP, and possibly that was the original intention, but soon SL fashion blogs like JuicyBomb were featuring it on girls in pretty sun dresses and the like. It wasn't about RP anymore, but rather a kind of "abuse chic." Gashes, black eyes, abrasions, bloody noses as "decorative" and fashion features. And the creator, whatever her initial intention, decided this was a good thing, and began to market the skins as a fashion accessory. (It was Prok, interestingly, who first drew my attention to the skins.) I still vomit a little in my mouth whenever I remember the promo pics of happy smiling girls in pretty dresses, with blood running out of the corners of their mouth.

With @Eva Knoller

Really interesting! I think there is a great deal of potential for SL modeling of RL applications. For instance, I used to rely on a rather unimaginative use of cat's eye in RL, but I've had really good luck testing eyeshadow palettes and singles, as well as styles in SL and applying them (mostly) successfully in RL. Also, hair styles and ombres. Really, the sky is pretty much the limit, I think.

Jamming with the girls. Here's the rhythm section: @BelindaN(Drums) and @Saskia Rieko(Bass and backup vocals)

Whut? (Sorry, I know that's not an allowable answer)

Or we could, you know . . . actually change our behaviour so that we aren't always THAT neighbour, the one who is so scummy and selfish that they make the neighbourhood utterly unbearable for the responsible and socially-conscious people living there? Just a thought . . .

Just sayin'

/me handcuffs your ankle to the table No one wants to see a bloodbath, Amina. Not even if they're only Goreans.

First of all, The Daily Mail, Prok? Really? LOL Secondly, this seems to undercut your initial thesis, which was, as I took it anyway, that this thing was being engineered by a community of online hactivists, techno-communists, or whatever you want to call them. One thing is definite: however much we may have enjoyed watching hedge fund managers get kicked in the teeth for a while (I know I did), this isn't going to end well for the small investor, and it sure ain't going to lead to the democratization of the stock market, because the whole system -- stock markets, social media, the whole huge, complex corporatized structure of modern capitalism, is built to ensure that that doesn't happen. Ever.

Does this count as a "face" pic? Well, it's a portrait shot, anyway . . .

So, much of my time in SL over the past week has been spent setting up a garage jam space for @BelindaN, @Saskia Rieko, @Eva Knoller, and myself. It's pretty much ready to go. Time to move in.

No. Are you freakin' NUTS?