Sy Beck

Phil Deakins wrote: Don't share land. I will almost certainly end up with one of you doing the dirty on the other. Phil, you bad man! The mind boggles.

Marcus Hancroft wrote: A friend I made here told me once that he would make a custom shape for me and he and I spent several hours on his sim as he made the shape and we tweaked it until I thought it was perfect! So my shape is one now that nobody else in Second Life has! I still don't understand why people buy body shapes. It's one of the most simplest things you can do for yourself, if a bit time consuming, but you can soon build up a whole library of shapes for your avatar.

Have you considered the fact that LL have checked her out and that it was the case that he/she was lying to you and is really 20+ something. I know from previous people who have posted here that LL take age seriously and usually suspend the account immediately and then check the facts.

Knowl Paine wrote: . I sorted out my junk drawer and put all the pens on the left side, that's the Pen Department. You heretic! All pens go on the right hand side as any OCD will tell you. Unless you are left handed of course, in which case we'll burn you ya witch!

Perrie Juran wrote: . And it is not up to the criminal law Judge as a rule to decide the constitutionality of a law, only to enforce it. The constitutionality is for the Appeals Courts to decide. No, it is up to jury to decide whether a person is guilty or not based on the reasonableness of evidence presented to them before a judge can enforce the law. Therefore, you are supposing that the American public would consider that as actual evidence to find someone guilty...?

Well when I first rezzed I chose male without any thought going into it as I'm male and it was an automatic choice, not knowing what was beyond. I had a system skin for months till I fell in with a regular group of people and noticed that they looked far better than me. Not being a shopper I honestly thought that some people had taken their skin off, Photoshopped around with it and reimported it. Not a million miles from the truth, but a reason why I was so slow on the uptake. Since that time I have been indebted to a group of women I know who once a year will give me a complete makeover. I have the final say whether I wear it or not, but it is them that present the options. I am a complete numbnuts at clothes/body shopping. I have though in my near 5 years changed body shape considerably. I started off as the usual HeMan replica and have gradually reduced my size and proportions to what is now almost a 1:1 look. The skins I decide on are more realistic too, maybe stubble, with some freckles thrown in rather than airbrushed beauty ones. I was once involved with an RP sim and made a female alt to help with some RP for a friend. It was a disaster, I couldn't do it, for all intents and purposes I was a male who happened to have a female skin and body on at the time. But, she was a fine looking female alt because I let another woman (again) choose the skin, shape the body and choose the clothes. I considered holding on to her as a building alt, but after having 2-3 passes made at me and having to explain it was an alt and that I was male I gave up on it and deleted her. As regards choosing another ethnicity I think I'd have to have some compelling reason to do it, which as yet I've never had. It's far from being the same flight of fantasy or escapism that turning yourself into a vampire, a furry, a dragon or robot is for people. I don't think I'm going to find out what it's really like to be a different ethnic race by changing the colour of my skin. I may find some, but it will be far from the whole story that exists in RL and in all aspects bar a few it's not a fantasy option to go that route.

Ahh gotcha, thanks Void.

Well vandalism and harassment are criminal acts I presume even in the US and it doesn't matter whether I want damages or not. They have a committed a crime that I only need to refer to the authorites to have them processed by the law. LL could provide the evidence as it would all be electronically recorded including IP addresses and the DoJ has the powers and the influence to track down those offenders however many proxies they may use; as evidenced recently by a well known proxy site handing over information of a hacker/user to the authorities. Sledgehammers to crack nuts though I suppose in the end.

Void Singer wrote: yes and no... the hope seems to be to get it passed as a "feel good law", but underneath it are people who know in advance that it can be abused and hope they get to. This is law already though isn't it and the argument is for it to be amended/repealed because of its potential for over zealous enforcement and perceived labelling of people as criminals? @thread That being said, how come LL have never used it or passed cases on to the DoJ to pursue persistent griefers within SL. Griefing is vandalism with financial and/or personal injury thrown in as well as harassment? Or do they fear the revenge of the hacker community as a whole? Which would mean that there are people who operate at one level on the internet with what seems impunity. As I said in an earlier post, is it possible for victims of griefers in SL to refer their cases to the DoJ if LL is not taking appropriate legal action for breaches of their own ToS? Any lawyers in tonight?

Innula Zenovka wrote: Sy Beck wrote: On websites where people are required to give factual and accurate information as part of the ToS so as to protect other users then what is the problem? I'm sure you would want some serious redress if you had been duped by somebody saying they were somebody else or portraying themselves as something they were not and you had lost money or public credibility because of it. It's tantamount to fraud, which is a criminal offence. How is fraud defined where you are? Here in the UK, we have the Fraud Act 2006, which, among other things, creates the offence of "fraud by false representation" (section 2 of the Act), which says someone commits an offence if he made a false representation dishonestly knowing that the representation was or might be untrue or misleading with intent to make a gain for himself or another, to cause loss to another or to expose another to risk of loss. That seems to me perfectly adequate, and catches all forms of misrepresentation, be they committed electronically or by paper means. What more do you say is needed? I'm from the UK too Innula and would agree that we are covered, this though is US law and I'm no expert on what can be cited as a fraud over there. I chose the word tantamount to imply that deception by using a false ID is akin to fraud if you are using it for nefarious purposes for even minor things that may cause somebody personal ego injury, credibility or financial loss. I suppose a flippant example would be if that you had signed to a dating/friend site and posted beautiful pics of yourself, which weren't you and generally given false details and then somebody falls for it. If they send you presents on your birthday or at Xmas and give you a big investment of their time, emotion and energy then they are going to feel like a victim of fraud when they find out that the woman they thought they were dating turns out to be a man. Would they want to take it to court as fraud? Probably not. Would you like that person to be banned from the site and flagged across the net as a faker? Quite possibly yes. I note in the article that it provides for users to be able to use this law against the providers and/or 3rd parties presumably using the same service. Now that would have implications on SL. Somebody griefs me, they get a ban, but if they come back on an alt to continue the griefing am I now able to pursue not only the griefer, but the provider too through the courts? The former for breaking the ToS and the latter for negligence...? I am myself not bothered by this law, as I said if the ToS says, give true data then give true data. If you want to play another id go to sites that allow for it. My view was the law was un-necessary, but it's an interesting exercise to speculate on the outcomes.

This ^^ (Chelsea & Peter) SL has developed almost haphazardly and it has been tinkered with more than developed. I agree with Peter's point about a root and branch review. In most areas of commerce you will have competitors who emerge and force change upon you. The competitors will have looked at your business and figured out what works, what doesn't and what's missing and launch their product. SL has not had that kind of competition and therefore needs to be more rigorous with itself to avoid stagnation. This still remains a unique and wonderful place, but by SL's 10th anniverary it cannot afford to still be the same product it essentialy was 10 yrs ago with a few more bells and whistles added on. As this kind of environment becomes cheaper to setup and run more competitiors will enter the market; LL must ensure that SL is technologically far in front, but also that its customers will have no other reason to leave such as customer service and pricing.

Well on the surface this seems to be just what a lot of people on here have been calling for. People who break the ToS are treated far too leniently in some people's opinions and now if they do it then criminal proceedings can take place. They've got what they wished for may they and the trespassers suffer for it. As any right winger would and probably will comment, "If you are innocent then you have nothing to fear" will probably hold true in SL. Having an alt that does not match your RL identity or known other online identities is not a breach of the ToS so therefore can never be prosecuted as such by the US authorities under this law. On websites where people are required to give factual and accurate information as part of the ToS so as to protect other users then what is the problem? I'm sure you would want some serious redress if you had been duped by somebody saying they were somebody else or portraying themselves as something they were not and you had lost money or public credibility because of it. It's tantamount to fraud, which is a criminal offence. If you don't want to play by the rules don't play the game. If you want to have numerous ids and gender or body portrayals then sign up for those sites that allow it under their ToS, there are millions and millions of them out there for you.

RudolphUkka wrote: Dammit! Michelle turned up as fantasised, but the football had started. I'll never know what I missed now, will I! *** Rudi *** Football highlights at 11, hope Michelle was as good and that you scored too.

Alcohol or drugs related maybe.

/me **bleep** slaps SLF's now #1 Fairy [ETA] Dang! I changed 3 letters and it still caught it!

What's the point of this, seriously? What next? Men to wear ties, women in trouser suits or long skirts, furries on a leash. If I go to a RL meeting I don't expect a requirement to be that I have to refer to myself as what my friends may call me, as the name of a character in a play I may currently be performing in or God forbid Slutmaster69. The last CUTG meeting seemed a complete confusion for the Linden to chair, this will only make it worse, my advice would be for every one to turn off display names and then there will be no confusion at least for one group of people in the meeting.

Venus Petrov wrote: Perrie Juran wrote: Venus Petrov wrote Curious is as curious does. Suffice it to say that someone else understands my point. As far as the statement I bolded, while the forum is 'owned' by Linden Lab, it is not private. If it were private, we would not have to limit our discourse as would adults in a living room surrounded by children. You are correct, it is available to anyone. I was thinking more in terms of private property that we are allowed to 'visit.' I should have been clearer. Sorry Perrie, umm have you gone and acquired another personality? My reply was to someone else on this thread and now you say that 'you were thinking'?? Then you write 'I should have ...' I have seen something like this before and I would say that you are sockpuppeting here. Humm...might sockpuppeting be a form of forum griefing? Or, is that trolling? Why ever would you delete posts? Come on, fess up. You know that you want to. ETA: added to text _________________________________________________________________________________________ Perrie Juran wrote: So putting my long windedness aside, I would like to propose this simple concept: "Griefing in the Forum occurs when the focus of a discussion moves from the issue at hand to the poster." ___________________________________________________________________________________________ As others and I said, it's usually the poster who brings it upon themselves. Perrie Juran Suffering from severed post jiggling.

Aylin Moonshadow wrote: Cat got your tongue...?

Deltango Vale wrote: "Griefing in the Forum occurs when the focus of a discussion moves from the issue at hand to the poster." --------------------------------------------------------------------- I like Perrie. I think he's a great guy. I saw what you did there. :smileywink:

I would find it (have found it) very hard not to attack a person who I know to be either, lying, hypocritical, making incorrect assumptions, making ad hominen posts or posts to publicise themselves and/or defame others. It would be nigh on impossible to critically and honestly address their post without tackling them personally if any of what I've listed was contained or expressed within their post. I also have a lot of sympathy for Rudi's viewpoint, that if you express a point emotionally rather than as a structured, factual and reasoned argument then don't be surprised if you incite another emotional drama queen to comeback at you in the same style or for someone to point out that you could express your point in a far better manner. If they or somebody else is offended or hurt by a hostile or vehement reply to a post, then from my experience 99 times out of a 100 it is because said poster has had their, intelligence, credibility and ego demeaned in public by a cogent response rather than by a barrage of emotional name calling, offensive mud slinging or griefing if you wish to call it that, which I don't.

See here

Mayalily wrote: The Diary of Anne Frank is amazing. But makes me cry so terribly every time I watch it. I read it as a youngster, but is gut wrenching. I have not forgotten war, there is merely nothing I can do about it. I use the Serenity prayer about such things I cannot change and try to live as happily as I can. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. ~ attrib' E.Burke.

Mayalily wrote: Sy Beck wrote: Err....Wilfred Owen was English and not German, so no. Also, Owen died one week before the end of WW1 and the book was written in 1929. I remember a bit of the movie "All Quiet on the Western Front" and I do kind of recall the main character was a poet. I find that interesting that there was actually a real war poet. "All Quiet on the Western Front" is fiction though which can be inspired by any real life person. Doesn't have to be a character in the same country when writing fiction, as fiction can by "inspired by"... You've seriously never known of any war poets or that they existed?

Err....Wilfred Owen was English and not German, so no. Also, Owen died one week before the end of WW1 and the book was written in 1929.

Maryanne Solo wrote: Shouldn't "The Love Machine" have led to "Coffee and Cigarettes"? *wonders... Haha, nice one Maryanne :smileyvery-happy: Maybe because one's a machine and needs to be plugged in again? :smileywink: