Jump to content

Dana Hickman

Resident
  • Posts

    1,008
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dana Hickman

  1. EDIT:just saw this: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Your-Avatar/My-Avatar-is-two-colors-top-pink-color-and-bottom-tan-Can-t-buy/m-p/1554453/message-uid/1554453#U1554453
  2. I always do unless it's something so simple a chimp could manage.. and that chimp part is fairly ironic since I've actually had to tell a few abrasive men in SL to RTFM while pointing to my profile. Chimps..
  3. There was an article I remember seeing in the last handful of months, about how Target stores would look at what women of child-bearing ages were buying, and if they had purchased certain items would automatically sign that woman up to receive targeted ads, catalogs, and coupons for all that kind of maternity-related stuff. No idea how an AV name could get associated with that if that was indeed the case, unless maybe it was due to an online purchase of some kind, and then the AV name and your RL address got sold on a list which these marketers bought. Just an thought...
  4. Qie Niangao wrote: One is the failed rezzing itself, but then there's the peculiar handling of the thing that failed to rez. If it's no-copy, instead of remaining in Inventory, it goes on some strange walkabout, disappearing altogether, perhaps to reappear upon relog--or perhaps not. Well no wonder I couldn't seem to hit the micro-parcel set aside for unpacking your purchases at that one store. Third try was the charm.. which made it go *poof* completely and I had to repurchase the item.
  5. Syo Emerald wrote: So you want to point out that being jealous because your boyfriend *** another woman, is somekind of a mental problem?! Are you crazy or what? Try reading the whole OP next time then... danicah wrote: But when she was with Josh, she would always get extremely jealous when he was around other girls. I ONLY commented on the part above, about open relationships in general, and I didn't say a single thing about sex or cheating. You dragged that in from reading other replies but they are not part of what I was talking about, nor were they part of the words I wrote.
  6. During my first few years in SL, I won enough L$ at contests and events to outright buy 1/8th of an original mainland sim at land bubble prices. It was fun but I wish now that I had just cashed out lol.
  7. Another classic example of people not letting all of their expectations be known (as in.. guaranteed understood, no secrets) before engaging in these kind of relationships. No, moving this relationship to an open one, or even having selected an open one to start with most likely would not have saved this partnership. The problem is the jealousy, it's a sign and symptom of deep insecurity in either herself or the relationship, and it probably only would have escalated since it seems it was kept as a dirty little secret until this guy started getting hit with it. In cases like this, the guy can either choose to attempt to keep her 110% comfy and secure and hope her jealousy symptoms don't worsen over time, or avoid even starting such a relationship with this person in the first place. Had she been honest with herself about her issues early on, and then been honest with him out of respect, it's a good bet things wouldn't have turned out the way they did. Absolutely open relationships can work, and work well if the people involved are honest with themselves and each other beforehand, when issues pop up, and are assertive with making these things known instead of playing the lame "hint or imply" game. There are no psychics or mindreaders in this digital place, so acting like ones significant other(s) are some kind of super psychic that can pick up on hints is only a recipe for a big huge fail, and a fail the "hinter" would be to blame for. Consequently, it's no wonder that couples in open relationships here who are married to each other in RL seem to fare the best when agreeing to allow "play" with other residents.
  8. Cali Souther wrote: Dana Hickman wrote: Storm Clarence wrote: Do you ask the same thing of non-ding-a-ling dudes? I ask that in one way or another to everyone who puts the moves on me. If they can't respect me enough to give an honest, straightforward answer, then I probably won't respect them enough to consider saying yes. That's just how I roll. I think it's important if you are going to become intimate, but for online chatting & just hanging out with a group of friends - It doesnt matter to me what gender someone is. That's just the way, I roll. I was talking about me asking the people who hit on me to be blunt about telling me their intentions, not anything to do with gender. I'm an immersionist and couldn't care less what gender someone is in RL, even if there's intimacy involved.
  9. Ok, who necroed? Geez.. light a match or sumfin :smileytongue:
  10. Depends on the viewer.. Phoenix has an Asset Blacklist that derendered AVs get listed on, and you have to remove their names from it and either Tp away/back or relog to get them to show up again. It doesn't work without taking their name off that list. I dunno how other viewers do it.
  11. Storm Clarence wrote: Do you ask the same thing of non-ding-a-ling dudes? I ask that in one way or another to everyone who puts the moves on me. If they can't respect me enough to give an honest, straightforward answer, then I probably won't respect them enough to consider saying yes. That's just how I roll.
  12. Perrie Juran wrote: I would agree in a pure roleplay it would not be actionable. But if I said I'd pay you 1000L to come roleplay with me that might be actionable. Right. That's why I said that RP and RP characters are assumed unreliable sources (probably should've said presumed instead). It is known when people enter into RP that most, if not all of it is "fictious construct", and things said in it aren't binding because they are story. It's certainly a whole different thing when someones uses their AV as a legit agent of themself to make real binding agreements. That has as much weight as wording it out and signing it to a piece of paper in a lot of cases, just harder to enforce is all.
  13. Jacki Silverfall wrote: These are adults. If they can't AR, Mute, TP then its time to quit the game. push the big red X. I agree. If there's not enough factual evidence to warrant filing a report, then there's not enough actual transgression to warrant filing a report either.. which pretty much means someone is just getting waaayyy too touchy and butthurt about things that don't actually cross the line. The TOS covers a lot of things, but it doesn't say that people aren't allowed to be a**holes.
  14. Perrie Juran wrote: Exactly. What is at issue here is the validity and enforceability of an electronic contract. For instance, you negotiate a price with an Escort in SL for certain services, pay them the agreed price and then they don't perform their end of the deal. Would you have a legal standing to take them to court to recoup your Lindens? We are entering into a whole new legal area that is still being hashed out but oral contracts (incorrectly called 'verbal') and electronic contracts are enforceable under law Yes, but I hadn't referred to anything that involved measurable loss on the part of the victim, which is really the only characteristic of such a "deal" that would make such a thing actionable by law. I was only talking about the verbal (ie- lying, misrepresentation, etc.. like talk found in the OPs hypothetical example of roleplay dialog), not about things that amount to theft, fraud, etc.. that causes some kind of loss (ie- copybotting). I never made that leap from mere talk over to where a lot of the rest of this discussion has gone with binding contracts because I was only commenting on the idea of holding RP talk liable, as was put forth early on by the OP.
  15. I've thought about trying that avmatch place out, but haven't gotten around to it. Not because I have issues with meeting people, no.. I've got that part covered :smileytongue: . It's because a huge percentage of the people I do meet do not play SL the same way I do, and the number of places that I frequent is fairly small. I'm a dying breed of SL-only immersionist, and I'm not a RPer and I don't bring my RL identity with me into SL. Chances of finding compatible people are slim even on the best of days lately, so maybe one of these days I might try a site like that, just to see.
  16. Hilarious! :smileytongue: Usually when the ding-a-ling chicks ask me to dance or go home with them, I just play dumb and ask them "why?" or "what for?".. puts them on the spot and makes them have to spell out the specifics of their intentions right from the start. They friggin HATE that lmao.
  17. Perrie Juran wrote: So then an Avatar that copybots can't be held legally accountable (I'm talking RL Law here, not the TOS) because the Avatar is a "fictitious construct?" Will "I was just role playing a thief" hold up in a Court of Law? What you talk of is a completely different issue and context. He was talking about making binding verbal statements and contracts and asking about whether those can hold up to RL legal scrutiny. Copybotting is a DMCA issue, for which there are certain protections already in place.
  18. Qwalyphi Korpov wrote: Now this is the point I was attempting to raise. If an AV is a character is it legally reasonable to enforce a standard of behavior normally applied only to mature adults capable of managing their own affairs? I'm not sure why a roleplay "character" even could be held accountable considering it's entirely a fictitious construct, and therefore it's entire credibility at making binding statements or contracts, as well as the validity of any made are immediately called into question. No different than having an unreliable or questionable witness on the stand in a RL court, or even a biased juror in the panel. There's simply no guarantee, implied or otherwise, that such a "character" could be acting in good faith as an accurate and binding agent of the person behind it. There's even no guarantee that the approved account holder is indeed the person behind the keyboard at the time in question. Only evidenced acts or verifiable patterns of behavior in a RL capacity could ever lend any real credibility to an otherwise unreliable, and assumed unreliable source. This would probably hold true for all avatars, regardless of how they choose to approach SL personally, even the Lindens themselves.
  19. I know 5 or 6 people who look like this or worse, and despite being pretty nice people I have to fight the urge to tell them they look like angry little emo trolls, and are most definitely NOT cute.. which is what I tend to think they were going for along with a heavy goth/emo style. It's actually kind of disturbing to me, but they do have the right to look any way they choose in SL.
  20. Perrie Juran wrote: This appears to me to be saying that these female Ava's are really gay men logged in as women for the purpose of having pixel sex with other men. And given the number of "I'm a **bleep**, please use me type" female Avatars we see, it would make for a very large number of people doing it. I am not saying it doesn't happen, but 99% would seem to me to be an extremely high number. I said nothing at all about gay or bisexual. The 99% was indeed arbitrary but intentionally meant to be a huge percentage number, because like Dillon, I have never seen a RL woman be able to go straight to sex without getting that little bit of bonding in beforehand.. never, and that includes myself. The "warmup" I referred to isn't about sexual excitement, it's about bonding or warming up to the person, focused on the individual and not the act. It's an extra filter we have and an emotional response that's *nearly always* a needed precursor to the act for women (think: greenlight at the intersection). This is why I suggested that those who can dive right in cold (note: i said cold, not fast) are *nearly always* going to be men in RL, because men can do that quite easily and women have a most difficult time with it. This also doesn't refer to all those who may be doing that because they're just RPing these things for benign entertainment. Obviously not everyone's the same and there's always exceptions to the norm, but that's also a given and shouldn't need to be mentioned like a disclaimer.
  21. Madelaine McMasters wrote: I've often wondered if those fellas are actually losing. They don't attract us, but we don't know their success rate. Could it be that they walk away thinking "I wonder if she knows what she's losing because she can't turn her brain off for a few minutes?" Valid point there, and one I do have some experience with, but the situation I spoke of was something a little bit different. This was one of those "all ya gotta do is show up and tease me a little, help me get in the mood" kind of things, so no "turning off the brain" required, only "turn on the woman". His success rate means zip to me, so from my end it's him being lazy, and losing out on me.. which is the only stat I would care about lol. It's also not understanding that 99% of women who can move from pure social to pure sex without any warmup are going to be men using female AVs. Real women are wired differently, and so I hope he has lots of fun with those guys :smileytongue:
  22. Syo Emerald wrote: The verbal dance....well I think thats cause in a virtual world and especially for women its important to seduce not only in a visiual way. The cinema in the head is the best turn on, I think :catembarrassed: That's exactly right! You see this a lot with men in SL, and I tend to think it's just being lazy.. along with a fundamental misunderstanding of how we work. I ran into this very thing last night, and I ended up walking away thinking "..I wonder if he knows what he's losing because he can't get out of guy-pron mode for a few minutes". That kind of lazy and "girl-stupid" I don't have time for on any day.
  23. Large radius facelights in public places... There's no reason a facelight should be any larger than 2m radius, yet people wear ones that are maxed out and end up making everyone else at the venue have to see SL the way THEY choose. I didn't buy a superb dark tanned skin so that some self-absorbed bimbo can completely white it out from 30m or more away. It's not about turning off attached lights or derendering these fools, it's about them changing the default for everyone in the area just because it's possible to do. I can understand if the person is new and naive, but it's the older ones who know better but still do it anyway that piss me off. Their need to be the speshial snowflake is so overwhelming that it becomes "to hell with everyone else", and I don't think others should have to pay the price for these peoples shortcomings. I also get a bit disgusted with the other people around who hate these super big facelights but don't speak up. One can sit and watch one of these nuclear facelight fools actually herd people around the venue or dancefloor like they were sheep, all moving to get away from the light, yet you almost never see anyone say a thing. I'm sorry but that's just weak.
  24. Clarissa Lowell wrote: No, sorry. If you copy the numbers I made - which do require thought, decision, and aesthetic ability to choose in the unique combination I ended upon - and put your name on it, then you are a thief. End of story. This is true. Even through intentional legit imitation, the odds of arriving at exactly the same values on more than say 50% or so of all *commonly adjusted* slider values is so astronomical that to find such is pretty much a guarantee of thievery. Someone who does that is no different than those inworld who write down all the object parameters of mod prims, one after another, until they end up with a perfect copy of someone elses construction that shows them as the new creator. RE-creations are not creations at all, they are intentional copies and a willful attempt at bypassing owner name or object permissions, and they still count as theft. IMO Mod item RE-creators are only 'manual' copybotters in a sense, but worthy of less respect than real copybotters because they demonstrate the amount of deceitful effort a thief will put into calling someone elses work their own.
  25. So, the trees are finally done then? Figures... I have no idea why they'd do that, but i'd probably change that answer if I found out how much of the trees sway and related things was done sim side... and if none of it was sim side then it's flat out a bonehead decision to get rid of it.
×
×
  • Create New...