Dresden Ceriano

wiked Anton wrote: So in your opinion, anyone who doesn't have the ability to put into words that satisfy your assumption of intelligence doesn't have a valid argument and you intend to inform them of this. Everybody has valid thoughts , opinions and arguments, only some may not have the educational back ground ( intellectual thumb up their ears) to be able to " sound as smart as y'all" but their arguments are just as valid. This whole discussion sounds like and intellectual wank a thon. ( and yes, i used spell check here to make sure i didn't offend anyone) Some people's arguments are not valid, no matter how well they write. Some people start arguments that have nothing to do with the topic at hand, go off on tangents, accuse people of harassing them when they're not, question their very right to express themselves the way in which they choose, cross reference issues from one thread to another and a variety of other things that expose them of being incapable of have any validity in thought or opinion. When this is the case, they should be called on it... if it hurts their tender feelings, too bad. ...Dres

RudolphUkka wrote: Mayalily wrote: The ad word on my screen is this teeny tiny thing. A bit like a * fairy? *** Rudi *** For your information, my thing is not teeny tiny. ...Dres

Oh Val... I adore that coat. ...Dres

Kylie Jaxxon wrote: Thanks, I'll take you up on that sometime...I hope earning it doesn't involve tassels and dancing on table tops :smileytongue: As if... you do know who you're talking to, right? ...Dres

Ann Otoole wrote: Because there is no place in this topic for my personal opinion. But you guys go ahead and have a ball. What? Why not? ...Dres

Ann Otoole wrote: Advertising. IMVU does it and gets loads of users. SL is as easy to use for basic stuff as IMVU is. LL never really tried to promote SL. LL doesn't even defend their brand while IMVU uses the keyword 2nd life to steal LL customers. I will refrain from saying anything further. You're very right. What IMVU is doing is despicable and should be addressed. If you've been paying attention (which I'm sure you have), LL has been doing a lot more to promote SL recently, which I think is great and clearly needs to be done. But some sorts of promotion, when handled badly (as it most certainly has been in the past), might just come at the cost of alienating their own user base, business owners and active participants. How can that be considered helpful? It saddens me that you feel you must refrain from stating your opinion here in the SL forum... certainly your voice is as relevant as anyone else's and shouldn't be censored, either by yourself or anyone else, for any reason... especially fear of retaliation by LL itself. That this could even possibly be the case, really needs to be addressed... otherwise you'll have no voice. And having a voice is important, is it not? ...Dres

Void Singer wrote: wasn't this article hashed already? Indeed it was... but I was preoccupied then and enjoyed the chance to have my say here. I'm selfish that way. ...Dres (Plus, I was going to point that out, looked for the post and couldn't figure out what to type in order to find it.. oh well.)

Kylie Jaxxon wrote: @ Dres - Really like your place...it fits you :matte-motes-sunglasses-3: Thanks... come see it in person sometime... the fez you have to earn... lol. ...Dres

Kylie Jaxxon wrote: Pserendipity wrote: Dresden Ceriano wrote: What are you talking about? If you had bothered to read the content of any single post here, you'd have realize how very off topic your post actually was before you even posted it. Just saying. ...Dres I think there's a problem because the Universal Translator hasn't got a setting for Transylvanian. Pep (has noticed that 90%+ of vampires seem to be semi-literate for one reason or another) Haha, Pep :matte-motes-sunglasses-3: @Dres...that post sounded like it was totally scripted Maybe it should be. ...Dres

I'm glad you said it... I was going to say there are certain things that never see the light of day in the SLF... Redzone was one... the JLU is merely the latest. I learned about it through the JIRA but can't pinpoint where I read about it first. I've never seen the thread in SLU (I try to stay clear of that hornet's nest as much as I can), but I think I'll have to go check it out. I find it incredibly interesting that the big 'scandals' are usually about things that purport to try to keep us safe. Rarely have I heard of griefer gangs savaging the SL landscape, though they're surely not unheard of. Just saying. ...Dres

I'm waiting for the movie to come out. ...Dres *hopes it's in 3-D*

I've fezzed up... ...Dres

Sy Beck wrote: Alazarin Mondrian wrote: Second Life, or 3D virtual worlds will move from niche to mainstream when anyone anywhere can host their own sim / archipelago / continent / universe, connect freely to other such spaces and have multi-way traffic and trade whether it's hosted on their own home computer or a mega server farm. There's hurdles to overcome but in time those hurdles will become trivial. ^ This is most probably correct. I agree. LL would have to completely rethink their business model once this becomes reality, before really. Otherwise, they will certainly go the way of AOL... doesn't anyone really use that anymore? ...Dres

Of course, he'd talk about it in the past tense. He's moved on to other things now... this isn't anything new. He created it and has left it in (questionably) capable hands, as he has done and will do again with his current project and the next one and the one after that. He's a man of ideas, a visionary... that's what he does. That's his shtick. What he says, though, is spot on... SL is a niche product. The fact that people need to be, as he put it, "highly motivated to get on and learn to use it," means that it will never be "mainstream." Most people don't want to put forth the effort that's required to enjoy SL... they'd rather turn on the TV, play a video game that's already laid out for them or hook up with people, in RL, on various social networking sites... not that there's anything wrong with that. That doesn't mean that SL's demise is anywhere close to being realized. SL offers something that none of those other things can. As long as the powers that be don't run it into the ground or someone comes along that does it better and is, therefore, able to build up it's user base to be able to rival it, SL will remain relevant... at least to the people that find it relevant. Right now, no one is even close. Personally, I would like to see LL put as much effort into keeping their customers happy, and therefore here, as they do trying to attract new ones (we could argue all day about what keeping them happy entails). When you're losing as many people as your bringing in, there will be no growth. And companies that show no growth are usually considered in a negative light. Still, though I have my issues, I'm optimistic about the direction we're going in under Rod's supervision. I think he knows what he's doing, for the most part. It's just taking some time to turn things around... at least that is my hope. ...Dres

JeanneAnne wrote: Technically, this is correct. Parasitism IS a form of symbiosis. A very one sided form. Rosedale is a multimillionaire while you the hosts of this vampire pay your nickels and dimes to it in order to "build" stuff that isn't even real, while it laughs at you. NO respect is due this parasite, this vampire. No, you are not "bits of metal" to be kicked out by this monster. Rather, you are blood dolls to it, to be sucked dry. You think any respect is due the thing that does THAT to you? Jeanne That explains everything. ...Dres (Sorry, I couldn't help myself... lol.)

Venus Petrov wrote: I, for one, would miss the interactive nature of the meetings. Not only that, they actually work as long as there's someone there that, not only knows how to handle one, but is in a position to address concerns and make decisions. At one time, the process would be that we'd discuss things here in the feedback forum, hash them out a bit, decide if they should be added to the agenda, then sit down and talk it over at the meeting. Decisions would be made, concerns would be addressed, possibilities would be scrapped or sent back to the drawing board (meaning here for further discussion) and things got done... with help from the very people that use this forum everyday and care enough to take the time and put in the effort to show up and be a part of the solution. The system works, but it hasn't since Lexie's departure because there's no longer anyone here to play that crucial role. LL should have never left it unfilled, even if that person wasn't as competent or knowledgeable, progress could still have been made. If nothing else, we wouldn't have been left with no where to go to in order to address issues... we wouldn't have been forced to bring them up in the forum, getting warned for it... and suspended... and banned. ...Dres *shakes his head and sighs*

Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Oh my Gawd....the deadly duo in my thread.... I am so honoured!!!! I'm almost tempted to use the word "awesome", but unfortunately, I have made a vow never to utter that most abused word of the Englsh language. Luckily, Literacy Lady can suggest some alternatives to the dreaded and ubiquitous "awesome". Try these appropriate appellations Witch Carole: astonishing, awe-inspiring, formidable, impressive, magnificent, striking, or wondrous. I hear fairies often like to use the word fabulous. Might that be acceptable as well? ...Dres *could sprinkle it with glitter if you wish*

Bravo!! ...Dres *wishes he wasn't too tired to formulate a better reply*

Griffin Ceawlin wrote: I was gonna say... BTW, which one am I? You're a fairy... remember? ...Dres

Carole Franizzi wrote: Right, let's break it down. The "forum" area....how could it best be used...what's its function? Social Forum - private Showcase forum. - public Customer services forum - either I don't see why this couldn't be done within the framework we've already got. As I remember, the original Off-topic forum was hidden from the general public, meaning you had to sign in to see it. I believe this idea should be discussed and brought to the CTUG to suggest to the... oh wait... there is no one. :matte-motes-frown: ...Dres ETA: By framework, I meant the Lithium software.

Carole Franizzi wrote: Venus Petrov wrote: One of the early warnings in the CTUG yesterday was when Viale Linden appeared and immediately stated that the meeting would be short due to lack of a speaker. To me, this was as if he said 'We have no need to hear what you wish to address on the agenda. My agenda is what matters.' The next warning was his statement 'can one person go at a time or I need to go.' Again, it seems as if our voices are unimportant. I do not think this was the message that was intended....or, was it? I read that part and the thought which immediately crossed my mind was that perhaps this person is totally inexperienced in chat-type communications and is not aware that, not being able to see hands raised, asking permission to speak, there is no possible way for a group of chatters to take turns intervening...... We tried, but all it did was give Vaile the ability to ignore what someone besides the person he called on said. Which, especially when you've been typing something and are unfortunate enough to hit enter after he's called on someone, can be very frustrating. ...Dres

Venus Petrov wrote: One of the early warnings in the CTUG yesterday was when Viale Linden appeared and immediately stated that the meeting would be short due to lack of a speaker. To me, this was as if he said 'We have no need to hear what you wish to address on the agenda. My agenda is what matters.' The next warning was his statement 'can one person go at a time or I need to go.' Again, it seems as if our voices are unimportant. I do not think this was the message that was intended....or, was it? The "or I need to go" part was what I found most telling. I found that simple statement to be most insulting to those of us who cared enough to be there in the first place. ...Dres

Carole Franizzi wrote: Pamela Galli wrote: Carole Franizzi wrote: Having said all that, I ought to point out that the thread covers many issues which include banning for being unfairly accused of flooding the forums – not being abusive to other posters. I wouldn’t have posted in his defence had he been chucked out for that. That sort of behaviour is against the ToS. A number of permabans seem to have been handed out during the protest against Celestiall's permaban. Hers is not the only one deserving of review. A permaban is a death sentence; it should be reserved for the most egregious, abusive behaviors. A mistake was made with Celestiall's ban -- isn't it reasonable to assume that on review, other mistakes might be discovered? Isn't it worth another look? Totally agree. That one bad mistake was made is what makes me concerned. I woudn't dream of challenging the mods' decisions regarding actual infractions. They made a mistake over Celestiall and were decent enough to sort it out, but I witnessed another "case" with my own eyes - Pep's. Others - Storm and Derek - appear to have been booted for objecting to the commercialisation of the forums. Perfectly reasonable objection to make and, even if it hadn't been "reasonable", no customers should be forcibly silenced simply because they won't chant the "everything is wunnerful" slogan. Yes, absolutely - a review is only fair and I for one would appreciate a more balanced and consistent treatment of all SLers now and in the future. The expectation that we only post free publicity for SL is the unreasonable demand. Here, you touch on something that is of huge concern to me... there is no recourse. If you're banned from SL itself, you, at least, have a course of action (where have I hear that before?) that you can take to have that ban reviewed. There is no such thing where the forums are concerned, as far as I know. I never did get an answer when I posed that question. What's written in the Standards is it... the moderation team has the last word. Celestiall was reinstated because people rallied around her, but what of the people that are unfairly banned that may not garner that same level of support? Why should they be left without the option to have their ban looked into by a greater authority, as hers was? I would speak of the warnings I received, for reasons I found dubious at best, but I'm afraid that may earn me another, so I shall refrain. While I understand that people discussing their individual disciplinary actions in the open forum could quickly turn into a circus, there has to be some sort of accountability of the moderator's decisions. And, unfortunately, there's no where to turn, no one to go to and no way to ensure that they might not have gotten it wrong, in certain instances. ...Dres

Knowl Paine wrote: The "product" is access to resources. The product would be nothing without the vast resources provided by the very people that use the product. Knowl Paine wrote: Residents have freewill, no one is playing God. They do have free will, but they are also affected, heavily, by the actions of LL management and employees on a day to day basis. Knowl Paine wrote: An Account may be cancelled at anytime, but it is extremely unlikely that LL would do so without cause or reason. Whether or not the cause is just or the reasoning sound. Knowl Paine wrote: Second Life is a private club, it is not a place of Public accommodation. Membership in SL is open to the general public, but, the club has rules. The term resident and member are legal fictions required to secure our Right to privacy. A private club that's open to the public? Legal fictions? Okay... you lost me. Knowl Paine wrote: Second Life has competitors who would love to see the demise of SL, these competitors have zero concern for "resident's emotional investments". They will exaggerate and sensationalize Resident comments to their benefit. Who cares? Second Life must remain viable of it's own accord. They've got a user base that's, for the most part, quite willing to help them in that effort and should treat them as the valuable asset they are, instead of little children that should just do their chores and keep their mouths shut. Knowl Paine wrote: The Forums should not be visible without login. That would solve a lot of issues. A thumbs down feature with counts hidden, could allow the community to self govern, x amount of down votes and the comment is hidden but not yet removed. A moderator would review hidden threads for possible removal, egregious violations would still be moderated without waiting for down votes. An interesting idea... I'll have to give it some thought. Knowl Paine wrote: I agree that Resident feedback, both positive and negative is valuable. I believe that a custom, tradition or rule of including a possible solution with any comment/discussion would be helpful. Solutions can't be found without first identifying and evaluating what the problems are. ...Dres

You can dress like a fairy all you want, that doesn't make you a fairy. I, on the other, don't have to dress like a fairy to be a fairy. ...Dres *hopes it sinks in this time*