Jump to content

Ando Joubert

Resident
  • Content Count

    138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Ando Joubert

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. I'm glad to see LL actually adopting TPV features that have made them the go-to choice vs the LL offerings. I'm further pleased to see that TPVs (primarily Phoenix) are able to quickly adopt the good things about V2.x, and still offer a lot more flexibility and features, without the travesty of an interface that hangs like an albatross around viewer 2's neck.
  2. I will not post from your profile, as I do not think that is within the bounds of the ToS. But you do NOT make any distinction between chat and IMs in your profile, despite your dishonest claim here to the contrary. You can move the goalpost all you want, but the fact is, aside from IMs, there is absolutely no purpose whatsoever to offer a disclaimer for open chat. None. As for the Dursley thing, while I appreciated the pop culture literary reference (though I'd have actually been impressed had you referenced Dostoevsky, Dickens, or even Tolkien), you're wrong again. I am well aware of my children's faults, foibles, and other issues. I also know their strengths and successes. And I'm not shy about saying they are, in fact, more accomplished than most kids their age, simply because it is true. Their friends would agree with me. If you want to go toe-to-toe on this, I'll be glad to, but I'm pretty damn sure neither you *nor* your little friend will come out on top should you force a comparison. Also, please note - I did not say they were "better" - that's not a claim I would make about pretty much anybody - I said they are simply more accomplished. Sorry if that offends you. I have been very engaged in their lives, and know their friends well, too, so I can say without hesitation that I am more familiar with the maturity level of kids than you realize. You may continue to assert otherwise, in ignorance, but that's up to you. I can also claim this with confidence: saying not much changes between 16 and 18 is simply not accurate for most kids. Now I know you claim that you did not "experience much maturation going from age 16 to age 18," but that's not something one should really brag about. Seriously. Keep it to yourself. Or, as you so eloquently put it, "shut up." Oh, and Nanny - thanks for, once again, showing that you cannot actually address an issue; all you can really do is fire off pithless, vacant insults. You really need to work on those, they're just not very clever. Goodnight, and good luck. Have fun with the children.
  3. Brenna, not that we will ever chat inworld, but before you hang your hat on that ToS profile thingy, you should be aware that your own profile exposes a major ToS-violating section. In short, by putting that little "I log all IMs and will use them however I want" does, legally, in no way whatsover supercede the real LL ToS. No matter how much you say it, you are not legally able to re-frame the LL ToS to suit yourself. If we were to chat, and you were to share that chat with anybody at all, regardless of your silly little disclaimer, you would be 100% in violation of the REAL ToS, and would be subject to sanction by LL. Like it or not, that's the fact. I would even suggest that your attempt to supercede the LL ToS with your own is, in itself, a ToS violation. I just don't care enough to check. So again, get off your high horse about the ToS. And feel free to play with children. Legally, that's exactly what they are. Children. (BTW, having raised 2 kids myself - whose accomplishments I can virtually guarantee dwarf those of most kids their age, including your "friend" - I know for a fact that 2 years at that age is more than a little significant). If you think it makes "next to no difference," you are simply speaking from ignorance.
  4. You know, Nanny, instead of offering a snarky, nasty, juvenile comment, perhaps you could attempt actually addressing Kyle's points. Let me illustrate it this way: how useful would it be for me to suggest that what you need is to get laid? Not very, right? So you see, your nasty little comment is really not very useful, practical, or holds any merit save our further understanding of what little you have to offer. You may live in a virtuous, virginal bubble, but not everybody in SL does. In fact, most people don't. And bringing children into proximity with adult-oriented activities is an absolutely terrible idea. I promise you, it will not be long at all before unwitting statutory rape occurs. And it won't be much longer after that when this is discovered by some rightfully litigious parent. Maybe for the sexually moribund, this is not an issue. But for those of us who do enjoy virtual sex (yes, Nanny, a lot of people have been enjoying virtual sex for a long time in SL), this is a serious concern. Nobody I know has any interest in having sex with children, but as far as I can tell, it's impossible to know if Suzy Resident is 16 or 45.
  5. What's your point, Brenna? Selective interpretation of the ToS?
  6. Good post. I believe this is yet another nail in LL's coffin, but unlike you I don't think they will be remembered fondly. More like "Wow, they had a great idea, and it flourished until they hired amateur designers, second-tier programmers, social media hacks, inexperienced management, and then let the children in. They had a good thing and they blew it."
  7. What? LL did something stupid, ill-advised, and without thinking it all the way through? I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you. Honestly, I can't wait to see the lawsuits that spring from this. You can only make absurd decisions for so long before reality catches up to you, even in a virtual world. Men do not want, as Faye Feldragonne put it, to "keep their peckers in their pants," nor do women wish to keep their pussies in their panties (yes, Faye, it takes two to tango). It's only a matter of time before unwitting statutory rape occurs, and then the fur will fly when mommy and daddy find out. (How does one adjudicate unwitting sex with a minor who looks like a balrog and an adult who looks like a bunny? Hmm.) And in other news, dontcha love that that every noob is now named "Resident?!" Can this be any lamer? F&%^( Linden Labs. What a bunch of maroons.
  8. Actually, there *are* standard methods and practices in UI design, gathered through years of experience by professionals. To go into them would take an inordinate amount of time and effort when you can simply go to google (or support your local public library) and look it up. It is clear from the design of viewer 2 (and to keep it somewhat on topic, in the functional and interface design of Display Names), professionals UI designers have little or no say at Linden Labs. I don't say this to hurt anybody's feelings, it's just the way it is. And the result of this is that a significant percentage of people will not adopt either viewer 2 - not because it's a bad idea, or because they are "old" or "stuck in their ways," but because it's poorly designed from the ground up.
  9. Wow, what a snotty little twit you are, Alexis. That tree is certainly not up your nose. Are you always so full of yourself? What I am saying, if you happened to be intelligent enough to understand it, is that it IS, obviously, going to be a problem or the Lindens would not fear their own creation. All I am suggesting is a simple switch to disallow the use of one's name as a display name. I think that is neither irrational nor unwarranted. As for your harangue regarding my ego, I am not worried about my name being used. But I know many people in SL who DO have strong name recognition, and could easily be a target. And what is your obsession with lawyers? Dismissed.
  10. Ruuh, do try to keep up, son. I've watched the video, and I would bet my English understanding - as well as my reading comprehension - surpass yours considerably. Here's the bottom line: I really have no problem with the feature itself, and can see why some people might want it. What you failed to answer in your attempt to be "clever" is simply this: if it's so safe, why have the Lindens forbidden the use of their name, when they have not disallowed the use of their name in group tags or titlers? Could it be because they are aware enough to know that it can be used for spoofing purposes? A simple switch in prefs that say "Allow others to use my User Name as a Display Name " would be sufficient. Do you have a problem with that? Oh, and stop generalizing and hurling insults based on your own prejudices. You've done this at least a couple times. You have no idea what "most people" in this comment thread understand, or don't understand. Broad generalizations are not helpful. They are arrogant, insulting, and rude. I think of all people, somebody like you would clearly understand that.
  11. I don't know why people are complaining. Display names not being unique is NOT a problem. If you watched the video above, you'd realise that the username will always be unique. Then please explain to us why the Lindens might have blocked the use of their name? If the Lindens seem to think it's a problem, why don't you? Don't listen to people who say every member of your entire organisation should be bug fixing. If you expect people to take you seriously, Ruuh, you might start by not telling lies. Not one single person has said that. Just be patient. Enjoy shared media. That makes it ALL worthwhile. If you can't think of benefits of shared media, I think you need to sit down and have a brainstorming session. No, YOU enjoy shared media. If it's beneficial or interesting for you, fantastic. But it doesn't make it worthwhile to me, not if I have to use a feature-lite viewer with a butt-ugly, amateur interface; and I'm not sure how that relates to display names.
  12. Gee, Kiki, the Lindens seem to think it's a problem that they won't let their name be used as a display name. Why do you not get that? What is wrong with supporting an option to disallow the use of your name?
  13. Jesus Kiki, you need get over yourself, and the fact that some people don't want their names taken by some griefer! You don't get it? Obviously the LINDENS know it's a problem, and won't allow their names used this way. What's your problem with simply giving folks the choice to allow their name to be used? Tip: just because you don't care doesn't mean other people don't. Get it now?
  14. CF, I guess you're just not grasping the point. Consider this - You have never seen a single instance of somebody impersonating a Linden with group names. Fine and dandy. I'm not convinced that your experience is a valid statistical sampling, but let's assume for the moment that there have been no instances on record of this happening. Why then, would the Lindens feel it necessary NOW to ban the use of their name as a display name? And why in the world would you object to letting residents switch off the capability to use their name as a display name?
  15. Gosh, 2 seconds is all it took to come up with that? Color me surprised, since that's exactly what I have been saying! The LINDENS know it's a problem. That's why they've banned the use of their name. But hey, thanks for proving my point. You know, all it would take is a simple flippy switch in prefs that says "Allow my name to be used as a Display Name, Yes or No." It could even be opt-out for all I care. But that would take care of about 99% of the problems right there.
×
×
  • Create New...