Derek Torvalar

HarrisonMcKenzie wrote: Being a Japanese cultural scholar, I have to think this has more to do with your behaviour or cultural prejudice that racism. If you don't say hi to people, they won't say hi to you. If you sit in your private skybox or closed off parcel and never venture out, you'll never meet people. I don't know if you're doing any of this, but I so hear people say that all they do is sit in their house and comment how bored they are. As for cultural prejudice, a LOT of people who are into Japanese culture are giant, horrible nerds (myself included), so anyone familiar with those subcultures may simply be avoiding you as a stiupid weeaboo, not wanting to tak about anime and panty machines. You can't really do anything about cultural prejudice (aside from turn it down if that's what's going on), but you can be more social. If you go to a club, say hi to people. Try and strike up conversations. Use emotes and gestures. If people see that you are being active, they may start talking to you. "scholar"? Really?

Laurin, barefoot in gossamer. Was nice to see her after many months.

LlazarusLlong wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: The problem with "chivalry," however, is that it is, as you intimate, not really about "generosity" or "kindness" at all, but about power. If you and I have the sort of mutually-respectful relationship in which we are generous and helpful to each other equally, then all that that implies is that we are generous and helpful people with a good, mutually-supporting relationship. Even if you, in practice, end up helping me more than do I you because you are better placed to do so than I, that is merely a slightly skewed expression of an understanding that the roles of helper, and helped, are mutually exchanged between us. Neither of us is necessarily, by nature, one or the other. But chivalry of course is predicated not upon a shared exchange of equal power, but rather an inflexible and highly gendered disposal of roles. I am not permitted by this particular code to, for instance, hold a door open for you, or pull out a chair for you, because, regardless of our actual powers and capacities relative to each other, my role as passive "receiver" of favours is predetermined by my gender. So, built into this code is an imbalance of power: even if I possess it, I am not permitted to employ it. In that sense, condescension is very much the operative word. And every time that someone is consciously and deliberately "chivalrous" to me, as opposed to being merely generous or kind or polite, he is not merely engaging in "nice behaviour," but actually insisting upon his role as the active and powerful partner in a relationship that aggressively relegates me to the role of passive receptor of favours. Are you sure you're talking about chivalry? Not BDSM? Well I better sign up for this workshop then.

LaskyaClaren wrote: Speaking (as Derek has divined that I would) as an "oversensitive feminist," I can only say . . . What a very silly question! What exactly do you mean by "chivalry"? What is this thing? If by that term you mean the medieval ideals associated with the cult of courtly love some 600 or more years ago, well, yes, it's very much dead. Along with other such charming relics of that bygone age as feudalism, witch burnings, and the Black Plague. Do you mean the highly-romanticized (and historically inaccurate) resuscitated neo-gothic version of the 19th and 20th centuries? The one built upon entirely unrealistic expectations about the relations between men of a certain socio-economic status, and the women of their peer group? Well . . . mostly the class to which that applied (a gentrified middle class with pretensions and aristocracy) are dead and gone now too. And, as Pussycat has noted, it really only applied to white women -- and women of a higher social status -- anyway. It was always kind of a myth rather than a reality. Just ask the women and children who were massacred along with prisoners at Ayyadieh in 1191 by that Paragon of Chivalry, Richard the Lionheart. Or by chivalry do you mean basic courtesy, politeness, and kindness? I don't think that THAT is dead at all. In fact, I like to think that I practice it! Am I allowed to be chivalrous if I am (just) a woman? And an oversensitive feminist too? Ahh, there you are Lasky. Welcome back. Although I don't think you really left, probably ghosting your way around the forums until something piqued your interest enough to make youself manifest. ;P Interesting that you would choose to take a historical tact here, as I would have thought you would have come at this from your stronger suit. I mean spending the bulk of your time here for the last number of years commiserating with your comrades and all, I would have thought you were cocked and loaded to give D'Ho a full blast. But I can't totally disagree with your synopses regarding the meaning of 'chivalry' even though they are tinged somewhat by presentist or latter day interpretations that have evolved over the ages, but then that can be expected from a layman, sorry layperson in the area. But I am willing to grant you forebearance for some of the minor flaws I see there and hope that you will see your way to bestowing the same on me as I make some minor points about the Feminist agenda in this regard. I am sure you will agree that Feminism, or rather, agreeing that equal pay for equal work and the right to equality in job placement does not make one a Feminist. Those things a merely the hoped for results feminists desire. Feminsism is about Power; the acquisition and maintenance or control thereof. Hence, superfical social reifications regarding 'manners' such as 'chivalry' or conducting oneself like a 'Lady' (asin aLady of the Court) are of no real concern to a feminist except only in so far as they are a means to establishing the end of realigning the power structures within society. Basically, Feminists find the idea of chivalry patronizing or condescending because it, in their minds, seeks to whitewash over the disparities they are trying to rectify. (excuse the brevity of this as I need to run and finish dinner and eat)

We interrupt this thread, until Scylla or Lasky make an appearance, to bring you the Psychedelic Sunday interlude. Today's offering is the classic Spill the Wine, released 45 years ago May.

DejaHo wrote: Dresden Ceriano wrote: LlazarusLlong wrote: And I am concerned that DejaHo might be upset to think that we were having a threesome without him making up the foursome. Nonsense, I'm sure Deja would only be upset had I yelled "Four!" ...Dres *only yelled three* You yelled three before you swung . . . Playing through. I am not sure what he was yelling but he left me hangin last night after he said he was gonna go and get another drink and have a smoke. Probably something like, "Get offa my lawn! I am tryin to putt here!"

DejaHo wrote: As hindsight is 20/20, yes, imo, Spieth will prevail. If I came to this thread sooner, like on Friday, I would have written the same. This kid is only 21 and has the poise of a 40 year old seasoned veteran. Sunday afternoon the leader board will read as: 1. Speith 2. Woods 3. Day 4. Michelson 5. The Ho :-| That's my final answer. PS Donning a green jacket almost rivals the prestige associated with drinking from the claret jug. I love both tournaments. I think you meant to say Rose instead of Woods, didn't you? I am looking for a three-way tie between Speith, Rose and Lefty myself. With Rose pulling it out on the second playoff hole.

CleoSertorii wrote: That is the nonsense I was referring to specifically. While you scoff at the way some of your posts are treated by some of the forum members here, you fail to appreciate that we were once as inexperienced in forum protocol as you and others are, but seem to be hellbent on remaining, however our styles evolved through observation of other's postings. Rather than indulging in ego-centric obstinance, defiance and hyper-emotional hysterionics you might do well to heed some of the advice and modify your forum conduct such that you will earn the respect of the more experienced posters here. Frankly, I do not think you really comprehend what 'we' see. And, just because something is your opinion that reflects what you think does not mean it can not be nonsense. If your logic is invalid, your assumptions incorrect, perceptions skewed then the ensuing opinion, the product of your thoughts, is quite probably nonsense. Deal with it. Lasty, as I suggested in your thread, just post your question, that is well under 100 characters, and leave out the rest of the drama. Im sorry to rain on your parade, derek, but I'm not a conformist, and I have no interest in "earning" your respect. If i have to change to your point of view to be respected, then i would rather be an outcast. Enjoy the view from your pedestal Don't think of it as a pedastel, but rather being firmly rooted in the foundation of decorum. But if you wish to remain mired in the putrefied muck of adolescent tantrums of defiance and obstinance, so be it.

CleoSertorii wrote: Derek Torvalar wrote: CleoSertorii wrote: My very first reply was from Derek, who didnt actually say anything, but posted a screenshot of the "answers" section of the forum, which just happens to be the place i have already looked when doing my homework. But you didn't ask your question there did you? And why is that? Because you didn't want to. That other stuff is all nonsense. The Answers section is populated with some of the oldest most experienced residents of SL just waiting for a question. There is nothing wrong with a little order and structure. It makes things, like Answers, easier to find if they are all in the same place and easily accessible, rather than strewn all over a forum site with 20 odd categories. replies like this are what lead me to believe that some of you act as though you think you are the forum elite, and that almost everyone else is inferior to you if they dont do or say things in a way that reflects your own viewpoint. Basically stated...who in the hell died and made you god? It seems as though anyone who participates in this forum, but doesnt do it in exactly the way you (or LL, or Dres, or...) approve of, then somehow they are stupid, or immature, or lazy, or unthinking, or "fill in the blank with some derogatory term". The fact that you people cant see it makes it even worse. My opinion is not nonsense. It is how i think. Because it is different than yours, does that make you right and me wrong? I dont think so. Maybe posting in the answers section will help, maybe it wont, but it is MY decision on which one to post in, not yours. If you dont like it, then dont read it. true, a little order and stucture is fine, but being **bleep** about what forum is appropriate isnt your concern. The moderators will handle that, and if they wish to move my thread, then thats fine with me. You and LL aren't the forum police, so stop acting like it. Also, are you aware that when searching for something, the forum lists results in ALL subsections, so even if things are scattered, it isnt any harder to find. Oh, and here is a little twist i'll bet you didnt know about...the answers section has a character limit (not even enough to type a full sentence) that prevents me from asking my entire question, so please tell me just how helpful that will be? " I made a deliberate decision to post my question in the GD section in the hopes that i migh thave a better chance at getting an answer. As someone already pointed out, GD has far more traffic and what appears to be long-term residents who might have dealt with this issue before." That is the nonsense I was referring to specifically. While you scoff at the way some of your posts are treated by some of the forum members here, you fail to appreciate that we were once as inexperienced in forum protocol as you and others are, but seem to be hellbent on remaining, however our styles evolved through observation of other's postings. Rather than indulging in ego-centric obstinance, defiance and hyper-emotional hysterionics you might do well to heed some of the advice and modify your forum conduct such that you will earn the respect of the more experienced posters here. Frankly, I do not think you really comprehend what 'we' see. And, just because something is your opinion that reflects what you think does not mean it can not be nonsense. If your logic is invalid, your assumptions incorrect, perceptions skewed then the ensuing opinion, the product of your thoughts, is quite probably nonsense. Deal with it. Lasty, as I suggested in your thread, just post your question, that is well under 100 characters, and leave out the rest of the drama.

Samuel Meiyo wrote: I own a business on SL. A dating agency per say. There has been a user the has been banned as well as estate banned and they keep coming back on alts. They keep targeting me as the business owner, as well as the customers spreading lies. They have admitted to be the same person time after time again and will not stop. This has been going on for months and I am getting sick and tired over it. Can anything be done? Yes. Move your business. Ignore them. Leave SL.

He is certainly on his game. Which suits Augusta. After fading in the final round last year, this year will indicate whether he has the potential to be another Jack or Greg Norman.

LlazarusLlong wrote: Or is he going to choke on Amen Corner? (Opinions invited from those who know the difference between a threesome and a foursome, for example Deja) Ummm, No he won't. chuckles Moving Day tomorrow!!!

LlazarusLlong wrote: Coby Foden wrote: LlazarusLlong wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: And LlazarusLlong responded: Yes, it is far more reasonable to expect the Forums themselves should be working effectively and not shunt you to the blogs every time you click a button. It's not every time for me, just once per session, near its commencement, so I am not overly perturbed. What has started to happen to me every time and every day. • From my dashboard I select "Community, Forums" and sign in there. • Well, after signing in, instead of being directed to the Forums tab, I'm thrown to the Blogs tab. Why? • Ok, I click the Forums tab and start reading posts. • Very soon I notice that I'm not signed in any more. • I sign in again to the Forums and I find myself staring the Blogs. Again! Why? • I click the Forums tab and search the thread where I was when sign out happened. • All the posts in that thread are marked as new! Grrr... • The unwanted sign outs has started to happen even twice while I'm reading the posts. Coby, that is EXACTLY what happens to me. I don't believe it - LL being consistent . . . I too have noticed this happening for about 2-3 weeks. Inconceivably, I think it is by design, a way to get people to read the LL Blog. It seemed to coincide with Xiola's appearance asking for help to make the forum a place for all SL residents and a response to people complaining that they never got news from LL.

Ohjiro Watanabe wrote: When I used to hear about illiterate students graduating from school, I often wondered how that was possible. But after encountering some of LlazarusLlong's more lusk annunciations, I now realize that not only is it possible for people to graduate without having learned fundamental skills such as reading and writing, but that it's possible for these same people to believe that “the truth”, “the whole truth”, and “nothing but the truth” are three different things. Before I begin talking about specifics, let me just mention that if you think that it is better that a hundred thousand people should perish than that LlazarusLlong should be even slightly inconvenienced then you're suffering from very serious nearsightedness. You're focusing too much on what LlazarusLlong wants you to see and failing to observe many other things of much greater importance such as that its hatchet men have been pivotal in sustaining the narrative that LlazarusLlong's writings surpass most intellectual discourse in terms of the cogency of what they promote and the morality of their implications. Towards this end they toss about inflated figures, dubious “facts”, and exaggerated claims about how LlazarusLlong is beyond reproach. LlazarusLlong is not interested in what is true and what is false or in what is good and what is evil. In fact, those distinctions have no meaning to it whatsoever. The only thing that has any meaning to LlazarusLlong is solipsism. Why? The answer is almost utterly obvious—this isn't rocket science, you know. The key is that LlazarusLlong once tried convincing me that the more strepitant the communication, the more perspicuous the message. Does it think I was born yesterday? I mean, it seems pretty obvious that LlazarusLlong refers to almost everyone it dislikes as “benighted”. Consequently, when I made some disparaging remarks about LlazarusLlong's imprecations, the choicest word LlazarusLlong found for me was—wait for it—"benighted". My purpose in telling you this is not to highlight LlazarusLlong's limited vocabulary but rather to remind you that Titoism is a plague upon us all, a pox that will likely not be erased in the lifetime of any reader of this letter. To LlazarusLlong, however, it's merely a convenient mechanism for waging a clandestine guerilla war against many basic human rights. It is not necessary to continue living with the risks induced by LlazarusLlong's aberrant prank phone calls in order reap the cautionary benefits bestowed by the knowledge that we all know, in the world that surrounds us, that there are terrorists and home invaders and drug cartels and carjackers and knockout gamers and rapers and haters and baleful braggarts who scheme to use threats of fiscal harm to coerce perverted, biased skinflints into forming the association in the public's mind between any codices LlazarusLlong disagrees with and the ideas of hate and violence and illegality. What is often easy to forget, however, is that LlazarusLlong's warped dream is starting to come true. Liberties are being killed by attrition. Maoism is being installed by accretion. The only way that we can reverse these vengeful, jackbooted trends is to advance a clear, credible, and effective vision for dealing with our present dilemma and its most effete manifestations. To be precise, it and I disagree about our civic duties. I aver that we must do our utmost to advance freedom in countries strangled by tyranny. LlazarusLlong, on the other hand, warrants that savagism is a beautiful entelechy that makes us whole. All right; this letter is finally drawing to a close. If I have said anything that overstates the truth and indicates an unreasonable impatience, I beg you to forgive me. If I have said anything that understates the truth and indicates my having a patience that allows me to settle for anything less than reporting as best as possible the facts and circumstances surrounding LlazarusLlong's headlong tactics, I beg God to forgive me. wuttanob, eh. Another failed PoliSci major's propagandist op/ed. C- Take a writing course.

SID Riler wrote: I think anyone and everyone can and should post in forums if they want to, if they feel like asking a question that has been answered 100 times before in a knowledge database let them be, if you do not want to answer that questions for the 101 times, just don't look at the post, but do not suggest that just because someone post a silly post, is doing the wrong thing, that's my opinion, seriously, people that posts all the time in the forum sometimes think they have the Director stick, well you don't, me, I like reading and answering and I never make a forum question, because like you said, I go first to where I can find the answer but, man if they want to ask, whatever they want, that's anyone's right Here's another one. A spoiled childish brat with entitlement issues. Clearly ODD. Even worse, ready with their dysfunctional sympathy on parade for everyone to applaud.

Take your meds.

irihapeti wrote: Derek Torvalar wrote: irihapeti wrote: Derek Torvalar wrote: irihapeti wrote: depends if Philip cant use any LL or other companies patent stuff for HiFi then he has to invent new ways of doing pretty much everything thats not already in public domain, opensource or patent expired if prev. patent. LL can use what belongs to them already or have licensed eta. HiFi wants to opensource everything (seems like) so will be slower to dev than LL, assume LL is going closed source and in part using others peoples licensed stuff HiFi and LL have a loose agreement. It would not be surprising to learn that one hand is washing the other in this endeavour. i not be surprised either about this. That there is or might be some arrangements that are beneficial to both parties altho between Philip and Andrew (Andrew Linden was the first LL programmer and has huge experience and skill) they have a whole lot of technical knowledge in their heads about how 3D virtual worlds can work. Altho from what I have seen of the HiFi code so far it has little in common with SL code. Algorithmically tho there are heaps of similarities by necessity Do you mean the present SL code or the new platform code? have never seen any nextgen platform code. But can say that algorithmically will be pretty similar. In the same way that WoW is similar to SL, from a algo/engineering design pov one thing tho that am pretty sure LL will be interested in for nextgen platform is what HiFi have done with facial/voice animation. I would be quite surprised if the LL nextgen world did not include this capability. I dont think it will be the millions members breakthru tho. Just be a nice to have feature I wonder if those anxious to partake in HiFi understand that they will not be supporting text chat. If LL go that route then you can kiss it all goodbye. (late edit)

CleoSertorii wrote: My very first reply was from Derek, who didnt actually say anything, but posted a screenshot of the "answers" section of the forum, which just happens to be the place i have already looked when doing my homework. But you didn't ask your question there did you? And why is that? Because you didn't want to. That other stuff is all nonsense. The Answers section is populated with some of the oldest most experienced residents of SL just waiting for a question. There is nothing wrong with a little order and structure. It makes things, like Answers, easier to find if they are all in the same place and easily accessible, rather than strewn all over a forum site with 20 odd categories.

irihapeti wrote: Derek Torvalar wrote: irihapeti wrote: depends if Philip cant use any LL or other companies patent stuff for HiFi then he has to invent new ways of doing pretty much everything thats not already in public domain, opensource or patent expired if prev. patent. LL can use what belongs to them already or have licensed eta. HiFi wants to opensource everything (seems like) so will be slower to dev than LL, assume LL is going closed source and in part using others peoples licensed stuff HiFi and LL have a loose agreement. It would not be surprising to learn that one hand is washing the other in this endeavour. i not be surprised either about this. That there is or might be some arrangements that are beneficial to both parties altho between Philip and Andrew (Andrew Linden was the first LL programmer and has huge experience and skill) they have a whole lot of technical knowledge in their heads about how 3D virtual worlds can work. Altho from what I have seen of the HiFi code so far it has little in common with SL code. Algorithmically tho there are heaps of similarities by necessity Do you mean the present SL code or the new platform code?

ProvocativeBliss wrote: I am considering buying an Asus GL771JM-DH71 17.3" ROG Gaming Notebook Computer, Intel Core i7-4710HQ 2.5GHz, 12GB RAM, 1TB HDD, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M 2GB, Windows 8.1 & was wondering if someone can tell me from the specs below if this will run SL efficiently & see mesh bodies good: Asus GL771JM-DH71 Specifications Processor -- 2.5 GHz Intel Core i7-4710HQ Quad-Core 4th-Gen Haswell Turbo Speed -- 3.5 GHz Cache -- L3: 6 MB MemoryType -- DDR3L SDRAM Installed -- 12 GB Capacity -- 16 GB Graphics Card Type-- Dedicated Installed -- NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M with 2 GB GDDR5 SDRAM Dedicated Screen Type -- Widescreen Screen Size -- 17.3" Backlight -- LED Aspect Ratio -- 16:9 Finish -- Antiglare Native Resolution --1920 x 1080 Hard Drive Installed -- 1TB7200 rpm Type: SATA Network -- 10/100/1000 Mbps Gigabit Ethernet (RJ-45) Wi-Fi -- 802.11ac Operating System -- Windows 8.1 (64-bit) No. You need to upgrade that. If you aren't spending at least 3k on a laptop you get exactly what you deserve. Heartaches and headaches.