Bitsy Buccaneer
-
Posts
1,898 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Bitsy Buccaneer
-
-
The day the furniture folder decided to make a fashion statement....
-
2
-
-
I'd like to have the choice of a few different inventories (and the ability to designate which inventory/ies I want an item to go in) so that I can have access to easily searchable folders of infrequently used stuff (like seasonal decor) without them loading every. single. day.
-
IMO ideals don't have to be absolutes. Would a word like 'principles' work better?
I know Joe put his propositions forward in terms approaching some sort of absolute but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to limit the conversation to that kind of thinking unless we want to. I'm reasonably certain I don't.
-
2
-
-
I'll play along Prok, because SL on my new computer refuses to see the .dae files I wanted to upload and test and I can't figure out what's wrong
It's probably 'secondlife' in my head, all one word, no real emphasis. It's something I do, as and when my disabilities allow. Maybe that shapes my view of SL. I can't be inworld enough for it to be immersive and it's less passive than other things I engage with. It's part of my slow, quiet life.
-
3
-
-
Sorry for saying anything Tari.
-
1 hour ago, Madelaine McMasters said:
Missing from Joe's treatise is any mention of curiosity and critical thinking, both helpful in setting up (and changing) ideals and learning from mistakes. And does encouragement come from anchors or people (including self)?
Maddy, you went out of your way to quote me there. I don't know if you're challenging what I wrote or riffing off of it. It was a shift I thought might be useful to Tari. It was intentionally short and had just the one point so it wouldn't get lost.
Critical thinking and a seriously inordinate amount of curiosity are high amongst my ideals. I'd recommend both to anyone but recognise not all are inclined to do so. Ideals can become their own type of encouragement. They've been more effective for me than other people tbh. That's just me; I'm not going to get prescriptive for anyone else. Do you see people and self as separate from ideals or anchors? I think it's all entwined. Ideals (for me) are values I consider important enough to highlight so they don't get lost and forgotten amidst all the distractions of people.
The places curiosity has taken me is why I don't mind the 'anchor' imagery or the idea of some sort of point to return to. Not necessarily to adhere to, but to re-examine in light of new experiences and current understanding.
The bit about lying and truthfulness is complex. I prefer 'right speech' as a paradigm because it's encased in ideas of compassion and helping others. In general, of course be honest. But sometimes it's too much, or too harsh, or even just wrong. IMO the biggest danger may be in getting so caught up in a self-image of always telling the Truth that it becomes circular and insulated from critical engagement. We've all seen it, the person who makes false claims to facts because she's convinced herself she's always right.
Anyway, that's my take on the things you brought up.
-
3 hours ago, Rhonda Huntress said:
Is something flying over my head?
I don't get it
just a failed attempt to be a bit silly. toilets don't work as toilets in SL. you can put sex animations in them or tipjar scripts or use them as decor or part of role play or as a lucky chair, but if you count that then everything (at least that's moddable) is potentially useful in SL, including Chin's wearable online indicator.
-
4
-
-
ok, let's try it again. telegraphing joke:
toilets
-
Tari, what about this sort of thing (anchor in OP's terminology) as an ideal to keep aiming for, even though it will be missed? Then it can be used to help learn from mistakes made and as encouragement to keep trying.
Would that sit better with you?
-
-
5 hours ago, kurt28 said:
This stuff is really confusing to me. I couldn't even figure out how to purchase this skin in secondlife.
I found a skin that seems to be the best one I've found. Is there any reason why I shouldn't go with this skin?
https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/GAEG-Full-Skins-Hugo-ST5-Chestnut-Omega-Applier/9781737
Is it an old skin? Or something wrong with it?
And what does the ST5 stand for?
What is Omega Applier?
There is a very good reason why you shouldn't buy it. It requires a mesh body and head. See the part in capitals in the ad:
QuoteThis Full Skins Applier is made for the OMEGA COMPATIBLE MESH BODIES/HEADS ONLY.
► Please verify the compatibility of your mesh product with the Omega System first.
Omega is the brand name of a way of 'applying' clothing and skin textures to a variety of mesh bodies. Some mesh bodies and heads require proprietary 'applier' systems (their own brand is the only one that works). Some mesh bodies and heads also work with the Omega system as well. It's like the generic applier.
I don't know what ST5 is, but numbers in skin names can refer to lightness-darkness. Like the palest will be Tone 0 or Tone 1 and the darkest 5 or 9 or however many shades that creator makes. Each creator does it differently though, so it's worth taking a moment to figure it out for one you like.
Look for a skin that says Classic or System Avatar. Those will work without a mesh body or head. Older skins will work too, but might not be labelled as Classic unless the advertising has been redone.
This is all very confusing. It must be exhausting to be new or returning. It does eventually start to make some sort of sense.
-
1
-
-
Oops. Gives you a hug
and furtively digs through inventory looking for a tissue to rez....
-
3
-
-
In a world where you can be anything,
Be kind.
-
9
-
-
5 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:
If you mean that what s/he writes is worth nothing at all, then I agree with you - at least as far as the forum is concerned. I think it's common knowledge here.
Sorry, Dakota. I just had to.
No, it meant that sometimes she gets it so wrong that it turns really quite comical.
I guess part of me hopes that it's intentionally so.
-
2 hours ago, eighthdwarf Checchinato said:
For me to have a "theological position", would mean that I had to be a theist in the first place. But I'm not. Not anymore, to be exact. I rather consider myself as an atheist.
LOL. OK then, your anti-theological position regarding the existence of God/gods, religion and various other related things. You know, the ones you keep bringing up.
-
Hugs Klytyna. You're priceless.
-
15 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:
I think what we need to feel valued shifts over time. In the earliest years what we need to feel valued focuses mostly on our individual needs, but it appears (according to growth psychology) that our self-esteem shifts more to what we contribute to society (if our development goes well).
In other words, to what we give as opposed to only what we take. These seem to be the happiest people with a sense of purpose -- those who are able to achieve this.That's interesting, Luna. I agree that there are differences in what we each need and it seems to me that recognising those differences (rather than relying on our own as guidance) are important in adding value to others.
What can we do to foster awareness of this in society? -
Are you trolling me eighthdwarf? Or did you really not understand what I was asking?
QuoteI wasn't suggesting that participants be theologically neutral, just that we talk about values and ethics without getting bogged down in assertions of theological positions.
You keep bringing it back to your theological position. I don't take any characters as proxy, imaginary or not. But that seems to be all you're willing to talk about here. Is there any way forward in this conversation?
-
Nothing of the kind love. Try again.
-
59 minutes ago, eighthdwarf Checchinato said:
IMO, there isn't such a thing like "theologically-neutral".
So you do think it's possible to live ethically without religion but you don't think it's possible to talk about it without reference to 'sky daddies'? Will you kindly clarify this for me?
I wasn't suggesting that participants be theologically neutral, just that we talk about values and ethics without getting bogged down in assertions of theological positions. Did you miss the difference or do you think it's not possible?
-
So a single line is your entire evidence for your assertions. Interesting.
(This was a reply to Klytyna, which it followed immediately after before the threads were merged.) -
What's your evidence for this Klytyna? Please base it in the OPs words rather than generalisations or your interpretations. Thank you.
-
To the OP, if you're an atheist trolling other atheists, that's got to be at least as easy as trolling fundamentalists these days. It's misplaced to take much pride in doing so.
If you're not an atheist and you really are sincere, starting out these sorts of discussions with words like "God" is, as you acknowledged before, combining hot oil with cold water. I tried twice in the other thread to bring it back to the values you were talking about but it was too late. The majority seemed to just want to carry on with laying out their own theological positions and using others' opinions as a jumping off point. I don't know how they'd react to a theologically-neutral thread on living ethically and with regards to others. Might it stand a chance?
-
19 hours ago, JoeDex said:
Because in order for you to add value to the world you have to know that you have value. Your being alive is valuable and your purpose is to add to the value of others. This can be accomplished in as many ways as you can imagine. Likewise, there are those that try and take value from others.
You have value and you matter.
This is what I see as the heart of the topic. Can we get a discussion going on this? Here is what I posted earlier:
I really like the idea of living in a world where everyone understands that they matter and where the guiding principle is too help each other.
I really like the recognition that there are many ways to do this.
Can we talk about this too?
How do you add value to the lives of others? Do you truly value yourself?
-
2
-
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Do you prefer box? Or no box?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted · Edited by Bitsy Buccaneer
I did some Adventing with my building alt so she would have some clothes and also to broaden my horizons in terms of what creators are doing these days. It was great when it came in a box and I could just delete the extra sizes, knowing that there was a safe copy in the original packaging should it be needed. And it was, as her size and shape are still evolving. Even went back in to a couple to find notecards and LMs that I wouldn't have kept otherwise but was glad to have.
Needing to rez and fill a prim, make sure nothing got left out in process, label it properly and all of that got tedious quickly. I much prefer boxes over folders because they're instant back-up copies and I've found it useful to have them.
ETA: I'm one for intentionally wearing boxes to quickly see what's in them so I appreciate it when creators put their advertising picture on the outside. Thanks to the few who still do that.