Jump to content

Innula Zenovka

Advisor
  • Content Count

    9,458
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,939 Excellent

4 Followers

About Innula Zenovka

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. One downside might be that the reason your Linden Home doesn't count against your parcel's available LI is that the root prim is positioned so that it's on protected land owned by LDPW (near your mailbox/life preserver) and the LI counts against LDPW's allowance, not yours. So for your plan to work, the parcel owners, not LL, would have to carry the LI for the houses. This might make them a lot less attractive to residents, I think.
  2. You do realise that's not the way civil cases work, I hope. That is, the respondent (the civil equivalent of the defendant, or LL in this case) enjoys the benefit of the doubt and is assumed to be innocent until the plaintiff has established her case "on the preponderance of the evidence." I'm also not sure what "not literally believing her" (as opposed to ... "figuratively believing her", whatever that might mean?) involves. Personally, I'm suspending judgment one way or the other, since I know nothing about facts of the case, but I'll be surprised if her side of stands up to rigorous and impartial examination (but I was surprised when Jeremy Corbyn became leader of the Labour Party, when Leave won the Brexit referendum, when Donald Trump was sworn in as President and by lots of other things, too, so that's no real guide).
  3. Certainly there is some truth in it, in that both sides agree she used to work for LL and has now resigned after complaints about her performance at work. The rest of it is, as I understand it, disputed, so the contentious parts of her complaint need to be resolved by an impartial tribunal after it has properly considered the evidence presented by both sides. Since she's the one making the complaint, she's required to prove it to the civil standard -- the preponderance of evidence, I think it is, in the US -- and since we don't have access to any of the evidence she intends to submit, nor to any evidence LL intend to submit in rebuttal, I don't really think speculation based on prejudice (that is, having reached a provisional judgment without reference to the evidence) is going to be particularly helpful for anyone. The most I assume about any case, civil or criminal, is that the complaint, if true, means the complainant or the prosecution has a case in law. I also assume, possibly rather cynically, that anyone who feels aggrieved about losing their job (or finding themselves in a position where they consider, rightly or wrongly, they're about to lose their job or that the work environment is toxic) probably feels they've been unfairly treated and also probably has a significant financial and personal interest in having a court declare that they were not, in fact, as incompetent or as difficult a colleague or whatever as the their former employers say was the case. So, just as I don't assume that defendants in criminal cases must be guilty because the police wouldn't go to all the trouble of arresting them without a good reason, or that they must be innocent because the police are oppressive and biased, even though both must be true in particular individual cases, I'm not intending to form any premature judgments about this matter and I would caution others against so doing, too. I have my own speculative opinions on the matter, certainly, but since I don't have any facts with which to back them up, I'm not going to try to present them as facts, and I would advise others against doing the same.
  4. When I was a student, many years ago, one of the lecturers used to tell us that, in her classes, there was no such thing as a stupid question other than one she'd answered just five minutes earlier, as the questioner would have known had she or he been paying attention.
  5. I was thinking primarily of the linkability rules plus llSetLinkPPFast. I haven't done much with Multimove for a long time, but when I did, it was primarily because I was trying to move a large vehicle (so linkability rules) with more than 32 prims (so physical movement issues, cured by setting appropriate links to PRIM_PHYSICS_NONE. Probably I'm mistaken, but when I was looking out the copy of Mulitmove I recalled what I'd last used it for and thought that, if I were making a similar vehicle now, I'd probably try to do it with a single script in a large linkset rather than Multimove, at least until I discovered my brilliant idea didn't work as well as I had hoped (admittedly, that all too frequently turns out to be the case). That's what was behind my note of caution.
  6. Passed you a copy of 5.1 inworld. However, I probably wouldn't use it myself, since it was written as a work-around for a problem that can frequently now more readily be solved by using functions we didn't have back then, such as llSetKeyFramedMotion, and by setting the prim physics shape to none where appropriate. Both of those help avoid the restrictions that used to be imposed on physical movement. I don't say it's necessarily outdated but I would now definitely think twice about using those scripts since there are now much better tools available as part of LSL than there were back when the Multimove scripts were written.
  7. Put it this way. A 12 July event organised by the Bellissaria Orange Order to celebrate William III's victory over James II's Catholic forces at the Battle of the Boyne presumably wouldn't seem contentious to many Americans but it's certainly contentious in Northern Ireland and parts of Scotland, and many Brits (and, I imagine, citizens of the Republic of Ireland, too) would regard it some suspicion. So whose view of the event do we accept?
  8. I think we may be at cross purposes. I mean, I would have thought that a gay man or woman in Russia would consider the hostility shown by that country's government towards people of his or her sexual orientation was pretty political -- I do, though admittedly I'm neither gay nor Russian. My point is that I don't think the world divides up neatly into political and non-political, since -- at least in my view -- very often the personal is the political, which is why I think it would cause no end of problems trying to ban political events from the Fairgrounds. Let's be specific, though. July 12th is a date without much significance in US history and culture. Would you say that a request by the Bellissaria Loyal Orange Order to hold a commemorative parade with a marching band, bonfire and fireworks display, similar to the analog ones they organise in First Life to commemorate a very important event in the history of their community back in 1689, was political or not?
  9. That's the problem, though -- in this context, whether or not something is political is, in itself, a political judgment. For example, this time next year, should LL allow the fairgrounds to be used for what the (non-US) organisers describe -- correctly -- as a parade, marching bands and fireworks to celebrate an important historical event in the history of their community, dating back longer than the 4th of July, which is marked back in their country with parades, bonfires and a public holiday? Better think carefully here, since a lot of people in Ireland, North and South, and the UK Mainland (particularly parts of Scotland) have quite strong views about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parades_Commission A general rule against rallies in favour of candidates for elected office would be simple to enforce, I guess, but I get worried once we get beyond that. I mean, you might not consider a pride event poltical, but I would imagine that -- whether they were for it or against it -- an SL resident in Moscow or Kiev might see the event as very political indeed. I can't imagine that's an argument into which LL would wish to be drawn.
  10. I've been thinking about this and, while when I read this for the first time I agreed strongly, and I think I still do, but I'm not sure why any more. I mean the fairgrounds are not part of Bellissaria proper. They're offshore, connected to Bellissaria by the ferry, presumably precisely so that people can't be disturbed by any of the events going on there. They shouldn't even be in anyone's draw distance unless they really it up. So the objection can't be that residents of Bellissaria would be disturbed by the rally. What is it? The best reason I can come up with is that Bellissaria is supposed to be a friendly, welcoming and diverse SL community where people can relax, hang out with friends, have fun role playing, or exploring, or decorating, or boating or doing whatever they enjoy doing and generally not being confronted with first life concerns and hassles like politics, unless they want to be. But is the knowledge that someone's holding an event some several regions away in support of a cause with which many people disagree enough to spoil Bellissaria for other people? Seems rather intolerant, and also to lay the ground for some pretty difficult decisions that LL would probably want to avoid. If people can't organise political events on the fairgrounds, what is the status for campaigns like "Save the ..." which I've seen run in SL on behalf of several endangered species? LL presumably don't want to get into fights with people who want to promote generally popular causes with which, if LL has a view on them, it probably sympathises. I would still greatly prefer it if people didn't organise political events at the fairgrounds or anything else, but I'm no longer sure why that is. Can anyone help me?
  11. I don't think that "shared experience" really applies here -- that restriction was brought in, as I recall, to put a stop to things like the old Emerald hack to give people extra attachment points in the early days of mesh, when we only had a few points to use, and we could wear only one to a point, that looked perfectly OK if you were using Emerald but looked to anyone not using Emerald as if the attachments floating round in space were surrounding the avatar like so much planetary debris, which made SL look a very messy place indeed if you weren't using that particular TPV. I'd have thought de-rendering views you don't like was a far better way of dealing with the problem than erecting privacy screens or putting up fences and hedges (which look a bit silly on a houseboat anyway). I don't see how it's different from keeping the blinds closed in your RL home to obscure an unwelcome view.
  12. My understanding was that LL are doing this (presumably on legal advice) as a result of recent changes to the detail of the relevant US "know your customer" regulations, intended to crack down on money-laundering. The requirements have always applied to people cashing out over a certain level but it was so high that few of us ever hit it. Now, or so I am told, it applies to all dollar cash-outs, even for $1 US. Presumably, too, it simplifies everyone's lives to have a separate company, wholly owned by LL, handling all the financial transactions that attract regulatory oversight.
  13. To which terms of the contract do you particularly object, and in what way do you say that signing them is putting your "@$$ [...] on the line [...] financially"?
  14. Despite not being at all religious myself, I would have no particular problem with a religious group -- Christian or otherwise -- running some sort of facility in SL offering support to people with cancer, or any other serious illness or disability, and to their family and careers, so long as they're already experienced in providing this kind of support in a professionally supervised First Life environment. That's what bothers me -- not that the facilities might be run by religious people but that they might be run by well-meaning but inexperienced amateurs who don't really understand what they're doing. Earlier I mentioned my experience of cancer and how helpful I found Macmillan Cancer Relief, one of the main British cancer charities. Their forums are a great online resource for anyone, patients, family and carers alike, affected by the disease in any of its forms. One of the reasons they're so successful is that everyone knows that, as well as training and supporting their volunteers, Macmillan train many specialist cancer nurses, so there are plenty of very experienced and knowledgeable people on hand to ensure that any medical advice is well-founded, and that, in the course of trying to comfort and support patients and carers, people don't put their well-intentioned feet into it and make a bad situation worse. While the OP knows from her experience what cancer can be like for patients and family, not everyone does. And while the staff and volunteers at cancer respite centres and the like make caring for and supporting patients and their families all seem very easy and comfortable and natural, that, to my mind, is because they are all really well trained and are themselves professionally supported.
  15. I've met plenty of both Christians and Jews in my lifetime, but the only people I've ever met who talk about "Judeo-Christians" are US Christians from particular denominations (and I'm willing to bet good money they don't call themselves "Judeo-Christians" when they're in church).
×
×
  • Create New...