Solar Legion

Medhue Simoni wrote: I think you misunderstand my position, and I think I can see why. I do not think all people are good. I do think most are good, or want to be good and respected. There are obviously some psychopaths, and some that think they are working for the good of all. The problem that I see with the world, is that as more and more governments become more and more socialist, those psychopaths will gravitate to government, as they can have the ultimate control there. Governements give the crazy people a place to do their bidding. If governments only stuck to their core purpose, which in the states is define by the original constitution, and not allowed to make new "laws", then they would have limited control over the masses. Over time, under these conditions, I feel that people would realize that they have no real use for government and we would live in a world that would most resemble eden. Nothing can make a perfect world. We could get very close, but only when we drop the notion that we are allowed to control other people with force. Therein we run into several problems ... Humans being what we are, if the bulk of the laws on the books were to vanish we would have people who believe they can do whatever they please. This even factors in leaving basic laws concerning treatment of people in place. As I've said to Social Darwinists in the past (and no, I don't quite think you are one, the principle is still the same however): When we cease to ensure that the smallest and weakest of us is cared for and has a chance to have a life, when we remove all the nets and the regulations, what we are left with is a society that glorifies the "every man for himself" philosophy. The cooperation which ensues in such an instance is half-hearted. It exists only to further serve the individual in getting what they want. I am very much opposed to such a system Med ... I've seen what can happen under such a system in more minor ways. We have a lot of growing to do as a species before we're capable of creating the world you believe in - the "psychopaths" of the world don't need to be in positions of power to cause trouble, they can do such quite well from the lowest positions on the totem pole.

Medhue Simoni wrote: There is no doubt that I'm an idealist, but this doesn't mean that I'm without reasoning. You could consider me the biggest anti corporation person, many people have ever met. I see the things they engage in and it sickens me. This is why I believe in the free market, as it seems to me to be the only way to reign them in. I believe in the Free Market because it is intellectually honest and without coersion. It has faith in people and what each can achieve by their own brilliant acts. It makes no sense to believe in the government, as it is only a group of individuals. Governments are force, and i do not believe it is right for any1 or any 1 group to be able to dictate to another what is right or wrong. All people can come to common notions of what is right and wrong, as it is in every1's interest to do so. Everything else is coersion. When people are left to solve their problems on their own, the end results will almost always be that which does not produce harm to either. Each party is forced to come to a common understanding. It is only government that can produce wars that will kill millions, or allow 1 side to stand firm, to the point of mass deaths. Oh, you bet I'm an idealist, and hopefully I will stay this way until the day I die. Now we are getting somewhere Med. we are agreed in some ways in terms of corporate greed .... Where we differ comes from our own experiences and how we see the world. You believe that people can create and sustain such a market, this means you believe people to be "good" at their base. I don't. Humans as a whole are capable of atrocities which simply cannot be laid solely at the feet of corporations or governments ... or even institutions of faith! All of thse have a common element: People. Humans are truly no different than the other animals on this planet when you delve into our base natures. We only cooperate because it behooves us to do so to survive. The instant we feel that such cooperation is no longer required ... we shift to our basest natures and seek only to better our own, individual positions. There is a difference between believing in government and believing that government is a required evil. I am the latter Med. I don't like the way governments are so easily corrupted but let's be real here for a moment hmm? We've seen throughout human history what happens when government is removed from the equation ... it is not pretty. Like I said ... in a perfect world, your ideals would work very well. We don't live in a perfect world. Humanity has a lot of growing to do before we have even a hope of meeting the ideals you have. At our present rate? I put that time around the day Sol consumes the Earth.

Medhue Simoni wrote: You can choose to dismiss whatever you want. It will be at your own demise. Thanks for tossing up the lemon of history, as it is quite easy to hit this 1 out of the park. History does not have large examples of Free Markets. The closest thing to large Free Markets in history, would be 2 of the most successful empires the world has ever seen. Those would be the Roman empire and the USA. In both situations, they started out with mostly Free Markets. Over time, both empires got more and more socialist. At the time of the Roman Empires collapse, they were an extreme example of the corruptions of socialism. The same thing is happening here in the States, and as we creep closer and closer to total socialism, we can see better and better the collapse coming. The only thing that can save the world, has nothing to do with forcing any1 to do anything, which always leads to wars and death. The free exchange between people, which is the concept of Free Markets, without any top down coersion, is the only way to save the world from the tyrants that think they can control the masses. Hmm, and you use the same tactic I have always seen in those whose starry eyed idealism blind them to everything else: Any time someone brings human history into the equation where it concerns human nature, you try to bat it away with the lack of truly free markets for comparison in said history. It doesn't work that way Med. You want to "hit it out of the park"? You can do so by sticking to human nature and finding ways to prove that humans are "good" at their core. Going off on a tangent like you did just serves to weaken your position and enforces the notion that you're an idealist. I don't like corporatins much myself, nor do I like the level of corruption within any government that is required to allow these corporations to have their way. I do not - however - delude myself into thinking that some mythical "free market" (which, as described can only exist in a perfect world) would solve these problems.

Medhue Simoni wrote: It is a broken record, as what you say is continuously propagated by the mass media, by governments, and by socialists, in exactly the same terms. Again, these theories have not evidence to back them up, only emotion driven propaganda. I've heard it all a million times, hence it's a broken record. It is not impossible. You are making assumptions about human nature. These are not proven in any way, shape or form. Actually, to some1 thinking long term, which most people do, it is illogical to screw over your fellow man. Like bad karma, it can not benefit you in the long run. It can only benefit you if you have the protection of governments and their tools to manipulate the masses. In a completely free market, more often than not, all exchanges happen for the benefit of both parties. If this were not true, then the exchange would never happen. There are occassions when 1 party is not as knowledgable as the other, or 1 party tricks the other, and 1 person will lose out. In this case, the 1 that engages in this practice will, over time, lose customers as more and more customers get screwed and pass on their experiences to others. Right, you've heard it all before ... You want evidence to back up my assertion concerning human nature? I present to you ... the entirety of human history. A history filled with conflict, greed and showing both the best and worst of Humanity - and even that history is skewed to make some look as if they were "good" when in reality they were anything but. In the future you may want to consider that any time anyone uses the term "propaganda" when forming an argument on any topic ... I just laugh and dismiss them from that point forward. I have no time for conspiracy theories, starry eyed idealism or naïveté in any argument or debate. If you'd like to be intellectually honest ... you won't use such a term.

Medhue Simoni wrote: Ok, you wanna do the whole broken record thing. Great! See, there is actually evidence to back up what I say, and it's all around us. What you are talking about doesn't have anything to do with free markets or capitalism. What you are talking about is completely illogical. Why? Because all of those things you describe have never come about in a completely free market, or even a relatively free market. On the contrary, Socialism has been tried and tried and tried, in many, many different forms, yet people continue to idolize those principles. The whole concept is illogical in so many ways, beside it only being able to exist by using force. It was Einstein that said, something to the affect, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result". A Free Market is not government giving hand outs to their favorite corporations. A Free Market is not government restricting access into a market with licenses. A Free Market is not patents handed out to corporations to restrict competition. A Free Market is not government giving a limited group a license to broadcast and advertise for the mega corporations. A Free Market is not governments taking over whole market sectors. A Free Market has no regulations. A Free Market has nothing to do with tarrifs, or taxes. A Free Market is not people forming unions, which are immune from the crimes they commit. A Free Market is not a lawless nation with no courts for those that have been wronged, as all the basic common law practices still apply. This could go on and on but what I'm trying to say is that no current government engages in Free Market principles. The crazy part is, you admit, at the end, that there are no Free Markets, but your whole comment before that implies that there are Free Markets and they have all these problems. So, which is it? You want to blame things on the Free Market or Capitalism, and then you admit there have never been any true forms. Read the title of this forum thread. It's an appeal to intellectual honesty, which you don't seem to understand the concept. You contradict yourself and can't even see it. Now, I used SL as the closest thing to a Free Market that most of us have ever seen in modern times. It is not a perfect Free Market, as there is no court system, or use of common law principles. That said, the best protection of the consumer is the consumer educating themselves, and not relying on corrupt governments to protect them. We do see this in SL, and people learn quickly. Word of mouth and free speech allows consumers to tell each other who are the bad merchants. When governments engage in regulations, those regulations are generally created by the large corporations to further restrict access into their markets, and the government promotes these regulations as consumer protections. LL even restricts free speech, here in the forums, which I think is totally wrong. I'm all for people calling out merchants that engage in bad business practices, and letting the public decide on their own. As a large merchant in SL, I have no fear of being called out, as I don't engage in such activities. If I were to be falsely accused, I'd have thousands of friends and customers that would rush to my defense, and the accuser would quickly be seen as the fraud they are. Again, I did not say that SL was the perfect example, but it still survives today under this Free Market system, no matter how much LL messes things up. If not for the vast mistakes that LL has made, SL would still be thriving and growing. Excuse me? There's no "broken record" here Medhue. I'm speaking from a position of fact and from a position of reality. There has never been a truly free market, nor has there ever been one which operates as your idealogical variation is described. You are blind and/or naive if you truly believe what yiu're saying here - you want to invoke the title of this thread? Fine. Go back, reread and try to actually comprehend what is being said: A truly free market of the sort you believe in is impossible. Human nature precludes it. There is no contradiction - I showed you why it cannot exist. I even showed you why your use of Second Life is a flawed example. I'm only going to say this once: Starry eyed idealism is not "Intellectual Honesty".

Medhue Simoni wrote: JeanneAnne, I'm guessing, is a total socialist. What she fails to see is that SL could be hailed as the only "Free Market" in the world. It shows just how successful a truely "free market" can be. All of the failures of SL are directly attributed to the failures of LL, and have nothing at all to do with the players in the market. If LL adopted a more "free market" attitude within it's own company, it would likely be a huge success. If not for the constant socialist propaganda inflicted onto us on a daily basis, socialism would be dead and be seen as the real parasite that it is. Socialism has nothing at all to do with freedom. This is easily proven as the only way to implement it, is to use force. Without the threat of force, socialist policies would never be excepted by the masses. On the other hand, free markets and capitalism prove themselves to be the core of freedom. No1 has to force any1 to do anything. Everything gets allocated correctly, and price correctly, as the market and the free will of people send all the proper signals to allocate things properly. As soon as you take away the market from the equations, which is socialism, then you get corruption and mismanagement. None of the big players have any market forces from restricting it, leading to monopolies. Whether you live in a socialist society or a capitalist society, the market forces will always be at work. Market forces are akin to Karma. You can't control it, much like a raging river. To try and act against it will only cause more harm than good. It is better to flow with that raging river and you see all the benefits that the river can bring. When socialism is implemented in any market, you will see shortages, as all the incentives to produce in that market have been taken away. In a totally free market and capitalistic market, there will always be abundance, as long as peolpe are willing to pay the price. Any shortage in a capitalistic market presents itself with high prices. Every1 can see this. The result is that people clamour to get into that market, eventually eliminating the shortage and lowering the price. I'm sorry but, just as Jeanne's assertions do not hold much water, neither do yours. The Human proclivity for Violence, Greed, Decadence and all manner of negative segments of our very nature prohibits the existence of a truly "free" market. When you remove all the checks and balances to allow the market to do as it wishes ... it will do just that. Larger corporations WILL form trusts and monopolies. They WILL do anything they can to crush their comeptition. They WILL seek to increase their profits at the expense of everything else. This holds true for every market sector out there, just look at the banking industry, real estate, software, hardware, media ... When unckecked, the market is overwhelmed with those who will stop at nothing for their own personal gain. This is even evident among the users of Second Life. People will lie, they will find ways to 'cheat', they will use software to 'steal' .... No - the "free market" you're describing is not only an impossibility ... it may as well be a myth.

I see this thread has been busy since the last time I saw it ... I also see that the insane idea of the users getting Second Life in any manner was still being discussed as if it had any merit whatsoever or was founded on any resemblance of reality. Reality is this: You don't pay anyting at all - you don't even have the sort of "stake" in the software as those who have sat down and tried to fix the bugs in it. Content creators? Their "stake" is much different as well. They used the software to bring their creative visions to life and have to pray that Linden Lab won't ever pull the plug. The only stake in Second Life that has any real meaning to the Board is a monetary stake. And not even Premium Members pitch in enough to be much more than a blip on their radar. Single Sim Renters (no, you don't own the sim - you rent it from Linden Lab) register as the tiniest specks of dust on their screen. Huge Estate renter? They certainly register. Jeanne - you have o stake in Second Life that the Board cares about.

Qie Niangao wrote: Suffrage is not something anybody "went through" -- it's something people fought for and gained. Otherwise it seems confused with "suffering" which has nothing to do with the word. (I realize that's going to sound pedantic to some. Tough. My forest. Mine!) To clarify: By "went through" I was speaking of the movement itself.

Winter Tenenbaum wrote: Im also gonna say tbis.... It's a real shame that so many women wen through womems sufferage so that ppl like this could set back the womens movement 100 years. Good job! Best of luck. Actually it's a pity that they went through it so that the modern crop could pretend to be outraged by things that don't affect them one bit (and trust me, those that get so easily offended by what other women do online or in their real lives really aren't affected by it). You've got your thoughts and opinions - that's wonderful! Just remember that they're just that: Your thoughts and your opinions - The reality of the situation is this, no one is doing anything illegal by participating in this sort of role play while using Second Life. They're not doing anything illegal by participating in the (far safer) role play variations in real life either. Some people still retain the ability to seperate fantasy and reality. The only thing that should (and presently, rightfuly does) concern people is when it ceases to be fantasy. Actual abuse and violence against either gender is a very bad thing and should indeed be punished under the law. For everything else, people should mind their own business.

Winter Tenenbaum wrote: Don't wanna see YOUR forest through MY trees. I did not push my beliefs on anyone. With regard to Noble he was the pushy one. There is NOTHING normal about that fantasy. Sorry... Repeating it over and over again does not make your opinion a fact - sorry.

Alpha Sorting - also called Transparency Sorting. It is exactly what is says on the label.

Knowl Paine wrote: Some indicators are: Do you own the Land? Were you Invited to visit that Parcel? Is the parcel Linden Land? Does the word Public appear in the Land description? Is there signage advertising Public space? Is the Land directly adjacent to a Linden Welcome area? Is the Land a Resident extension, of a Linden road, rail, or waterway, built in the likeness of the Linden thoroughfare, in so that, the average Resident might believe they are in a Public area? If the answer is No; the Land should be considered as Private property. This. I myself have two different parcels, one that came with my Premium Account and the other that I and my group of friends rent. Both are invite/access list/group only parcels. They were set up this way for various reasons, including the desire to have places where the bulk of SL's Userbase simply cannot appear out of nowhere and interrupt any private meetings or otherwise impose on instances wherein my friends and I simply wish to be left alone. Heck, both parcels even have the proper options enabled/disabled to restrict all text, general sound, voice and even visibility to the parcels themselves. If either parcel were on Mainland, I'd leave them fairly open but apply the same content restrictions (and I have done so in the past) as in such a circumstance I do not mind respectful visitors. Not all visitors are such however, hence the further restrictions on the two remaining parcels as well as having all possible rezzed content set to group access only. It seems some fail to understand that Second Life is what those who use it wish to make of it and that we are quite free to deny others the use of our content. I don't begrudge those who wish to openly share everything they have ... and I expect the same in return when I choose not to share what I have.

JeanneAnne wrote: Solar Legion wrote: Theresa Tennyson wrote: JeanneAnne wrote: once again .. why should selfishness be respected? i will respect that which deserves respect but to my mind pointless selfishness & exclusivity deserve NO respect Jeanne I think most people here agree with you about selfishness, JeanneAnne - that's why so few people respect you. I got a laugh out of this. The simple fact she does not seem to be able to grasp is that Linden Lab allows security orbs and they themselves coded in the ban lines. Further, she has failed to realize that one can "steal" content - it happens each and every day. The difference is that the original remains right where it was. Content creators have every right to decide how their content is used - our personal opinions have no effect on this. of course you got a laugh out of her sarcasm .. & of course you want me to know that you support the selfishness being displayed by those w/ vested monetary interests in perpetuating selfishness in sl .. its the dogpile mentality meant to intimidate the dissenting voice .. its all to typical & only to be expected of course LL allows insecurity orbs & ban lines .. as capitalists they pander to the worst of human nature .. they support selfishness so long as it facilitiates weatlh transfer from the pockets of selfish people who wallow in selfish exclusivity to their own .. duh well .. if stuff can be stolen that doesnt mean I steal anything .. so why should i be in any way disadvantaged over the selfishness of others .. of either the thieves or of those who seek to protect their stuff from theft? why should i be caught up in the arms race between horders & theives? if content creators have every right to decide how their content is used then i have every right to regard their cartoons as worthless .. & to laugh at them when they become irate over copybotting & IP theft Jeanne Nice to see that you're incapable of basic reasoning and logic. Welcome to life - don't like it, too bad.

Theresa Tennyson wrote: JeanneAnne wrote: once again .. why should selfishness be respected? i will respect that which deserves respect but to my mind pointless selfishness & exclusivity deserve NO respect Jeanne I think most people here agree with you about selfishness, JeanneAnne - that's why so few people respect you. I got a laugh out of this. The simple fact she does not seem to be able to grasp is that Linden Lab allows security orbs and they themselves coded in the ban lines. Further, she has failed to realize that one can "steal" content - it happens each and every day. The difference is that the original remains right where it was. Content creators have every right to decide how their content is used - our personal opinions have no effect on this.

Funny, someone suggesting I contribute more "substance" whom has an account which could be barely a year or two old, who espouses ideals and dreams as if they were facts and who espouses a view of a reality which simply does not exist .... I've been here a heck of a lot longer, I've watched this program grow. I've contributed in the forum system since before this oh so lovely variation (note the sarcasm) was coded and on top of that, I have quite a bit of experience when it comes togames/software being bought out by other companies. I actually pay attention to the real world. You won't be taing anythiong - you own no corporation, you do not have the funds sufficient to make Linden Lab an offer nor would they ever do as you 'dream' they would. It's that simple. Yep - reality sucks. Welcome to the real world - you don't have the option of taking it or not, you live in it. The reality is this: No corporation is going to have the same leniency or tolerance for what goes on in Second Life or for the crap the users pull - least of all users like you. This is, quite simply, fact. A game maker gets hold of SL? It becomes nothing more than a true game. Microsoft, Adobe, or any other standard software company gets hold of it? Say bye-bye to free accounts, say bye bye to ban appeals, say bye bye to any semblance of due process ... Oh - and say bye bye to being able to have the software without an actual liscence.having been purchased smewhere. If you do not like how Linden Lab operates, go and make your own product. It's that simple. There is only so much the users can change.

Do yourself a favor - dpn't assume anything about me in the future. I dream. I do not - however - mistake those dreams for reality nor do I present these dreams as if they would actually happen. And so you're aware, if any present software or game development company got hold of Second Life, what many have actually enjoyed of it will end rather quickly. Take it from someone who has been here for a few years and has watched far less ambitious projects be destroyed by corporate buyouts. You think things cannot be any worse than they are? They can always be worse - that's reality.

Nope - I'd rather live in reality where any such "tier stricke" would cause an actual corporation to buy them out. Keep dreaming.

Linden Lab is a private company - unless you'd like to form your own corporation, amass a small fortune and outright buy out their board of directors ... Then the notion of general users "taking over" the company and their software is nothing more than an idle pipe dream, thought up by those who actually believe that customers have a real say in the direction of private software companies.

-agrees-

I once entertained the idea of making an SLU account ... Then I decided to go make a Second Citizen account and stayed with them until they closed. Then I made an account with SC's reincarnation. I won't touch SLU - I don't like nor trust the management.

I'll be blunt and brief here: Enough is enough. Linden Lab is not going to listen to you, they're not ging to enact any of the "security precautions" you believe Second Life should have, they are only ging to do what is legally required of them to remain in business - be it here or in the many countries they have customers in. No, you don't have any credibility - not when you accuse anyone who disagrees with you of possibly being a griefer or enabling griefers. That tactic alone makes your thoughts and opinions on the matter utterly worthless. You don't like the way Linden Lab operates? Cancel your account. All you're doing here is making yourself look like a foolish and spoiled prat.

I'd much rather they make it so that groups can be micro managed with more roles and the ability to make sub groups. That would solve the problems right there. Caps lock - lose it, all it does is turn people away and make users far less likely to tolerate you.

To assume that those using any means to keep your nose where it belongs are doing so for foul reasons is the absolute height of paranoia. I'll use a very adult example here: I have no problem with people watching me and my partner engaging in more intimate play where such things are within the purview of the setting. On any server space I rent or own however? I get to decide who comes and who goes. I get to decide who has the potential to visit and catch us in the middle of a bit of playtime. And the whole while, nothing foul is going on behind that "firewall" which keeps you in your place.

I hearby propose the following addition(s) to the ToS: The following instances should result in a ban, followed by the confiscation of one's PC and the removal of their ability to access the Internet in general Failure to tell the difference between real violence (of any kind) and a fantasy world Failure to understand that one can simply teleport out of a parcel or sim wherein one finds content which they object to Failure to tell when one has been pushing their agenda concering violence against a single gender (which is in itself sexist) quite a bit too far. Starting to see a patern? Don't like that sort of content - don't go to those sims. Can't control yourself/think it's your duty to combat it? Cancel your account.

What is your excuse for falling for a marketing ploy? Hey - MMOs and other bits of software that give a visual representation of a landscape still call what is generated on the screen "land". How about you try a bit harder hmm?