Dillon Levenque

Sylvia Tamalyn wrote: P.S. You and Dillon are such vultures!! First boots, now swords?? Have you no shame? Objection, your Honor. That question has been asked and answered. For those of you keeping score at home, the answer was "None whatever."

Scylla Rhiadra wrote: Well, it goes without saying that the violence isn't "real," Dillon. I don't think people want to avoid representations of violence (please note the qualifier "representations") because they think "OMG SOMEONE IS BEING HURT!" They want to avoid them because the imagery is disturbing or upsetting. Use the analogy of a slasher flick. We all "know" that the blood and gore aren't real, but that doesn't prevent people from being horrified, frightened, disgusted, etc. It signifies something that is upsetting, and what we feel from it is a sort of version of that same emotion, even though, again, we are aware that it is an illusion. If such imagery didn't affect us, we wouldn't bother going to slasher flicks at all -- or engaging in violent role play. For some, the visceral emotional response is part of the turn on, and for some, it is merely upsetting. It's the imagery that does this: it has nothing to do with whether it is "real" or not. And, again, I'll ask, because I'm still not getting an answer: what is wrong with offering people choice? Of letting them decide what kind of environment they want to be in, and what sorts of imagery or behaviour they want to be exposed to? Why are we so anxious to impose our own attitudes on others? It's all very well to say "You shouldn't be upset by this; I'm not!" But they are. Who are we to tell them they are wrong, and to insist that they be exposed to this stuff if they don't want to be? As for how easy it is to avoid stuff in SL . . . well, yes, it is generally pretty easy now, because of the classification system. In the "old days," when "mature" covered a very wide range of things, that really wasn't the case. Some sims, mostly those that specialized in hardcore sexual violence like the Crack Den, had notecards and warnings at their TP hubs, but in the vast majority of cases, just wandering through a mainland mature sim made it quite likely you'd find something violent or explicitly sexual -- without any warning at all. If things are better now, it's because of the classification system. Okay. We have no argument on the question of whether what anyone likes or dislikes is any of our damn business. For me that only matters if they start telling me about it in a way that indicates I should change what I'm doing to accomodate them. As for avoiding places you don't want to see; I've not been here as long as you have but I was here before Zindra. I ran across places I wished I hadn't but it didn't really bother me. Doesn't bother me now and it does still happen. I just keep going or leave. I do like the idea of having a place where that can't happen, for those who want to enjoy all of what SL can be without ever have to worry about seeing things they don't like. I just don't see any reason to spend time regulating what can or can not be done everywhere else.

Innula Zenovka wrote: Dillon Levenque wrote: I was wondering about that and still am. I looked at a piece of land for sale in a G (as in PG) sim and having read the current ratings wasn't sure. Did that mean I couldn't have a sexbed in my house? The owner never answered probably because he or she didn't know either. It says one can not be 'located' without any further descpription. What's not to understand about "sex beds may not be located in G-rated regions"? If your house is located in a G-rated region then it has to follow that anything inside the house is located there, too, doesn't it? It does follow that if I had a house in a G location, "anything inside the house is located there, too.". It just seemed so massively stupid to include objects in private residences within that clause that I questioned it. I've still not heard a definitive answer.

Scylla Rhiadra wrote: So, assuming that happened . . . would you then take issue with those who get turned off by violence? Is it equally "silly" to be nauseated or disturbed by animations depicting gutting, garroting, throat-slitting, or rape? Should we all just take a deep breath and realize that these too are just part of the "human experience"? I realize you weren't talking to me but that's never stopped me before. For one thing, nobody really gets physically injured here, anymore than anyone gets physically inseminated. Garroting and throat-slitting in SL are not all that far removed from children saying, "Bang! You're dead!". I know, we're not talking about children. I also know there are probably some who get some kind of thrill from that behavior. But in fact there is no physical harm. Children at play know, and I do mean KNOW, that the kid they are talking to isn't really dead. I believe the same is true of residents of SL. I do not think equating sexual or combative behaviors in Second Life with Real Life is a valid argument. Avoiding places and people that do things you don't like is much easier in SL than in RL. Person to person relationships, for me at least, are a different story. Hurtful behavior of any kind, the same.

Deltango Vale wrote: We all agree to respect other people's religion and politics, but mention sexuality and all hell breaks loose as if it were a serious topic for 'community control'. We wouldn't dream of partitioning SL based on race, religion, politics or gender, yet here we are, partitioning SL based on sexual preferences. Personally, I would eliminate all the maturity levels, but I am quite willing to have a PG/Disney continent for those who want the seclusion and conformity of a zero-sexuality environment. I offer the analogy of a lighting dimmer switch: 'off' or a wide range of 'on'. In my opinion a PG/Disney continent would represent the 'sexuality off' setting; the rest of SL would represent the wide range of 'sexuality on'. Perhaps more importantly, people need to get a passport and see the world. I realize SL caters specifically to those who can't easily travel, but at least read books about the world, discover the huge differences in national customs and social norms, learn about human sensuality in different cultures and sub-cultures, go to some clubs! The world is a marvelous place, rich in diversity. That people come to SL from all over the world makes it imperative we avoid narrow thinking and crude sexual stereotypes. If SL is to survive, we must stop being dogmatic about personal tastes and preferences. Deltango, I will argue with you a little about some of this. You and I have talked here and elsewhere about how SL's tolerance has made being here such a wonderful experience for me personally. I don't get anything from the 'Rating' rules that defines sexuality or even discusses same. The rules are, as I understand it, merely in place to describe the behavior permitted in certain places. Granted, that can lead to absurdities such as ones mentioned earlier in which galleries were reported for showing pictures of unclothed humans. I would hope that doesn't happen often and when it does is quickly corrected. But even that has to do with behavior or at least graphical representation. It has nothing to do with sexuality. I purely love that I can go anywhere and carry on a conversation with anyone here without my particular sexual preferences being relevant to the discussion. I still disagree with anything that prohibits any behavior done in private, even given the fact that privacy in Second Life doesn't really exist. If something is happening behind walls it's private, SL or RL. The fact that someone can 'cam' through the wall and watch is the problem of that someone. This of course assumes that the wall doesn't have a big sign reading "Hot All Nude Sexshow Inside!". I do agree that there should be only two ratings. PG or Not PG. That should be enough. I can understand not being pleased at discovering that a brothel is opening next door to your lovely cottage. I'd not dig that myself (although when a Ladies Only dance club was being built across the way I must admit I looked forward to rounding up strays). But stuff like that is pretty easily controlled by picking your spots. Live on an estate with a covenant. Rent. The Mainland should be open. Your last paragraph I agree with completely. Learn. Grow.

Marigold Devin wrote: ... to be continued? I know you guys have a lot on your minds right now, but if it's not too much trouble? When it's all sorted out? Could I have the sword?

Ceka Cianci wrote: actually blondin was speaking with residents..but it was residents that were merchants.. these are the ones directly affected by the changes and ratings. in other words private residents and their private homes don't fall under the ratings defenitions. nothing has changed from what it was before for private residents.. we could never be nude or have sex on General lands..it's always been disney.. it's not speaking about private residents and things they do in their private homes..because private residents don't advertise.. I was wondering about that and still am. I looked at a piece of land for sale in a G (as in PG) sim and having read the current ratings wasn't sure. Did that mean I couldn't have a sexbed in my house? The owner never answered probably because he or she didn't know either. It says one can not be 'located' without any further descpription. A typical (if there is such a thing) American residential area in RL is pretty much PG. Anything out of line would draw fire from somebody. But I am almost positive that behind closed doors sexual intercourse takes place in those areas. I do realize that 'camming' in SL is a lot easier and less expensive than doing so in RL, but it seems to me that a person should be allowed some discretion in his or her private residence no matter where it's located. I even read a quote from a Linden on one of the wiki's saying in essence that 'we won't be looking at what people are doing in their houses'. Is that official? I'd like to see those definitions 'unfuzzed' at least to that degree.

Stella, I don't have any suggestions (but it looks like several other people had good ideas). I was just writing to say what a giggle I got out of your signature! It looks as if it might have been written for a certain friend Sylvia and I have in common. I've copied it to show her later. /me waves to Sylvia

Charolotte Caxton wrote: Cube proliferation continues. Wow.

Pussycat Catnap wrote: Third useful tip. If your land is rectangular, chances are there there is a megaprim out there of its exact size. For most 512 lots that is 16x32. For most 1024 lots that is 32x32. Go to megaprim.sl and get the right sized megaprim. Rez it at ground - make sure its the exact location of your lot (turn on view property lines to be sure, and edit it to a whole number value on x and y). Now move it to your skybox and check to see that you can move it up and down the skybox and your skybox never goes outside of it. FINALLY - move it to some hidden height nobody else anywhere near you uses. Landmark that location. That's your new secret build platform, and also prim to check anything you rez in future to make sure its inside your land. Thank you, that is a GREAT idea. When I was doing that I made posts at all four corners of my plot and then moved the array to my Z, but having an actual platform would be way easier.

Ola!, Helena. I'm Dillon in California. @Monti—I love that Ting Tings song; that girl's attitude just makes me smile.

Jarrod1 wrote: Hey everyone! I just wanted to write up a little note on friendships/meeting people, especially for new people. Now I am still fairly new myself and the one thing I love about SL is the many different types of people you can meet here. There are people from all walks of life here and backgrounds and I believe that's what makes Second Life so great. You never know who you will meet or see. I truly believe for every one person that is not friendly there are ten others that will be. One key thing to remember, everyone as I said before is different and have different tastes, so I also urge don't be judgemental, life is too short for that. I have really enjoyed SL and continue to do so and remember HAVE FUN most of all that's what its all about. Get out there say hi start conversations and I guarantee it will lead to better and bigger things. Afterall that person you say "Hi" to may just end up being a friend for life! Thanks have a great day! :matte-motes-sunglasses-2: :-D. Very nice post. That's exactly how I approached SL and it has been and continues to be a wonderful experience for me. I see you're just starting your third month so if you're at all like I was at that 'age' you've gotten a pretty good handle on the basics and can really start getting into things in a big way. Have fun. And 'Hi', by the way. :smileyhappy:

Void Singer wrote: so disappointing, I never get these.... I missed out on the last two rounds... I must be unloved I did not get one either. It's a hollow feeling, isn't it?

I now think I see the path of redemption. Ms. Kyrie's selfless devotion to the cause has opened my eyes. I visit the gift shop outside the shrine and purchase a St. Brokoli tee, pull on my Bax boots, and return to the shrine. Tragically I have not as yet been blessed with the gift of Prims so I lack the beauty of Ms. Kyrie's skirt; I had to make do with whatever I could find in the closet. I can only hope the hallowed one will appreciate my devotion and allow me to join her flock. Or maybe that she will persuade Keli to part with her boots; I only have them in black.

Dresden Ceriano wrote: Will this one do? ...Dres Yes! Thanks, Dres

Sylvia Tamalyn wrote: I leave this thread for one day, and come back to find my friends debating over who gets my inventory? No wonder Our Lady fled for a spell...her (admittedly soundless) message is falling on deaf ears! P.S. Back off from my Bax boots! I'll spend eternity in Maddy's infernal flame before I give them up! Yeah, I'm guessing that's gonna happen with or without you putting aside the Bax boots. It just seems to keep on happening.

Venus Petrov wrote: I am with you on this one, Suella. The OP and Wili are business partners. OP: You are the 'search engine optimization' expert (according to your profile), do a search on 'prim babies' and you will see a whole s-load of things returned you can then check out. /me eyerolls :smileyvery-happy: I really need to find one of those cool falling down laughing animated emoticons; that reply earned it. And not to derail or anything, but your quantity terminology just confirms what I've believed for a long time: the s-load is the largest quantity possible, as it has no plural version. There exists only the s-load and the 'whole s-load'.

Penny Patton wrote: Peggy Paperdoll wrote: So you are advocating that LL discontinue user created content, delete all that's been user created and supply professionally created content in it's place? That's about the only way you will get past that "Second Life is Ugly". You might be able to put into place some basic skills requirement for content creators......Blue Mars tried that and look where they are now. That would also drive most of the present residents away. Then it's starting over with a brand new demographic. It might work. And LL might make billions if they did it (doubtful, but it's possible). And Second Life would then fall from unique to mundane............another run of the mill virtual game/world/social network. It wouldn't be SL whatever it would be. White washing it will "new user experience" doesn't change what it would mean to the platform. No, that's not what I advocate at all, and also you are very wrong that such a course of action would be the only way to make SL look good for marketing materials and new residents. Peggy Paperdoll wrote: --------------------------------------------------------------- Second Life is UGLY. It doesn't have to be. Actually, there's some gorgous sims in SL which illustrate just how good SL can look in the hands of an experienced artist. But...most SL users are not experienced artists, and obviously LL has no experienced artists in a position to affect starter avatars, the new user orientation, or overseeing the face LL puts forward when marketing SL. As a result, to the public at large SL like this. Ugly, maleformed avatars in blocky, poorly textured environments. The images LL uses to market SL are often not much better. This is only reinforced by the new user experience, where users are given a selection of t-rex armed, pin headed avatars to choose from before diving into confusing, fullbright orientation areas that don't really teach them anything and then drop them in one of a selection of hand-picked, but usually not very well made, locations. Getting people to join SL only backfires if you drive them away with an awful first impression. Before LL throws money away on making that bad first impression they need to completely revamp the new user experience. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The first point in a "report" such as you posted is the tone setter for the entire report.............that first point is discribing something other than what SL is. It says a great deal about the reporters knowledge of the subject. When someone says SL is ugly and LL should............*fill in the blank* they just demonstrated that they know nothing about Second Life. If you want SL to become something completely different then just say so.......don't try to impress by showing ignorance. Making comments like the above, which are directly contradicted by the contents of what you're replying to, make it seem like you didn't actually read before commenting. The bolded, underlined comments that "SL is ugly" and "there's nothing to do in SL" are common complaints, not my own judgement of what SL is. In fact, if you read the very next sentence you'd realize that. The very next sentence is, "It doesn't have to be". Perhaps it was not your intention to agree with the first sentence but the only conclusion to be drawn from the words as you wrote them is that you agree that Second Life is ugly (later you point out that some non-ugly places also exist) but doesn't have to be that way. All we need do is have fabulously talented graphic artists design every single thing we have. There are a great many of us who while we very much appreciate the work of gifted and hard-working users (there are some sims that are incredibly beautiful) we are also perfectly happy in more mundane surroundings as we explore, interact, and learn. I personally place much more emphasis on the social aspects of Second Life than the visual. As for those who say there's nothing to do (and I hear that on the Forums from time to time) Second Life will not lead you by the nose. It isn't a video game, where you start with an obvious task/situation/problem and progress from there. If you expect that you'll be disappointed. It is up to the user to find something interesting all on his or her own. To me and, I suspect, to Peggy P and to a lot of us in the 'niche' that is what makes it such a beautiful and rewarding place.

DQ Darwin wrote: @Sylvia: A warning be careful not to be deceived by those vixens that wish to profit by your spiritual enlightenment. As you can see I have been busy honing my building skills and have at this point been able to design and produce footwear suitable for pilgrimage. These desirable boots are both mod and copy which will allow you to colour them black or black as appropriate to their purpose. I would suggest any high quality boots or any footwear for that matter currently in your inventory be placed in my safe keeping pending a raffle were they can be purchased by me , sorry someone. The funds collected will be given to the first redhead I encounter. Be strong Sylvia be strong. Fiddle-dee-dee, Dee! I thought of it first! You (and Quinn) are just stealing my idea, one which was put forward with completely altruisitic and honest motives and was intended solely to aid in Sylvia's quest for enlightenment. I must admit those are lovely boots, though. Do you have them in black?

Hi everybody. Congratulations to all of you! I hardly ever post in here but I do like to stop in and read—100 pages is very cool :-). Loved your fireworks show on the 3rd, Hippie :smileyvery-happy:, but I never got on last night so I missed Dee's party :smileysad:.

Sylvia Tamalyn wrote: I think Our Lady is urging us to simplify...I couldn't help but notice that she is wearing freebie sandals, but I didn't realize the importance of this observation until you and the others suddenly started wearing plywood attire. i hope this doesn't mean I have to sacrifice my Bax boots. /me rummages through inventory in search of pink dotted dress she was blessed with when she joined SL I think you she wants you to prove your worthiness. Sacrifice, Give me—I mean, find a recipient who would be happy to get your Bax boots. I promise to shower you with compliments on the pink dress.

Quinn, having heard of the New Miracle, insists upon a visit. I reluctantly agree to join her but remain skeptical. Quinn has even taken the trouble to wear her devotional Mouseketeer hat. As I assume the lotus postition in the shrine I find that even I am drawn into the holiness. Truly there is something other-worldly happening here. Then I notice four letters scratched in the earth before her—YWFF. Is this a sign? Is it a devotional offering from another visitor? The Mystery deepens.

Jo Yardley wrote: I am SO going to ban every single one of you! Ignoring the rules in 1920s Berlin, the shock, the horror! Hehehehe, glad it all turned out well, no worries. All we care about is keeping our tenants and visitors happy so if nobody was around, its fine. Especially for such a nice story. Could you just change the slurl in your credits to http://slurl.com/secondlife/1920s Berlin/235/232/751 ? If you ever need Berlin again and want to do something totally against our rules and you want lots of 1920s people around, give me a call. We have strict rules on everything but are always willing to make exceptions. Thank you, Jo. Slurl has been edited. You may need to have a serious talk with your police department about this; I think someone was sleeping on the job again. :smileywink:

I'm thinking it will only take a few more posts before this chick makes it to the Destination Guide. I have someplace I have to be when I get inworld tonight but I defnitely want to get a look as soon as I can.:smileyvery-happy:

Keli Kyrie wrote: Well thanks to the new web profiles I can confirm the sender is a real avatar sending out real notecards. I wonder how they learned so much considering they were born yesterday? That is pretty amazing, isn't it? Some people just seem to learn instantly!