Kelli May

Occasionally, through some kind of glitch, my inventory has shown me to be wearing two skins. Even so, I've never been able to see two appear on my avatar at once. It seems unlikely (but hey, weird stuff happens) that you'd be wearing two skins but your inventory would only show you wearing one. My guess is that you are wearing one skin, but the detail around the toes is poorly designed and is showing two sets of nails. Or you are wearing some other item (a sock layer?) that adds toenails but doesn't match well with the skin. So my advice... Check exactly what you are wearing ('worn items' tab or 'current outfit' folder, depending on viewer) to determine if you are wearing two skins or not. Check anything else that could be adding mismatched toenails (sock layers, objects attached to your feet). Wear a different skin to see what happens. You can't remove a skin, only replace it with another.

I'm surpised no-one's mentioned FabFree yet, especially the 30 days free list.. Not everything on the main blog is free, and many items are group gifts or part of hunts. It's still a great source for free or very low cost clothes, skin and hair.

More annoyingly, there are posts where someone asks a question then goes on to act negatively, even abusively, when a reply is other than a straight answer. Far too many cries of "I didn't ask your opinion, I asked for help" and " if you are not interested in being part of the research, you are free to not respond". Excuse me. If you don't want it discussed, don't bring it to the Discussion forum.

I'd throw in Fallen Gods as another suggestion, but I don't know how good the availability of appliers is.

Lumae's 'Fable' fantasy skins might be a good place to start. Not strictly demonic, but there's a range of colours including red, black and deep green. Lelutka head appliers and Maitreya compatible via Omega. Discontinued in-world but still on Marketplace. eta: these are actually still available at the in-world store, along with several new fantasy skins.

As far as I'm aware, it's for the copyright owner to file a notification, not anyone else. So if you see a DMCA breach for anyone else's copyrighted material, you inform the owner, and they take it to LL. I am not a laywer, but that's how it reads to me.

Pussycat Catnap wrote: Kelli May wrote: Rhonda Huntress wrote: Talon Brown wrote: I'd cash it out on the Exchange and spend that money on actual goods, not virtual ones. Would 200 bucks really make that much of a difference in your life? Are your finances so tight you don't have an entertainment budget? Does this code of not spending money on virtual items also go for other intangibles like TV, movies, concerts or even tips for the waitstaff? I know it sounds like I am trolling (and I am a little) but I am seriously curious about why people would have a hard time justifying purchases in SL. What makes it different than other types of entertainment that warrants such condescending disdain? Not sure if it's disdain, or just a different focus of priority. A budget is exactly that: an amount one has decided to spend. For example, my budget for SL is very, very low, I think its the cashing it out part. 50K lindens is a lot of lindens for use inside of SL. But once you cash it out, you might have enough money to cover bus faire for a single trip halfway across town...(OK, maybe a little more than that, maybe you could get home too... ). SL also has some dramatically different price ranges for different things. My comments about a fraction of Zindra plot of land are only partially in jest... And in fashion, you're maybe only get half the fatpacks for that money at most current fashion events. But if you manage to escape the temptation of those two kinds of things - 50KL might manage to stretch decently far. SL seems to be splitting more and more into two camps that see the cost of being in SL as something radically different from each other. I think you're underestimating how far $200 could (or sometimes, has to) stretch for some people. I thought my post made it clear just what else it would be useful for purely as part of my entertainment budget. I didn't even get into useful material things (a new graphics card, or some more RAM - I can't afford both but they'd both be handy) or important things (my car might need repairs soon - that could buy two front tyres, or maybe an exhaust). I'm not in danger of starving, freezing or going without fresh water any time soon, but I have to think every time I spend double-digit money.

Rhonda Huntress wrote: Different focus I can understand. "I''d cash it out on the Exchange and spend that money on ..." There is a lot that could be said after that. Buy books for example. Pay bills. Buy a nice shirt. There are a lot of things I would totally understand. What I don't understand is why immaterial things need to be brought up as if they were not worth spending real money on. But he did not even say he would buy any certain thing except to point out it would not be virtual. So I have to wonder, is this anti-virtual stance just SL or does it cover everything that is not "actual goods?" I agree, to some extent. A lot of the things I listed as alternative spends were virtual (e-books, streaming subscriptions) or 'somewhat virtual' (cinema tickets). Taking a strictly anti-virtual stance would be odd in today's world. But I still think there are plenty of people for whom spending $200 (or $600, taking the updated post) would be an out-of-SL priority.

Rhonda Huntress wrote: Talon Brown wrote: I'd cash it out on the Exchange and spend that money on actual goods, not virtual ones. Would 200 bucks really make that much of a difference in your life? Are your finances so tight you don't have an entertainment budget? Does this code of not spending money on virtual items also go for other intangibles like TV, movies, concerts or even tips for the waitstaff? I know it sounds like I am trolling (and I am a little) but I am seriously curious about why people would have a hard time justifying purchases in SL. What makes it different than other types of entertainment that warrants such condescending disdain? Not sure if it's disdain, or just a different focus of priority. A budget is exactly that: an amount one has decided to spend. For example, my budget for SL is very, very low, because I'm currently out of work. I have two premium accounts, but they almost pay for themselves (grandfathered stipend rate). When I was earning reasonable money, my budget included a little extra for a larger parcel and more purchases. How do I afford a PC, capable of running SL? Five years old and rapidly falling behind the curve, but bought when I could afford it. The broadband connection to run it? Part of my wider entertainment budget which gives me access to free streamed music & TV, not to mention the ability to search and apply for jobs. It remains true that for some people, myself included, SL is a cheap (or even free) part of the entertainment budget and a couple of hundred dollars (or the equivalent in sterling) would be really helpful outside SL. For me, it could be thirty or so e-books, a year-and-a-half of Netflix, a dozen or more cinema tickets, four or five meals out with friends, three cool gigs or some combination of the above. That could be far more entertaining than a bunch of nice stuff in SL.

Type 'Solarian' into Marketplace search.

Phil Deakins wrote: That's a lot of "what if"s, Kelli, so I'll add another. What if soxley's statement is just a wind-up, just for the fun of it? It's so utterly ridiuclous that it must be. If I only responded to the sensible posts I'd hardly get a chance to write anything on here.

soxley wrote: People shouldn't be banned from SL, full stop. If someone is annoying you, you already have the power to change things. Click mute. If you own land, ban them. If you don't, ask the landowner to ban them. I am all for reporting, and inworld residents dealing with griefers in their own way. What I am NOT for is LL permabanning people who have spent money on SL. It is lousy customer service and highly unethical. And before anyone asks, no, I haven't been banned. But this month, six years ago, many were banned in one fell swoop and it was an affront to justice that still haunts the virtual world to this day. Would it be okay for LL to ban people who hadn't spent any money? How much money would you have to spend to prevent LL from banning you? Is it a one-off thing or annual/monthly? If a large group of landowners signed up to a mutual banning policy, where a ban from location X meant a ban from many of the active places of SL, would that be okay? That's self-policing. Who gets to decide what's worth a ban? Whose evidence is judged valid for enacting a ban? What happens when something is happening on land where you can't contact the landowner? What if it's the landowner griefing you? What if that landowner is your neighbour, your landlord or the store owner who just ripped you off?

I don't know of a product that does it, but it's eminently doable with RLV. The changed() event can tell if you change regions, and llRequestSimulatorData can check the rating of a region. RLV can automatically swap outfits. I'd be surprised if someone hasn't already built something like this (I did, once upon a time, but it was for a user-base of one).

Interesting. My adblocker didn't trap it, although it reported catching up to 9 ads on different viewings of the page. I also got a totally different ad to you - a video ad for some kind of dodgy business venture which had the old 'sure you want to leave this page' hack. So far, my blocker has caught everything else on this page.

UKanDo just killed my interest by popping up a full-page video ad when I clicked on their Features page.

Tenly wrote: ... Apologies for not reading what you wrote correctly the first time. And thanks for your response. You're welcome, and the apology is appreciated. Anyone can make a mistake, but not everyone can own up to one as graciously.

Tenly wrote: Hi diskomo, thats how I got my bodies as well. I think that if the creators had a presence in the MP store it would help people find their products and help them be more successful. Matraiya and Eve/adam creator have been around a long time. I was only aware of them because Ive been around in SL about as long as they have been...actually longer if you count my original AV. So maybe they dont "sell" on the marketplace...but they could have a presence and upload ads like the realtors do. you buy the card fo NO lindens...usually has a description and always has a SURL. inworld search browser doesnt work well either. but Im not sure how to improve it. for example, when I searched for mesh bodies it was not adam/eve or lara's creators that popped up. And I dont think anything ever gets deleted as I have often ended up teleporting to what I think is a store inworld with something I want only to find abandoned land or some crazy adult place. Not that I mind crazy adult places...just not when Im searching for something else. I think how we change things IS to talk about them. And not, in taking a dump on people who are interesting in seeing things improve, as Kelli did. Im very interested in a way to block people the same way I do with other social media. However, my beloved SL is also about 10 years behind that most basic feature. You completely missed my point. I was criticising the terrible, terrible way that the marketplace is organised, by pointing out the ridiculous contradictions, gaps and overlaps in the categories and sub-categories. I'd love to see it improved.

Most of it is hidden and it's hardly the focus of the clip, but I'd call it a katana. It appears to have a moderate curve, rounded and decorated tsuba, and a blade length of around 2 feet (or 2 shaku, if you want to go technical). There is very little historical evidence for ninjato as a specific ninja weapon, but they are usually described as shorter and straighter than katana with a plain, square or disc-shaped tsuba. That said, katana would not be worn slung on the back, but edge-up through an obi. A ninjato (if such a thing existed) would be worn as the one in the video is. If you're asking for the particular model as sold in SL, I don't know. I have seen that one (it has a very characteristic animated ribbon on the pommel) but I've no idea who makes it.

Unfortunately not. With the exception of a few avatars made of regular prims or sculpts, you can't resize an avatar this way. The only way to resize the default avatar is via the shape editor, and there's no simple way to scale up or down while preserving proportions.

I may have missed it, but I'm amazed that Gene Replacement's name hasn't come up yet.

Bare Rose is the only store I know of which sells a large range of flat-chested mesh clothing, rigged and unrigged. They also have very reasonable prices. On the downside, they only sell a single size of each outfit (no standard sizing), and they've always sold as trans/no copy.

Jessica Lyon wrote: Ok, I've found a solution for you both Prokovy and SosiaalinenKokeilu. Since the experience will only work over firestorm land and you both do not want to be forced into the experience I've found the perfect solution. I have added both your names to the ban list from all estates, therefor you will never have to worry about the experience abusing you. I hope that resolves this matter sufficientlly for you both, and if there is anyone else concerned about us abusing you on our land please let me know before you come to our land. Have a great day everyone! Jessica Lyon Project Manager The Phoenix Firestorm Project, Inc Jessica Lyon drops mic, leaves stage. /me applauds.

bebejee wrote: This person Freya is so rude, I asked he politely via PM if she could help sort out a problem related to a tip she gave on using youtube full screen inworld and she said rather curtly, that she dosent give advice via PM, my message started with Hi Freya and I ended my message to her with kind regards she didnt even bother saying hi let alone address me by name and ended hers with yet a curt sounding bye.. Dont recall being offensive to you in the orb range thread unless you popped in there as a catty alt and got a befitting response. Other residents, even the most kind and helpful, are not here to pander to your needs. Check your entitlement.



Dillon Levenque wrote: I realize it's Saturday (Sunday, even, in half of Asia) but there's the chance here to make this the Friday thread of all time. Now that Steph and bebejee are engaged in conflict, we should all just step quietly away and let the two of them snipe on. An all-out, no slur spared steel-cage death match of arrogance, ignorance, and entitlement. We get to find out what happens when an irresistible moron meets an immovable tw*t.