Freya Mokusei

Rhonda Huntress wrote: I would rather not see them. Well, there goes my plans for the evening. Feelin' good about using that spoiler tag, though. Fun thread.

Duplicate post: https://community.secondlife.com/t5/Land/TOS-rules-local-chat-extenders/qaq-p/3014572 I definitely took the time to link you to the related policies in your original post, but have updated my reply to you in order to be more clear. Please don't create duplicates, instead Edit your original question or respond to an Answer using the Permalink button.

Perrie Juran wrote: Don't I have as much right to shop the MP without seeing that stuff as those who want to see it? I'm not sure that either activity is a . You probably don't have a right to not see things you don't want to see. You may have a right to control the content that comes down your tubes, depending on your local laws and the technical operations of your ISP. The EU is especially tough on this.I lack incentive - given the background of this specific thread - to go into detail on the process here, sorry (although I should add, the method I have in-mind is more suited to Search than MP). I don't feel it would help, for reasons elaborated upon in previous posts. But good luck. @Phil RE: Phil Deakins wrote: Catching up with [Maddy] can be hazardous to one's health I'm resolved to keep trying in any case! I like a challenge.

Rhonda Huntress wrote: Freya Mokusei wrote: Are the nipples in question attached to a person of feminine or masculine appearance? Yes, most of the time but not always. Hrm. I think I found one of these confusing objects (I'm proposing to call them UNO's, Undeterminable Nipple-y Objects). I'm not sure whether it would be allowed on a General sim - or whether it's male or female. So I'll spoiler it, just to be safe.  Sorry I can't help more, but rest assured I am persuing this research with fervour.

//UPDATED: I'll attempt to be more clear. It would still be up to you to determine if repeating chat is equivilent to "monitoring". I would again repeat that a user's consent is likely to be required if this meets the Disclosure wording, but I'm not sure in which way this consent would need to be given. There are typically two modes of consent collection used in online spaces:- Active Consent: The user must click or otherwise explicitly 'Agree' to consent to the method of data collection after being informed of its scope and the purpose behind the collection. This is the recommended method for most types of data collection. Passive Consent: The user accepts that by entering a space and receiving notification (e.g. by a sign), that the data collection will take place. This approach may be acceptable in situations where the data collected would be 'normal' or 'typical' for the types of services being provided. The short answer: It's probably your call as to which consent method you use, as long as you're not instructed otherwise. I'm just a resident like you, and have no authority with which to claim I know more than the official policies. --- Rhonda is right, the ToS does not have the scope to cover local chat. The elements that used to have since been moved to the Privacy Policy. What you may be referring to is Second Life's Community Standards, which state the following:- Community Standards - Disclosure: Remotely monitoring conversations in Second Life, posting conversation logs, or sharing conversation logs without the participants' consent are all prohibited. I'm not in a position to provide you with "conditions" - I'm not familiar with the device you mention and you are responsible to keep your own account in good standing. My reading is that, if your device "monitors conversations" and displays their content "remotely", then a user's consent would be required.

No useful information in your question for diagnosis, so here's some generic link for you that may have the info you need. SL Wiki - Getting Started with Voice

Are the nipples in question attached to a person of feminine or masculine appearance? Apparently it matters a great deal in determining acceptability. Female-looking nipples being visible in public will cause the end of civiilisation as we know it, I have it on good authority. SL's 5th birthday celebration had nipples-attached-to-feminine-bodies and they got kicked out. I do remember that, but dunno if that was a Maturity Ratings issue. [Links not posted, but available.]

Nope. Linden Dollar transaction logs only go back a month, as you've established. For older records, you'd be best keeping these logs yourself and downloading a copy every month.

Phil Deakins wrote: Yes, but what fun would here be if we couldn't whine, moan and beg? It's what makes life worthwhile. Agree! On the proviso that begging and moaning only occur as part of consensual kink. Ohgodit'sgonefullcircle. ETA Hahaha and Maddy's on the same page!

Phil Deakins wrote: I wouldn't know how to block specific images. I'm surprised it can be done. I once spent an hour with another SLer, wandering around blocking advertisements from a really funny web location that decided we should be exposed to >300 ads just to spend some time watching a page update. We did the same thing in-world at another location, removing ads and an eye-sore mall from a sim I regularly visit using Permanent Derender - for kicks and giggles and to prove the time spent was worthwhile to improve our view. Same-ish principle though Derender tackles the issue higher up in the process! It was incredible that there were nearly the same number in both places. Turned out a useful experiment, both looked so much cleaner afterward and my data consumption (and in-world, frame-rendering load) dropped dramatically. That was my personal choice and preference, affected precisely zero other users and required no whining or begging to rule-imposing authorities to accomplish.

Assuming the OP's in control of her computer and her connection to SL then she definitely can control the content that comes down the tubes. Blocking specific images or specific data-providers is no big deal and can be done in a few minutes. However, she also wants LL to do this for her (and everyone else), and also to use her offense-barometer (where - to be true to Carlotta - she sees kink as a sickness) as a guideline for SL as a whole. This is the second half of her problem, and the part that most people in this thread seem to take issue with. You're right that EchoRose doesn't address enough of the underlying issue, it's just the only option available besides leaving SL. There's no reasonable or realistic way to address her complaint in full - people with intent like this are not going to be happy knowing this content still exists, just now outside of their cone of vision. The desire to try and force reality into line with their specific wants is too strong. [Further: EHow - How to Deal with Authoritarian Personalities, Wiki - Authoritarian Personality]

You're naive! Just kidding, is ok to be unfamiliar. I have conducted a land trade in the past (for much less space), and they're doable. Let me spend a sec describing the risk, though. The Risks The typical method is to set your land for sale to a specific person for L$1, and you trust them to do the same. Obviously these two sales don't happen together, so it's VERY EASY for one of the parties to wander off with both parcels - fairly and almost free. All they have to do is get you to put your parcel up for sale first. Linden Lab will not investigate this scenario and you have no protection against it - your land will be gone for L$1. For this reason it's more trustworthy to deal in L$, exchanging land for a common token. It'd be much safer for you to sell your unwanted land and turn it into L$, in order to buy a larger parcel as a separate transaction. Remember in this event, to sell your existing land before making the new purchase, as tier is calculated based on the highest amount of land you've owned within a month - and getting stung for the total of 32,768m^2 would be painful. The Alternative It's not clear from your SLURLs whether or not these two parcels are on the same simulator, but I'll assume they're not. If you could find a 8192m^2 parcel for sale anywhere on one of the sims you own property on already, you could end up only trading (or more ideally, selling, for reasons described above) one of the parcels and getting a second 8192m^2 parcel closer by. The advantage of this is that owning two parcels on the same simulator will allow you the full Land Impact allowance, even if they're not connected side-by-side. Hope this helps and is clear.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Freya's gonna need a new needle for her irony meter, I can feel it. (I have some in my toolbox, Freya. I'll bring one to your incineration). I had to switch it off pre-emptively when I saw this thread appear - it's prone to exploding violently on this forum and scattering iron all over the place. My generalisation meter's been generally working (the only way it works), however.  It's no secret I've had my bones-to-pick with advertising and commercialism in SL, and I'm frequently regarded as being progressive to a fault in my social and political opinions and behaviour. I take issue with certain types of roleplayed behaviour in SL on a personal level (I wouldn't choose to participate, but have never gone out of my way to make beef), so this kind of thing could theoretically appeal. In absolute fairness, I could see half a dozen ways where, given a few changes to the terms being used, I'd be on entirely the other side of this argument (if I didn't have such a huge issue with organised authority, and if it didn't expect LL to "do something about this"). But applying poor understandings of sociology to bad research, and drawing logical causation out of thin air just because it feels right and then criticising your entire audience on-top of that mess - that's a sure-fire way to escape the risk of being taken seriously.

CarlottaAdagio wrote: SL is a melting pot for sick and kinky people. A lot of people who have psychological problems. These men are so poor in character. No sane and healthy person... Please remember the TOS : Intolerance Lol, irony. Bolded especially is your classification of sick and kinky being the same, which is super telling and suuuuper out-dated. Like, Victorian. Not surprising that you're only interested in responding to those who seem - at least by your reply to them - to reinforce your point of view, continues to prove that I picked the right approach. Am certain, for example, that Immy didn't agree. Would be interested to see how many continue to agree with these clearly authoritarian statements of yours. Also loving the idea that BDSM in SL is perceived to be "male-dominated". Yeah, no - if actual research had been performed you'd have found that many of the businesses you complain about are owned and operated by real life women. This is common in Second Life, women provide a lot of content and activity. Secondly (but still obviously), men in Second Life are drawn to locations where women are made welcome and likely to be hanging out, and so misogyny would logically be a poor business model to adopt (and demonstrated repeatedly by the failures of a minority of SL businesses that gain this reputation). I don't understand how you think SL maintains its economy at all in this regard, because any analysis of this effect is missing in your posts. I've noticed a few regressive arguments seem really good at misunderstanding how kinks and fetishes work psychologically, how they often deliberately transgress into socially taboo territory. In the best possible expression of irony, kinksters only want to degrade people consensually - and individually as part of play. The people who "degrade groups of human beings" are the authoritarians who attempt to reduce the agency of free-choosing adults by creating rules based on ill-informed ideology. Kink is not only the most reasonable and tolerant option, it's also more loving and more equal than anything the out-dated and poorly-informed mindset that started this thread can produce. Can guarantee it's your loss if you see natural and healthy desires and lusts to be expressions of hatred and sickness. Our place of freedom becomes your battleground to suppress tolerance and openness, to establish a puritanical and inorganic monstrosity that pleases nobody. That's pretty sad, as well as being entirely unobtainable. It also seems an entirely backwards point of view to me - the kinky folk are usually the best. ETA: Sorry to anyone bugged by the constant edits to my post - trying to phrase things more carefully and explain-as-I-go just in case. All done now.

Deleting your SL installation will not resolve problems with your SL avatar. Your account has not been deleted by deleting your SL installation either. I still don't really understand what's going on. If you've deleted your old account manually for some reason, it can sometimes be reinstated by contacting support. There's usually a chargeable fee for this service. Being told you have too many accounts can be an issue for those on dynamic IP addresses, or if you're using the same Email address as your original account. If you have one of these, try power-cycling your router. Failing this, create a new account from a new IP address or by using a new Email address during sign-up.

Thanks for the pic and clarification of your use of language. Does indeed seem like your shapes differ. Try using the same shape asset by transferring it to your friends/alts, as well as removing any and all system shoe layers that you're wearing. Kind of feel like I'm repeating myself at this point. If you think you've tried all of this then I have no further advice. Good luck & bye.

There's not enough information in your question. Why can't you retrieve your old account? Do you see an error message when you try to log in (if so, quote it)? Have you attempted to recover your password? Your account is not tied to your computer's installation of Second Life. You do not need to re-join.

Dillon Levenque wrote: No, Freya, no! That way lies madness (I oughta know). Madness has the best folks. Always fun conversation! Can't put out the fiiiiiire.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: How do you know someone's not open to reason? How do you know someone is? Experience! Had this confirmed on page 1 by the OP themselves. Not one to waste time beating bushes that I don't need to (they don't enjoy it, or beat back). I was largely arguing to convince myself, and to rehearse my own position. Was satisfied with the choir though, is good to be in sensible company.

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Yeah, but "silly" might be seen as polarizing, yes? Indeedy. It would be unhelpful to use this in a conversation where I thought the other party was open to reason. Fortunately, my purpose in posting to this thread is in establishing the ridiculousness of the OP's logic and how it applies both ways - so "silly" matches well. This isn't at all the first time this conversation has happened here, there's little to prove that's interesting to me (just like how I've avoided wasting my time by retrieving sources). I don't need (or really want) to convince the OP of anything, they have no chance to effect change and their ignorance seems to have been proven to myself adequately at this point (so I have disengaged). My approach to threads differs depending on the receptivity of my audience. In this case, agreement is high and the threat is very-very low. I'm at about 2-steps above posting lolcats twirling on stripper poles (I'm hoarding them for safe measure). I am excited to add fuel to the fire! I got to meet Phil last week (and have been holding back from making jokes about his purported dungeon ever since) and that was coooool. I have your jelly platter still set up at home. Just timing! Can't get in-world 'til at LEAST tomorrow and that might be hit-and-run. >.<

Madelaine McMasters wrote: I don't know that Carlotta is being silly, but she is ignoring a lot of evidence, as do most people. One study won't settle any arguments, but there is some evidence that kinky folk are... okay! http://www.livescience.com/34832-bdsm-healthy-psychology.html Mind you, they might have reached a different conclusion if I'd been in the study population, but it's too late now. I think it'll be a long time before science gets a good grip in kinky behavior, but at least it's trying. Sex studies are hard, and SL makes this slightly harder (must. not. euphamise). Women are very well represented in literary types of pornography (common in SL), and this is well established. Could talk about economic differences such as play vs. need, skill vs. unskilled, independent vs. promoted but this gets windy and unnecessary when the one throwing up complaints isn't interested in discussing cause-and-effect, and already has their viewpoint set in stone. My reference to "silly" comes down to her repeated use of buzzphrases and calls to her imagined morality rather than putting her time into investigation or understanding. There's obviously a bigger problem in her methodology and this laziness will seep into most of her claims very quickly. Doublespeak and hypocrisy weakens every argument that's been made, and the logic in use perpetuates far more evil than some 100px images in Search. A bit of effort and she could create a reasonably interesting discussion (for some), but all this type of attack does is polarise and bewilder, without coming to any calls to action. Madelaine McMasters wrote: Although I'm certain there are mysogynists in SL, and women vicitimized by them, I suspect that happens less often than in RL, and when it does happen, the consequences are hopefully and probably less dire. Women have much more power here. We have the power to mute, derender and... log out. If ever there was a place to play behavior that's "outside the norm", SL is it. If I am to believe the "men playing women" statistics that are so often thrown about, I can hope that, for every two women who are victimized by a mysogynist man, one of them is actually a man who learns what mysogyny feels like, and stiffens his resolve to fight it in RL. All of this. SL holds a mirror to reality, exaggerates some areas and misses some more. Sure SL isn't a magical place without unfairness, but removing nuance from these conversations (as pre-programmed positions tend to do) removes helpful voices from the conversation instead of helping address the problems, as well as promoting division. Have brought up a couple of instances in this thread where that's happened (Conall also). Have always felt - very strongly - that the safety aspect of exploration in SL is powerful, along with the general spirit of celebrating female sexuality (vs. reality, which will often seek to punish female promiscuity). I would need to hear an incredibly persuasive argument to be convinced that reducing choices in what people can find in-world would be a good idea. I'm well-aware you want to burn me down, and am okay with this.

Still unclear whether you're talking about:- Perspective making your avatar seem taller on one viewer Changes to your avatar making your avatar taller. What's "female student"? Did you follow my previous advice about a Character Test or using Ctrl+9 to reset your zoom level?

CarlottaAdagio wrote: Misogynist men are ruling SL Called it. Why can't we do anything about it? Are [non-misogynist | non-men] powerless (my position is no, yours appears to be yes)? Aren't you perpetuating victimhood by making this claim? If it's all about money then I find it hard to believe it must also be all about misogyny. Sounds more like you've identified a pattern, and are attributing false cause through a very poor understanding of both sexes motivations in seeking adult activities here and a misplaced sense of personal morality. I've never met any of these men you describe. Do they exist? Any volunteers? What are the benefits of a landowner using Search to degrade women, will more men turn up at the event? (no, they won't) If this mythical class of men are supposed to be "rulers" (why are they 'in charge', can't they be an 'undercurrent' or 'counterculture'? Do they have more power?) they're doing a pretty bad job of it, maybe your claim is hyperbole and you enjoy framing things to suit your own narrative. I'm a person too, and one who enjoys the freedom SL provides. Tackling a non-issue like this only threatens this freedom, to the detriment of all of us and this platform as a whole. My thing is pointing out logical incongruities and nonsensical arguments, and I've plenty of material here.

Still being silly. Your agenda is (hopefully) fun for you, but it doesn't stand up in the real (or virtual, haha) world. I've been clear - perceived sexual degradation in Second Life is rooted in choice, thrill and preference. Sex dynamics in Second Life are as stable - as healthy - as those in real life, it's just that some of the imagery is exaggerated to strongly appeal visually. I've gone into this subject many times, have extensive experience with abuse survivors, as well as self-image, relationship balance and associated issues. I've studied psychology and sociology. I have many years experience in healthy expressions of kink, emotional intelligence and risk awareness. You don't know my experience and, again, attempting to minimise it is not helpful to your case. Can guarantee you're barking up the wrong tree with your perspective. It's old-fashioned and does not match up with reality. Fans of 50 Shades of Grey (as one example) are not any more inclined to have suffered abusive relationships, go away with your silly self. Arguing against blind ideology isn't very interesting, moreso if they're just keyboard warriors. If you plan on taking action (not here, LL don't read forums) now that you've heard an explanation for what you've seen, please go and attempt that. If you're waiting for more explanations, then maybe wait and see if anyone is more open to your point of view. I am not.

I see you have an agenda. That's fun and I hope you enjoy it but I'm not interested in silly senses of morality and out-dated shaming behaviour. Again, you don't get to choose how other people enjoy Second Life. Making up fake numbers discourages genuine truths about the human condition. Seeking degradation-as-play is not at all unhealthy (you claim that it is, and this is a lie) and minimising the perspectives of real women (it's well established that many women enjoy sex and power-play, and online erotic play in general) damages your case more than helps it. Suggest you try a more balanced approach in future. Your opinion is that LL should "do something about" the imagery. Great, go nuts with that blind crusade if that's how you feel. It's not how I feel, so we're at an impasse.