Doc Carling

I admit the white rabbit is just for show to catch attention. It's a dummy no avatar. Apart from that like you I'm friend with all kinds of avatars. To respect other residents looks as is is an imporantant element of my photographer job. But to respect it doesn't mean I have to like it. Anyway, I use to shut up and to keep my opinion by myself. But I think the pictures which we are talking about from a neutral standpoint they are extreme. Oh, I still wonder what people might think about what I wear. I'm so vain. Please don't tell it anyone.

That gets us to nowhere. While I try to explain my comments in a neutral and objective form you continue to attack me on a personal level. When you re-read my replies you notice that I'm not critisizing the persons which use those avatars. I'm critisizing the look only. Please, let's stop here.

I notice that some residents seem to collect "likes", but don't give "likes" back by themselves. That's their right of course. But is that fair? Anyway, I'm curious. What must a picture have that you want to react on it?

You expect that I accept frogs as my friends. And call me a kind of looner, when I say no thanks? Again, it is a very difference, if one looks wired because of technical issues. Or if he/she chooses a look voluntary and with intent. In general nobody has a right to tell me what I have to think about a look. You can call me rude, arrogant or intolerant, when I say it loud. That's ok. I'm aware that I risk to get such reaction. 🙂

Me.

But you adore my talent to spice up a thread with my comments?

Because with are social beeings, live in societies and to look at each other is part of our human nature? 🙂 As for your second question. I don't expect that you care. Of course you can walk around as what you want, but don't expect only applause.

*Good idea. Just screen capped her avatar logo.*

Take a look. 😝

Though to be dressed silly or to look like a failed genetic experiment is a very difference.

I assume there isn't any chance that we become a love couple ever?

That makes me curious. So you say, if you enjoy someones company or not is depending on that he likes you as a froggish looking oversized avatar with pencil legs and wired green feet as well? I mean think a minute about that. How sounds that?

Actually I'm sure I just say loud what you dare to think only.

I'm not commenting real life looks. I have no right to do that. And nobody is perfect. Neither I. But I apologize, to express an inner self with an Avatar is a little bit to much for me. I was part of the so called good old days in SL. The avatars looked as good as they could depending on the limited technical options. One was forced to accept this. That's different in times of mesh. It is hard for me to imagine that someone can enjoy to look like on your picture. Because something is sure, the most people react with an OMG on it. Even when they aren't honest to say it loud like I do.

I guess you are kidding? This look is a nightmare.

That's really something outstanding. Too bad that one can't purchase such software. And if yes, well, I suppose it costs a fortune. Perhaps an inspiration for Linden Lab?

That's what I meant. A license is made of words. And words are easy. I admit my entry is perhaps to much about license stuff. My point is that downloaders don't print erotic photos out to wrap their sandwiches in them. They mostly use them to have some fun. Isn't that a disturbing imagination for you?

Yes, it's the default. I read it on Flickr. But I read also they have for example 88947891 pictures online alone under the Creative Commons/Attribution license. A brief definition: "You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your copyrighted work - and derivative works based upon it - but only if they give you credit." That means other can edit it in any way and post everywhere. Now imagine this: they change your picture to something evil or nasty and give you credit. Not a very comfortable thought.

Well, many residents have a flickr page. And they don't upload only g-rated pictures, but often erotic or even explicit ones which reveal much of their sexual preference to the public. That's what flickr says: "Many Flickr users have chosen to offer their work under a Creative Commons license, and you can browse or search through content under each type of license." What is Creative Commons? If you want to know more, please read more on flickr. Anyway, some levels of this license allow downloaders do to almost everything they want with your pictures. Well, I wonder what license level Flickr sets as default, when people join. What licence type did you choose? Well, downloaders might respect licenses or they don't. That's not the point. It's what nasty things downloaders might do with our erotic pictures behind locked doors. I doubt that we are always aware of it, when we publish such rather private material.

Carissa Carlberg Carling Carlisle Carlos Carlson - A huge list, many good sounding names. But I would choose my current one again.

Your friend has nothing to fear. Telling some system details is harmless like showing a picture.

That's their secret algorithm. They worked 2 years on it. llFrand(100.0) 😎

C'mon you are comparing apples with sheep cheese. lol The word avatar lets space for fantasy. The word truth not.

Sounds very familar to me. lol

🙂 Well, that's what the thread is about. That everyone has his personal definition of the word avatar.