Now that your readers understand what passes for *harassment* in your posts they can reevaluate what you may have meant when you claimed to have suffered from *harassment* (“So uh like … when somebody asks you a question, that’s like, harassment? Dude wtf is with you?”)

We can now move on to discuss what passes for *provocative* and *maliciously punitive* in the Prokofy lexicon. DELICIOUS WORDS! I can see why you loath quoting primary sources! The reality can NEVER measure up to your furious retelling! But when the time to be entertained has passed we must all get back to the business of truth (you’re welcome to join us Prok, but I don’t think it’s your thing.

Here is my hotline post:
http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?t=54546

1) You feel you’re on the run and have to justify because in fact you’ve been caught with your proverbial knickers in a bunch.

2) You’ve been forced to wriggle and writhe with this business of the journalist but anyone can see you didn’t give the lady permission to use your name, I said you didn’t give her your name TO USE, and it’s all clear. You don’t get credits for that, hon, we keep telling you.

3) Your provocative and maliciously punitive post in the Hotline is rightly not answered by Lindens who have at least some sense of human dignity such as to not harry and harrass especially new people who sell free things, including your stuff. Too bad. Don’t put out free stuff then. And stop trying to turn it into an issue about “favouritism” when it is obviously not that. The question you asked shouldn’t be answered. They’ve done the right thing. To answer and say “we don’t have a policy” is to encourage sale of freebies which they don’t exactly want to do. To answer and say “we have a policy to prosecute that” is to be unnecessarily punitive. So what’s great about the Lindens at a crunch time like this is that they ignore you, despite your haughty reminders. It’s a beautiful thing to see. God bless ‘em. Just when I lose faith in those Lindens, they reward me with special moments like this.

Never, never answer Aimee, Lindens. Let her writhe, she’s good at that.

It’s not about FIC or favouritism, and your lack of an answer isn’t proof there *isn’t* favouritism, it’s just that for once, the Lindens decided to leave open a question that really should be left open. Like I said, God bless ‘em.

We live for these SL moments. We know they might change and some enterprising old-resident-turned-Linden might feel enough of Aimee’s harassing heat to answer that question. Stay strong, Lindens!

Nope, you’re not off the favourities list until your mug disappears from the forums page and the front page and everywhere else and we get a *rotation*. I mean, when I look at the rag mags and tabs at my supermarket checkout, I don’t see Brittany and Hilary Duff and Paris Hilton over and over and over again like on 5 magazines, I see them *rotate* at least and the cover *changes*.

“I don’t see how I’ve said the “exact opposite” of what you’ve said when I said your name didn’t reach the press. It didn’t. That’s because you asked the reporter not to use it. This is pretty self-evident.”

Had your original quote actually been “your name didn’t reach the press” I suspect you would feel more comfortable with primary sources. Rather, this is what was said:

Prokofy Neva: OH, so then you feel the WWD mentioning Aimee, who didn’t give her RL name for the story, is um “desperate” of that writer? Thanks.

Aimee Weber: i gave her my RL name

Followed by your bold statement on SLHerald:

“Aimee herself said she didn’t give a reporter her RL identity”

Lets go over this one more time…

Aimee- i gave her my RL name
Prok- “Aimee herself said she didn’t give a reporter her RL identity”

http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/ see transcript for context
http://www.dragonscoveherald.com/blog/index.php?p=945#comments

So when I invited you to cite primary sources to demonstrate my “harassment” of Linden Lab, it came as no surprise that you ran from the option like a vampire runs from garlic. Allow me! Here you can find my original question to Linden Lab posted 07-20-2005.

http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?t=54546

After nearly 2 months during which time I said NOT A SINGLE WORD about my unanswered question, ZsuZsanna Raven decries the rapid turnaround of Anshe Chung’s hotline question as evidence of favoritism.

http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?t=61532&page=1

The rest of my statements on the subject can be found at that link. There were three relevent statements pasted below, but please read the full thread for context:

“If this is your measure of favoritism, can we take me off the favorites list? (unanswered since 07-20-2005)”

“…Sometimes new users get a quick reply, and sometimes they don’t, and sometimes the “FIC” get a quick reply, and sometimes they don’t. I think it has much more to do with the nature of the question than the person asking.”

“I’m comfortable with LL’s performance on the hotline (despite my 2 month old unanswered issue…yay favoritism!) I think if LL reached 100% perfection they would still see an unending stream of complaints on the forums”

I said not another word on the subject. A sum total for four comments in nearly two months, some of which in jovial or complementary language.

We need not describe your accusations of “harassment” as LIES. Instead, we should continue to instruct your readers to search for the ESSENCE of truth in your words. When reading your posts, they should resist the temptation to apply their own innate understanding of the word “harassment” and instead recall THIS EXAMPLE to understand EXACTLY what you mean when you evoke the term.

I think it is harassment of the Lindens to keep demanding they answer your Hotline to the Lindens question when they have defined the ground rules there as being that they answer questions that they can answer that have relevance to the community (look at their exact wording). You’ve introduced an entirely specious and tendentious issue, which is that your not getting an answer is somehow implied negligence on their part, and also some kind of proof that you don’t have favouritism — when of course you do. Your high and mighty “indignation” about these poor Hotline Lindens not answering you is really unseemly. Indeed it is harassment. And I hope to God they never answer your question. That would be best. And far from proof that you don’t have favouritism, their NOT answering it would prove to me that they have their heads on straight and get why they shouldn’t answer it OR give you special treatment and render a pronunciation affecting the entire community, including some adversely, just so you can have your little freebie loss leaders and not have some poor hapless newb sell it at a yardsale. Shame on you.

I don’t dance on command and run around providing links. Anyone who has seen your post knows *exactly* what I mean if they aren’t the little fanboy suckups you count amount your coterie. I don’t need to make up different meanings of the word harassment to stick by my claim: you harassed the Lindens *first* by putting in this provocative, nasty question designed to gain your own advantage and harm others in the game with unnecessary disciplinary action, then by challenging their refusal to answer your Hotline, which in itself was a harassing, provocative challenge trying to force their hand on an issue they RIGHFULLY prefer not to rule on, and you did it to gain special favours for yourself. Ugh, it’s so obvious.

Readers should been keenly aware of differences in the way you define *many* words compared to rest of us. For example, you have made claims that you had to endure “harassment” from your detractors. For most of us, this claim conjures up some brutal images that should rightfully earn you the sympathy and support from any compassionate soul.

But then in the message above you describe my “harassment of the Lindens” to answer my provocative question about selling freebies. I invite you to demonstrate to your readers exactly how I have engaged in “harassment” as you just spoke it, that they may know for all time exactly what you mean when you evoke that word.

Don’t spare me my rightful humiliation by muddying the issue with paragraph after paragraph of double talk, concept redefintion, and hyperbole. Instead, let the primary sources convict me! State plainly:

“I stand by my claim that Aimee has engaged in the *Harassment* of the Lindens over the question of selling freebies, and here are the links to prove it, in full and with context. I will say no more on the issue and let the evidence speak my words.”

If, on the other hand, you need a lenghtly explaination about how the definition of harassment varies from when you describe my harassment of the Lindens vs. your opponent’s harassment of you, well that’s ok too. It will simply serve as a reminder to your readers to be vigilant when reading your words and to research the hidden ESSENCE of truth rather than the plain truth of your statements.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

Prok! Stop!

Prok, you’ve got to — uh — heh, ha, HAHAHAHAHA!

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh please! Prok! No more! For th’ love of GAWD!

Oh the — haHAHAHA! — the HUMANITY!

*sniffs* *wipes tears from eyes* *shakes head*

Oh lord, Prokofy. You slay me, sir. You —

I am slain.

S-l-a-i-n, I tells ya!

*giggles, exits stage left*

I’m hardly one to talk about reams of typing and ranting nonsense, but I guess in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, eh?

Jauani, are you forgetting the proposal you put out in the group ranting about bolshevism and communists and stuff? This was political theater but I’m not sure everyone understood it as such. Anyway, people just walk around the robots.

Aimee, I think *your* readers will benefit for the extensive exegisis — to borrow a Uri word — I’ve done on your sophist machinations. Those with just a little bit of education in rhetorics and politics will get it. They’ll know to watch that Aimee just a little more than they might and take her a little less at face value. You might always be able to *technically* wriggle out of some actual point of view you had…like the time you refused to reveal your platform before being nominated LOL — a completely unacceptable position in any politics, even in a highly controlled situation. You might be able to parse words with a nit picker and say really, you *did* give your identity but we can see through all that. It’s pathetic.

All of this distracts from the really unacceptable positions you’ve been taking lately on all matter of public issues. Like your harassment of the Lindens to answer your provocative question of whether it is unacceptable or even unlawful under the TOS to sell freebies — this being, of course, a rather pointed notion to your own freebies you give away as loss leaders. Never answer this question, Lindens! Never! Better to beg for forgiveness than ask for permission on that one…just never say a thing about selling Linden or free stuff and we’ll all be fine. Disseminate any cultural opprobrium you wish, sure, it’s “not cool” or “lame” but do not punish people for this, it’s wrong.

Worse, Aimee, you’ve even endorsed an SL prison sim. My eyes bugged out when I saw that…but I guess you’d have to have *some* place to put all those numerous people you’d love to prosecute — and are gunning for the Lindens to answer your question about so THEY can prosecute them FOR you — who not only sold your freebies at some innocent newbie yardsale…but who are only *believed* to or *alleged* to have sold freebies…there’d be so many that to kick them all out of the game, the Lindens would lose their website numbers so this is just the perfect plan to have to put them *somewhere* where they will learn the proper appreciation for a good solid pair of Aimee knickers at the proper price! Which is free…as long as they stay attached for ever to your economic stream…Which is transferrable or moddable…as long as they stay tethered to you to ask permission to mod or transfer it….bleh.