The Alphaville Herald

181 Responses to “‘Broadly Offensive’ Raid in Blister; Lindens Review Teen Anime Paintings”

1. 

   Lisae Boucher
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   And another update. As a sign of goodwill I lifted the ban in Blister for two of the griefers: Sapphire Oh and Mercury Slade. I did this since they are working on a nice-looking ship next to my land and I can imagine that the ban on my land is a bit limiting what they can do around it. I have no intention to obstruct people on purpose so therefore I lifted the ban again. Again, I have no bad feelings towards these people but if I need to protect myself, I will use whatever means are allowed.

   And no, it doesn’t mean that this conflict is over. It’s just that there is a difference of opinion about what is considered artistic and what’s not. And for those of you who are interested, images of that “underage fairy” are now flying around in the area. Then again, underage? As someone already noticed, how do we even know that a fantasy character is underage or not? Do these images qualify as child porn? Well, if it does then even the Herald is committing a crime now by publishing the image of this fairy.

   Since this conflict started, I’ve received a lot of support from people who disagreed with these people and their opinions. Many strongly disagreed with the way they all acted upon this. I hereby want to thank all of them for their support and their encouraging words. It is great to know that most of the people in SL won’t let their second lives be led by just a small group of people.
2. 

   Angel
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   > I have several recording devices located on my land and their conversations have been logged

   TOS Violation?
3. 

   Anonymous
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   Seems to me there is simple solution to things considered by a landowner as griefing activities by groups whether they are sanctioned by LL or not. If you don’t want the Volunteer group to police your land, then simply ban their members from entering. Or are the members of that group not listed? Can you not ban a whole group? Or are the Volunteer allowed to trespass anywhere they want?
4. 

   Lisae Boucher
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   >> I have several recording devices located on my land and their conversations have been logged
   > TOS Violation?

   As far as I know, having a recording device on my own land is not a TOS violation. Others are using such things too since it allows landowners to keep an eye out on their own land and take action against people who use abusive language or are harassing other visitors.
   Those same recordings can also be used to report offenders to LL, which I have done so a few times. I want to keep my land safe and these recorders are just the best way to do so. And it’s one of the things these griefers tend to fear since it’s their own words that can be used against them.

   I could, of course, publish sections from those logs here but I don’t see the use of that. It just makes the conflict bigger. The only one who can do something with these logs are the Lindens, who can ban them from SL. And me, since I can ban them from my land.
5. 

   Aaltein Demina
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   I saw a teenager naked behind a flatscreen why behind..then on the seabottom a row off naked little girls..Adultmen with erection next too litle girls…i tpd friends stated FRIENDS they made up their own mind i was not herassing i was busy i walked outside and their u where saying it was Art..its not art too hide litle girls behind screens or on the bottom off the seaU banned m why cause i saw u and called u sick?I left didnt stay only had one talk with one person..and that was to warn me for this to happen. I will say here like i said then not beeing judge or jury..its about good and bad..its bad too have naked girls exposed like this. We have to protect our kids.
6. 

   Prokofy Neva
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   Anonymous, no, you can’t ban a whole group. There are those, like Angel Fluffy, who want desperately to have LSL commands for such things. I personally oppose it. I don’t believe in blanket bans. I *do* believe in criticizing and confronting persistently criminal gangs that systematically commit offenses and grief on alt after alt after bans, and calling them for what they are: conspiracies. Even I wouldn’t go to the trouble to look up everybody in the group and ban them all — who has the time? I ban people for overt acts or for probable cause, based on things like whether or not they already grief me in their profile (that’s a real um tip-off, eh?)

   We can’t ban a group of hundreds of people. I should hope they are an open group, with names visible, I’d have to check.
7. 

   Prokofy Neva
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   I continue to have questions.

   Lisea, if you are a lesbian appreciative of adult women and lesbian art, why did you include in your underwater repertoire a scene with *men* with erect penises (penii?) and little girls? (So we’re told).

   Were you hoping to make a mass-appeal commercial work of art, then? That I could understand. But is this art, or is it commercial porn? or what is it?

   And why is it underwater? And if you need to study how to use poser and not put clothes on people, isn’t it a bit hard to put erections on men?

   I ask these questions in sincerity, without second-guessing, but because they simply beg to be asked by anyone coming fresh at this and trying to find the truth of it.

   To Aaltein Demina, I can only ask: if you have to zoom behind screens, and go down into the sea to see something, it’s not in plain view. It’s private. If Lisae wants to make pictures of men and dicks and apparently “of age” girls (we can’t know), then that’s her business.

   How were you able to see these things unless you were told they were there, or went flying around and camera-zooming?

   Something can’t be broadly offensive if it is underwater, behind a screen, and it takes Michael Linden in his chibi squid mode to go find it. I mean, it’s not out there in view.
8. 

   Yumi Murakami
   

   Jul 15th, 2007
   

   Prokofy, what do you consider to be “acting as a police force?”

   Do you consider simply ARing any offensive content that you stumble across to constitute “being a police force”? If that’s really the case, then yes – the Lindens want *everyone* on SL to be their police force, and the Volunteers will echo that fact. That’s not because the volunteers are zealots. It’s because good, professional volunteers will not bring their personal judgement to bear on advice they give; they will leave the options open to the asker, or where there is policy they will give advice in tune with it. The general policy for content that “might be offensive” is: “AR it and let the Lindens decide.” That was the advice that Live Helpers were usually advised to give, and they’ve stayed with it.

   (And I should mention that that advice wasn’t given to “be a police force” either. It was also partly because anyone who was bothered enough by some content they’d seen that they contacted Live Help or Volunteers about it would probably want to be left with the impression that action was being taken about it – even if, when the AR was checked, the content was judged not t obe offensive.)

   But this seems like a very strong definition of “a police force” to me. From my point of view, encouraging people to become a police force would mean encouraging them to make effort to seek out offensive content, even in areas they wouldn’t otherwise have visited, and AR it. Nobody has ever been told to do this in any Volunteer notecard, in any of the meetings, or in any chat, by a Linden or otherwise – and I don’t know why you seem to think they are.

   And the complaint that Volunteers can all get together and AR a single target – Prokofy, *anyone* can do that. Are you going to say that *any* group on SL can’t possibly have any private meetings because they might decide to AR someone as a group, and that makes them a police force, who would therefore have to be accountable?
9. 

   Prokofy Neva
   

   Jul 16th, 2007
   

   Acting as a police force is actively monitoring land that is No, it’s going on land that is not your own, and public spaces that aren’t near your own sim, or helped by you.

   It’s taking a busy-body, excessively controlling interest in your neighbour’s affairs.

   It’s trying to win points with the Lindens.

   If you mind your own business, you are not likely to “stumble across” offensive material. It’s people who hang out in WAs as lifers there, who follow griefers around or go to big venues to “monitor” them that find these things. Some people find an enormous satisfaction in following other people and reporting on them.

   >”AR it and let the Lindens decide.” That was the advice that Live Helpers were usually advised to give, and they’ve stayed with it.

   This is wrong. Just because you think it’s right or the Lindens gave out that advice, it’s still wrong. If you, as an intelligent adult able to read and think at the level of a 12-year-old, which is what a common American jury requires, cannot read the law, and understand how to apply a simply thing like “no hate attacks,” and see that when somebody flies around with a grief ball that says “the Jews did WTC” that it’s time to abuse report it as hate — well, then you don’t belong in SL and shouldn’t sign the TOS, you aren’t old or mature enough.

   If you can’t figure out what is meant by child pornography or images that are also construed as child pornography means *+children*, and not flat-chested 18-year-olds or “underage fairies”, you need more than a Second Life.

   The idea to “let the Lindens sort it out” makes for a passive populace and an aggressive, stretched-thin and surly Lindens.

   >But this seems like a very strong definition of “a police force” to me. From my point of view, encouraging people to become a police force would mean encouraging them to make effort to seek out offensive content, even in areas they wouldn’t otherwise have visited, and AR it.

   Um, that’s what they do. Is there a reason to be in Blister, a nothing water sim like a million other water sims, unless you are on a hotline, unless you are looking for trouble? Of course not. The neighbours can a) talk directly to the people involved if they don’t like something right in their view (and that better not be something inside or underwater or b) abuse report it like adults if they find it actionable. The Volunteers are IRRELEVANT here. And I mean TOTALLY.

   >Nobody has ever been told to do this in any Volunteer notecard, in any of the meetings, or in any chat, by a Linden or otherwise – and I don’t know why you seem to think they are.

   Volunteers are encouraged to monitor WAs and other big areas and they always seem to find plenty to do. So they are already looking for trouble and finding it. And the Lindens in this very group chatlog ENCOURAGE people in the group to AR things. ENCOURAGE them. I’m sorry, but it’s unmistakeable.

   And the complaint that Volunteers can all get together and AR a single target – Prokofy, *anyone* can do that. Are you going to say that *any* group on SL can’t possibly have any private meetings because they might decide to AR someone as a group, and that makes them a police force, who would therefore have to be accountable?

   I think it’s wrong for the Lindens to ENCOURAGE posses. Because that’s what they do. “You all go offlist and get together and run a posse and mass grief-report and keep your eyes and ears open, so we have plausible deniability and won’t have the record show in this official group”. That’s how it appears; that is likely how it *is*.

   Volunteers, by its very nature, is abusive.
10. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Answering some questions:

    1) Lisea, if you are a lesbian appreciative of adult women and lesbian art, why did you include in your underwater repertoire a scene with *men* with erect penises (penii?) and little girls? (So we’re told).

    The Poser models used were Laura (Millenium teen) and Kelvin. However, for most of my art I use the models Victoria and Miki. I used Laura in this case with a more mature skin in an attempt to make a more fantasy-like setting. I considered to give her some Fairy features but decided to to. The idea was to have a young fantasy girl with her servant. In most of the pictures she wasn’t even nude but topless and to be honest, if guys are allowed to be seen topless then the same rule should apply to women too. There was no frontal nudity of her together with that guy either.
    And about the question why the guy had an erection? First of all, this is one of the few times I’ve worked with a male model in Poser. I wanted him to have less clothing than the woman since I considered him more as a servant or as protector. Poser has a special penis figure that can be used, which I did. And to be honest, I don’t have that much experience with penises anyways. So in one picture it did appear more erect than it was supposed to.
    Yet none of the images are sexual in my opinion. I’ve made 7 images of them together. In the first one they’re both sitting at a distance from each other, but both naked. Just as if they’re talking. In the second one, they are both standing (both naked) with a bit of a shy face on the girl. Probably a bit embarrassed by something the guy told her. These are the only two where the girl was completely naked, yet you don’t see her genitals nor the area where her pubic hair is. I intended to use these pictures with water on the background as if they have been swimming together. In the other 5 images I created of them, the girl is just topless but the guy is naked. (But no erection.) Simple poses like walking together, dancing together, running together, arguing and a final pose where the guy is sitting with the girl standing behind him. All done to play a bit with perspective. I still need to find appropriate backgrounds for most of these images and it’s not easy to find a proper picture to put them in a more fantasy-like scene.
    Other pictures of this model included topless images on and near a dragon, on a lion, near a great Dane and at a camping site. All meant to make clear that this is no modern-day girl but just set in a fantasy setting. I still have to see the first girl riding a dragon in real-life anyways.
    Heard some comments about that image with the great Dane, btw. Some people don’t realize that a great Dane can easily be 40 inches at the shoulder. If he’s sitting then you can add the length of the neck and head on top of that. My model sticks out even above that and was put more in the background, making her about 66 inches or so. 5’6″ is a decent length, isn’t it? I can’t help the fact that great Danes can be this tall anyways but not everyone realizes that. And again, it’s a fantasy setting.

    2) Were you hoping to make a mass-appeal commercial work of art, then? That I could understand. But is this art, or is it commercial porn? or what is it?

    What I did was try to create some artwork, yes. But then again, some people are just as easily offended when they see a naked Cherub or something similar. There have been quite a few protests in the past about Manneken Pis in Brussel, Belgium, since this is a statue of a young boy peeing. I heard there’s also a Janneken Pis in the same city which is a peeing young girl.

    3) And why is it underwater?

    It was underwater since I considered that to be out of general view. I had been testing an object that I just load with a dozen or so textures and it will then create all kinds of paintings next to each other, nicely aligned and set with a fixed price. I had been working on that the night before and had intended to clean it up again but then again, SL isn’t always as reliable as we hope. My viewer had major problems that night, crashing about every 5 minutes and restarting it didn’t always work that easily either. So I just gave up any attempts to do a decent clean-up since it was late and I wanted to go to bed.

    4) And if you need to study how to use poser and not put clothes on people, isn’t it a bit hard to put erections on men?

    Putting a Penis on Kelvin is quite easy. Altering it’s shape isn’t difficult either. Normally it is bent at an angle of 60 degrees but it didn’t look right in my opinion (as if I’m an expert on penises) so I reduced the angle to 35 degrees. As it turns out, some people already call that an erection. To me, it just looked more appropriate for a tall guy. Furthermore, at that angle it didn’t cross sections with his legs in some of the poses. I could have given it an angle of 0 in which case it would have been clearly sticking forwards but that wasn’t appropriate in my opinion. Not in this image nor in any other images I want to create of him to use in SL.
    Clothes however can be very difficult sometimes. Poser doesn’t come with many clothes to use anyways, unless you buy them and I don’t have an infinite pot of gold or whatever. There are some tools that make it easier to fit clothes in Poser but they don’t fit my budget. So it’s just a lot of work if you want to put one or more models in lots of different poses. Which I’m trying to do so I could let my images tell some short stories in the future. I still have a lot to learn about Poser anyways.

    Finally, some talk about protecting the kids here but protecting them from what? Nudity? People might not realize it but nudity tends to be the natural state of humans to begin with. None of us were born with clothes. It’s only society that forces us to wear them. Furthermore, I think that women have the right to go topless where any man can walk around topless! As if male breasts are less offensive than female breasts. It’s pure discrimination if topless women are not allowed.
11. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Lisae, sorry, but I just don’t find you sincere. I think you are doing an amazing amount of fancy foot-work here and tap-dancing your way out of facing the facts here, that in fact what you had was indeed what people really mean by “broadly offensive”. People took offense. You yourself even conceded that as a courtesy, you should take it down. I find an incredible amount of sophistry and word-salading going on here about 60 degrees this and nudity-propaganda that.

    Nudity is what we are born in; it’s not what we live in. That’s civilization. No amount of nudist propaganda and ideological haranguing can change that; it’s not a mainstream position and likely will not become one, even in Second Life. So don’t force it on other people; it’s a striden, minority view not appreciate or wanted by most people. They should be tolerant of your “art”; you should be tolerant of their dislike of your art.

    It sounds like you did that, and that’s good, that you were both willing to unban people who griefed you and also remove some of the stronger evocative images. But you simply have not persuaded me as to your intents. That’s not to say that mentors and Lindens should go diving under your cabana looking for things that were private.

    There’s another thing that is odd about the ‘protecting our kids’ mantra. If these are just manipulated images, then you could say there are no kids to protect; they weren’t harmed in the making of the images; they aren’t supposed to be there on the MG to view them, either.

    But, I quite understand the sentiment. Because it’s about not making an enabling environment as I’ve explained at length in my blog about this subject a few weeks ago. It’s about not encouraging this as the norm of culture. It’s not. It’s not acceptable for men to be standing around in these lewd poses with young girls — and that is why it is offensive and removed. Call it what you want; smart-talk your way out of it as you wish; people disagree.
12. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    To make one thing clear again, the Lindens did NOT remove this material. I did it myself after neighbors made it clear they felt troubled over these images. As it is, there is a difference of opinions about what is appropriate and what’s not. And if people are just willing to discuss these things, fine. But that’s not what happened here and even you admit that this was nothing more than a witch-hunt.

    Still, some people dislike my art and thus I removed the things that could be considered the most offensive. But images of a fairy in bikini cannot be considered inappropriate in my opinion. When people are starting to behave in a more civilized way, I have no problems unbanning them again. I just hope they will continue to behave more civilized and stop enforcing their opinion upon me.

    My intents? I’m still new with both SL and with Poser. I started using Poser after I got my SL account and everyone can check the fact that I’m just an SL member since February 2007. I create and publish my Poser artwork on SL because I want to hear feedback about these images, especially the things that are e.g. out of perspective, bad lights and shadows, minor flaws like clothing sticking inside bodies. It just helps me to become better with this.

    I am also working on a background story behind the images that I create. In the end, it seems to me that you could create interesting stories and illustrate them with Poser art. Am still working on several main characters of this story. One of them is Pearl, who was adopted by a poor fisherman. Since most of the story takes part in a semi-tropical to tropical area, I have a good reason to not use many clothes. The fisherman in my story uses spears to fish and dives a lot to find shellfish and other food on the sea bottom. Fishing this way is easiest with a minimum of clothing and since it’s a tropical climate, clothing are more a luxury.

    Quote: “No amount of nudist propaganda and ideological haranguing can change that; it’s not a mainstream position and likely will not become one, even in Second Life.”

    Actually, in Europe nudism is becoming more and more acceptable. There are more nudist areas these days than there were 10 years ago. And it’s starting to become more popular every day. Nudity has been acceptable for quite a long time in human history, with the Greek gymnasiums as one fine example of this. Ancient Greek athletes exercised nude.
    One reason that might explain why people oppose nudism is based upon religious grounds. But please, people. Don’t enforce your religious ideas upon me, okay? I’m not doing the same to you either.

    If you look at the Western history, you will find that nudity has always been reasonable acceptable up until the Victorian age. During and after that time, public nudity was a taboo until the beginning of the 20th century when people started to protest against this again. Even today, nudism is becoming more and more popular every day?

    What I think is bad is the hypocrisies of some people, especially those who are strongly religious. The Archdiocese of Los Angeles is now going to pay $660 million in settlement to pay off the victims of child abuse caused by priests of that same church. Yet it’s the same church who advocates against nudity and dares to dictate how people should live their lives. People should first look in their own backyards before they start judging anyone else.

    And nudism in Second Life? Actually, much of Second Life seems to be about sex, not nudity. There are plenty of female skins out there with huge breasts and realistic vagina’s. Or male skins with chest hairs and penises full piercings that can ejaculate. Sex-beds tend to be very popular items and so are sex-related pose balls. If you think about it, many people in SL tend to have a bit of obsession with this, although there are many others who just want to live a more normal second lifestyle.

    I myself tend to keep things a bit like real life. My avatar has an average human length and no extra large breasts. I am wearing pants so people don’t look under my skirt and so far I haven’t been involved in any sexual encounters within the game.
13. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    One additional thing that sickens me, btw. There are too many people who look at a naked body and immediately think about sex. Just ask yourself why a sane person would ever dare to make such associations?

    The next step would be that women need to cover their whole body in clothes that hide their whole shape. Just because there are men out there who will look at their feminine shapes and immediately get aroused by it.

    One step further and women won’t even be allowed to leave the house because otherwise men can see them and get aroused. This, in my opinion is complete unacceptable.

    In my opinion, clothes are a sign of suppression. It seems to control us as a society, as a whole. People are just too obsessed with clothes. If you wear last-year fashion you’re already considered an imbecile in our “modern” society, especially if you’re a woman. If you go to a party and another woman wears a very similar dress, you both risk being ridiculed over this. Wear something tight and guys can’t stop looking at you. Wear something loose and guys start complaining and suggesting you should wear some more tighter clothes.

    Just look at the fashion industry and the amount of money that is involved in this business. In many third-world countries they just put young teens and children at work in large factories to create the shoes and clothes that we wear today. And the price of one pair of shoes is enough to pay the salaries of one such child for half a year. (Well, I have an expensive taste in shoes anyways.) Not only do people have religious reasons to promote clothing, there’s also a huge commercial interest in encouraging people to wear clothes and more importantly, to continuously buy new clothes very regularly.

    Isn’t it stupid that every year I just have to throw away all clothes from the previous summer since they are out of fashion? Do I really feel the need to let the fashion industry dictate what I can and cannot wear? Fortunately, I am glad that most of my friends just don’t care about which clothes I wear. They care more about whom I am, not about what I wear.

    Anyways, it’s one reason why I feel so comfortable when I’m in a nudist colony or beach. At least people in those locations don’t judge me just based upon what I wear. They judge me on whom I am. It seems to me that the nudist lifestyle tends to be a lot healthier…

    Of course, opinions about this will differ. There will always be people who strongly oppose nudism. Can’t help this. There are also people out there who demand that all women wear Burqa’s. It’s just a matter of opinions and people are free to have them and disagree with mine. Still, some people feel a strong need to start big conflicts over these differences in opinions. That’s never a good thing.
14. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    I realize your point about the Lindens not removing it. I’m glad you clarified this and came forward. When it was first told to me, it was said that the Lindens took it, and/or “force-copied it, and that you “swooped”. It did indeed look to me like an ambush, forcing you to remove things. We can’t know if the Lindens copied it as some kind of back up or whether they even need to do stuff like that or how it works.

    I realize it’s a difference of opinion, but it’s one that does matter, and both sides have a right to these opinions and matters of tastes or morals. That’s what culture *is*.

    Nudism isn’t the norm not only because of some religious background. It’s practical; and people don’t wish to live immersed in sexuality all day. The idea that people on nudist beaches are somehow indifferent to sex is silly; of course they aren’t. It’s wrong to force this concept on people who simply wish to be modest.

    I don’t see why the Archdiosese of Los Angeles paying a lawsuit for damages in cases of pedophilia somehow makes nudism correct, cultural, enforceable, or somehow preferable. It doesn’t. It’s apples and oranges. You have your little sect; the Catholic Church may have pedophile priests but they aren’t the norm, and it is not a sect. And it does not attempt to *force* anti-nudism on people; people simply wear clothing as the norm and prefer to remain covered at least to the basic sexual parts at the beach. That’s all there is too it. No need to go on a zealous jihad about it.

    What you’re doing is being bigotted; you’re trying to match the case of pedophilia, which is surely to be condemned, with somehow a need for Catholics not to condemn what is wrong: child pornography. Why would the presence of pedophiles who have been *prosecuted* and for whom the Church is paying *damages* preclude Catholics from condemning child pornography?

    The very values that give rise to society’s need to confront the Church and force them to pay and to have the priests prosecuted is the same value that drives the need to condemn child pornography, and to find images such as the ones you made with the men and little girls broadly offensive. They are indeed. And I can surely go on pointing out that they are a good example of what is *broadly* offensive even if you *narrowly* don’t find them so, and even if I find that you were excessively hounded and shouldn’t have been, and volunteers were misused for this purpose.

    And frankly, if we can condemn Catholic priests for pedophilia — glad you can do that! — we can question your celebration of adult men with erect penises ogling shy little girls, hmm, can’t we? Oh we can’t? Well…how are these things different, eh?

    I don’t see how pointing to the rampant sex in SL, or your own “SL virgin” status somehow detracts from the point that the images disturbed people; they felt it was like the child pornography that the TOS now prohibits, and they acted. To be sure, they were zealous, and I don’t condone their behavior.

    What is to be done? I think when things really are broadly offensive people should tell their neighbours to put them inside or out of site. If they are beligerent and refuse, they might consider an abuse report but it’s a quandary, because the guidelines aren’t clear. I certainly can’t, in good faith, tell anyone to abuse report. I myself have ceased because the rules aren’t clear nor are they fairly enforced.
15. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    I’m sorry, Lisae, but many people do think about sex when they look at nude bodies and that’s *normal and natural* and NOT sick.

    What’s sick is your prudish need to inflict on them some idealogy, practice, or belief. You’re as bad as these Bishops you imagine want to get into your bed and prevent you from having sex.

    You’re trying to do a man-bites-dog here that contrarians do, and you’re trying to impose this sort of thing by fiat, but it won’t fly. It’s preaching and pontificating — only in reverse.

    To say that sexual response to nudity is wrong, or is somehow to be suppressed, is prudish and nihilistic. It’s as bad as people who find something shameful in nudity; in impulse, it is no different.

    It’s also hysterical and jihad-like to go on to say “OMGODOZORS the next thing that will happen is that men will have to cover themselves up in burquas”. That’s why you had these hysterics putting on Disney Burquas just because of age verification.

    There is nothing wrong with men becoming aroused by naked women, and trying to suppress that is as bad as the most extremist of the Islamicists who cover women in burquas. It’s the same thing, essentially. It’s the sickness of intellectual thought now in Europe that’s at issue here with this nonsense, and not any alleged “sickness” in somebody’s natural sexual desires seeking naked bodies. My God, it’s disturbing to see how much this jihadism spreads and infects the left.

    Wow, women won’t be able to leave the house! And…how are we supposed to keep men from being aroused? What was your plan for that? Cut off their dicks? Put blindfolds on their eyes? Seriously, what DO you plan in your perfect society?

    I’ll tell you what is a sign of suppression: sects, cults, bigots, wierd-ass ideas like yours, hon. That becomes oppressive, too. It’s not natural and normal to try to decide how people SHOULD be or feel when seeing nude or IMPOSE on them the norm that they should making nudity meaningless. That’s what’s disturbing.

    It’s more than fine for nudity to be associated with sexual arousal. The desire to decouple it is part and parcel of this hatred of the body and the physical that Uri discussed in his essay about the FIC.

    Fashion makes the world go round. Deal with it, chickie, and leave people alone. Put on a barrel and some clogs, if you will, leave us alone.

    Fashion provides jobs for many people. Oh, dear, are you fishing up from the depths of the well-warn hard-left tiresome European agenda this dreck about children labouring for pennies? Well? What are YOU doing about it besides bleating on a blog? It’s meaningless to go on propaganda jags about the salaries of people paying for your shoes. Take off your shoes, go barefoot, send the money to CARE, and shut up.

    Blah blah blah — ringing all the well-worn cliches, oh how stupid that I buy clothes, oh, how evil it all is. But…people wish to put on clothes and have fashion. Could you leave them the fuck alone with your jihad?

    I don’t believe there’s anything inherently “healthy” about nudism. If anything, you are exposed to skin cancer. If anything, people are engaged in a kind of social lie that I find disturbing.

    I don’t see how *refusing to have nudism imposed on the majority* is like imposing the burqua; indeed, it is the freedom of NOT wearing a burqua that we are after. Who is to save us from these tyrannies of narrow-minded majorities?!
16. 

    Sapphire Oh / Mercury Slade
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    We would like to put across our points and the reason why and how this started.

    We need to get the points straight, as myself (sapphire) have been told by Lisae Boucher that i

    am responsible for this. Accused of being a vigilante group. but we are only the neighbours to her

    land ( NO groups ) NOT vigantiles as stated by Lisae. Also she states we police SL..The only

    reason she says that because one of the land owners is a RL police officer. And owns a police

    helicopter on top of the boat..

    OK… how these items was spotted… Myself and mercury are builders on a piece of land for our RL

    friend and her SL partner. While building on the land we began to mark out property lines.. which

    is on the sea bed. Adjoining the land is the new land that Lisae Boucher recently brought. On just

    looking at her land these items came to our attention.

    There was 3 of us on land at the time and we all reported the images behind the screen. then to

    find that in the see just shocked us even more.

    Being a mother myself to a 6yr old boy. I have feelings and Close to our heart this personally

    brings horrible thoughts of child victims. Who are now adults. Having to look at these images in
    world, as we seen this one as a child next to a guy that has an ercetion. but thats just One of
    the images displayed there.

    anyway From that point we IM a friend and asked her to take a look and give her opinions. She felt

    the same as we all did. From there on we just was shocked by the amount of people visiting the

    land and making reports. The Information about what we seen was passed from friends to friends and

    so on, So therefore i feel that our feelings was the same as many of the people that seen these

    images.

    OK so that was it.. we done nothing else accept our presence was on her land, NO griefer, No

    nothing, just watched and listened till the Lindens Came.

    So now she feels the need to blame us for all this. Why? we did the right thing.. had our

    opinions , made a report, told a friend !!!

    So later that evening i seen the jacket that Lisae Boucher was wearing. She had writing on the

    back about her self, something like, builder, prim maker, Club owner etc etc , also is said

    Lotsawa (148,153,53). myself and about 4 others went to visit, A very big plot of land, what i see

    as two big Malls. over 4 floors high we similar images everywhere. We made another report, Later

    when we return we was banned. wonder why?

    ———-

    Now a couple of days on i read what Lisae as wrote here. She is making stories up to defend

    herself.

    NOW last night we see which looks like a slightly invisible ball near to the boat. upon examining

    the contents it became clear its was a conversation spy recorder. Now the place where it was place

    was in the sea again. As close as possible to land we are building on. Lisae approached us and

    after a while she removed it and she stated -

    “”The ball is indeed a spy. Will remove it now, btw. Not to remove evidence, btw. Just again as a

    sign of goodwill”"

    Ok she removed it, but why carry this on and continue to harass us by using this and indulge into

    our conversations. It was placed on her land but as close to edge as she possibly could . so

    therefore she caught our conversations.

    So that was it UNTIL. YEP another spy,, hidden inside a fairy, IF she was doing it before as

    goodwill, why did she leave that one there, just because we never found it at that moment, She

    couldn’t be honest and thought she got away with the first one so the second would continue to

    capture our conversations. Yes again she removed it but this time removed it without us knowing,

    sneaky. when checked and seen it gone she then approached us. We now don’t trust her one little

    bit.. she continues to drop items in the water. Example- a shiney disk that moves around. No idea

    why?

    Why she removed 2 of us from her ban list i have no idea. yet what she said that we was a bunch of

    vigilantes. SL Police. etc etc

    She continues to state this in her written comments, here and also of the chat log i kept of the

    conversation with her.

    So we all have opinions yes.. but for it to make headlines and many many reports, It must tell you

    something !!!

    I am giving here 2 snapsnots..

    (1) http://i16.tinypic.com/537uniw.jpg

    This is the spy ball… Behind her fence boarder but still on her land but as close to our boat as
    it can be placed. you can also she a fairy on the fence which later we found to contain another
    spy.

    (2) http://i18.tinypic.com/6ba4nyc.jpg

    This show a snapshot of the day in question.

    She is doing her best as to what seems to get banned, and after all we had our opinions, as so did
    many others that visited that day, We don’t even know or meet many many of them.

    So be accused of a Vigilante group etc etc … Lisae is just trying to protect herself and slime
    her way out of this.

    Anyway i Hope i have made a few pointers clear. Thanx
17. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Quote: I’m sorry, Lisae, but many people do think about sex when they look at nude bodies and that’s *normal and natural* and NOT sick.

    This is just a difference of opinions. Fact is, in some cultures it’s not even allowed for women to walk around in short skirts. Or to show their face in public. In other cultures (mostly the more primitive ones) no one even bothers about nudity. There are cultures where women just walk around naked all day while the men wear a wooden thing over their penis as some kind of protection. So opinions about nudity are mostly cultural values, and cultural values tend to change over time.

    Quote: When it was first told to me, it was said that the Lindens took it, and/or “force-copied it, and that you “swooped”.

    Yet you never bothered to check the real facts and started to just publish a story with a very sensational title. In a way, you did the same as the rest of the mob who invaded my area, although you soon realized that the facts were untrue. For many journalists, publishing a story without checking the real facts tends to put an immediate end to their careers. Well, some just start writing stories for cheesy magazines with stories about Elvis who’s still alive and UFOs who replaced the President with a robot-clone or whatever.

    Quote: It’s practical; and people don’t wish to live immersed in sexuality all day.

    And this continues to sicken me. People who see nudity and immediately think about sex. This mentality is what’s causing a lot of problems in this world. People who become so obsessed by nudity that they start to develop some unhealthy habits.

    Quote: they felt it was like the child pornography that the TOS now prohibits, and they acted.

    Yet the Lindens felt different about this. No warning was issued and they didn’t remove any content. They came, they saw and so far haven’t done anything since the material might be borderline, but not illegal in their expert opinions. Maybe they’re still undecided about this all so we’ll just have to wait on their final response. But they had no reason to immediately remove it.
    There’s still something called “Freedom of expression” in this world and this gives me the right to voice my personal opinion about things like nudity. Not porn, nudity.

    When I have some time, I’ll generate a few images of just Kelvin with his penis in several different positions so people can see what this model looks like in all these positions. Then again, people who already use Poser will probably already know what he looks like when nude.

    I also want to point out that the model Laura in Poser was used without any modifications. Combined with the Vivien, Emily or Ashlyn skin from the DAZ3d site, you get a look of a reasonable adult model, including nipples and slightly larger breasts. If you question my art then you should definitely question these skins that are commercially sold by DAZ3d, since it would allow anyone with Poser, the Millennium teens and these skins to make similar images within a matter of minutes…
    Adding clothes takes more time…

    Quote: I think when things really are broadly offensive people should tell their neighbours to put them inside or out of site.

    And this, I did. Reasonable requests will be answered in a reasonable way. And if people continue to disagree then the Lindens have to make a final judgment. But as you and I both seem to agree upon is that this whole witch-hunt is just a form of abuse by itself, making things worse, not better.

    Quote: There is nothing wrong with men becoming aroused by naked women, and trying to suppress that is as bad as the most extremist of the Islamicists who cover women in burquas.

    I have no problems with men getting aroused in general anyways. As long as they manage to control themselves. About four years ago my friends and I discovered some elderly guy masturbating in the bushes while he was looking at a couple of (adult) guys playing beach-volleyball. This was at a regular beach, btw. But apparently looking at a couple of guys in swim clothing aroused him in a real sick way. This could never be prevented but who do you have to blame for this? The guys who played volleyball or the sicko who felt it necessarily to masturbate while watching them?

    In some Islamic countries, a woman who gets raped risks being stoned to death simply because she had sex outside wedlock. And several women have been executed already for this simple reason and many more are still awaiting their final judgment. But are these women perpetrators or innocent victims?

    This is of course an extreme example but it’s not that much different from similar opinions in our Western world. It wasn’t even long ago when a woman wearing a short skirt could almost be legally raped since she apparently was asking for sex. As if wearing short skirts is an open invitation. Fortunately, this opinion has changed too in the last years. And unfortunately for you and many others, the fact that people are naked is no invitation for sex. Just like a mini-skirt is no invitation for sex. Or showing your face in public.

    Quote: What was your plan for that? Cut off their dicks? Put blindfolds on their eyes? Seriously, what DO you plan in your perfect society?

    Simple. Just educate each and every person about nudism. Get them to learn more about this culture. Teach them to accept the human body as it is instead of idealizing the perfect body. Is that so bad?
    The link nude=sex is not natural. It’s something parents teach their children. It’s made a taboo and thus it becomes exciting. Just like drugs is a taboo. Several people can resist their urges but it will also lead to obsessions for some.

    We should just start with proper education. Teach children to accept their own bodies instead of worshiping the ideal shape. Why is it that so many people nowadays feel so uncomfortable about what they look like? Why are people so obsessed with their own looks? Who is teaching these people that they have to look beautiful, need long legs and big breasts or else no one will like them? Just look around SL and you’ll find that most female avatars tend to be over 7 foot tall with cup F or bigger. And often extremely thin.
    There are people dying every day now just because they can’t accept what their bodies look like. Models are starving themselves to death since the fashion industry has demanded extremely thin models for years. Several models had to actually die before the fashion industry decided to accept a minimum size and weight for their models. And still, that’s not commonly accepted.
    As a nudist I just accepted the way my body looks. I learned to accept it because I’ve seen so many other “normal” bodies. And of course I have a certain preference in appearance but I’m not obsessed by it.

    Quote: I don’t believe there’s anything inherently “healthy” about nudism.

    And I don’t believe that it’s healthy for people to have any fear about nudity, because they might actually get sexually aroused by it. I’ve met quite a few people with similar fears who decided to just look around the nudist areas for a few hours. Almost all of them even forgot about the fact that they were naked at the end of the day and none were sexually aroused because of all the nudity at the end of the day. It was an experience that opened their eyes, although this might not happen to everyone.

    Anyway, I think we can agree that we both disagree about this topic. I’m pro nudism, you’re anti nudism. It’s unlikely that this is ever going to change but I still respect your lifestyle and hope you can respect mine. And if nudism offends you, don’t visit any nudism locations. My lands focus on the art of the human body and nudity, kept out of view for the occasional viewer. If you don’t like that, don’t visit my land.

    Quote: indeed, it is the freedom of NOT wearing a burqua that we are after.

    RIGHT! And for me it’s also about the freedom of NOT wearing any clothes that I am after. Is that much different? I don’t see it. Well, one word. I used “clothes” instead of “Burqa”…
18. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    The cultures that force women into the veil don’t predominate across the globe; and even in those countries where the practice exists, there is significant dissent, and it is not practiced by all classes in the society. Even primitive cultures have elaborate decorations and clothings and always did. I didn’t realize nudism had the same kind of rigid orthodoxy in a kind of narrow-minded belief system as cults. I can see now that it does. It’s the opposite of freedom; it’s licentiousness fighting with the tool of oppression.

    Um whatever the cultures where the man where’s the wooden thing over his dick, these aren’t modern, urban cultures where we all who log into SL live. So to invoke them now as justification of nudism is just plain nutty. There’s a reason why I don’t get into debates on RL topics with SL people as a matter of principle: because the levels of culture and education and experience are so far apart, that you’re talking to the wall. I sense that is one of those times : )

    I don’t think that nudity as a practice is ever going to grow beyond a cult. I don’t think in the North, where temperatures get low, is it likely to become the norm. But hey, that’s just me.

    Of course I bothered to check the facts. I talked to officially-registered and empowered mentors. Now seriously, where else do you go to “check the facts” in Second Life? There are no “facts”, client-side. The “facts” are all server-side with game gods who don’t talk and are no longer online.

    I used to vet every Herald story with at least some Linden online — because I could find them on line! So I could contact them, and get them to at least confirm or deny certain things. No more! You can’t see them online! They hide!

    I think it’s important to run with stories when you have them. This is a tabloid. It’s breaking news. I spent a great deal of time even over night with Pixeleen going over how to do this story and couch the terms. The result is a very careful “allged” and “may have been” very clearly expressed. The raid by Linden Volunteers, whether you and those volunteers wish to acknowledge it or not, has some LL backing to it — of the informal, plausible-deniability kind that always is so squishy in a governing power.

    And so often, as Uri always says, to get the story, we must wait for the story to come out in the comments. And we still don’t have the story because we don’t know if a) the Lindens took copies or b) had an opinion on the content or c) what they would have done if you had NOT caved to your neighbours. I suggest you test that, if you are sincere, and really believe that the Lindens found nothing wrong. Laterly, in fact, you admitted it was “neither approved nor disapproved”. And hey, that’s how we like our Lukewarm Lindens.

    >In a way, you did the same as the rest of the mob who invaded my area, although you soon realized that the facts were untrue.

    Oh, don’t be ridiculous. The facts aren’t untrue. Here’s the lede: “Tipped off by some newbie helpers who staff a monitoring network with Linden support, Linden staff may have seized or “force-copied” anime paintings said to contain what was deemed illegal child anime pornography from a cabana tonight in the working-class water sim of Blister — leaving only adult nude amateur art mostly made with a 3D modeling program: Poser.”

    Sorry, but Lindens coming, Volunteers coming, neighbours coming and YOU putting the stuff away isn’t all that much different than Lindens seizing the content, eh?

    And I think I very well captured the sense of witch-hunting, and I also had been following a separate, but very much related story.

    For many journalists, publishing a story without checking the real facts tends to put an immediate end to their careers.

    Oh, please spare me the Monday-morning quarter-backing, the Internet histrionics, and the savage mob-justice lawyering. Because you’re the mob, too, if you can actually save a Herald journalist who went there in good faith to expose the harassment you were facing, and covered that harassment. Just because I don’t buy that your underwater shenanigans is a totally airtight story doesn’t mean that i don’t think you were persecuted. You were. I just don’t like your tap-dancing around all the issues.

    If you believe your content is ok, put it in a cabana for sale. It’s not in your neighbours’ face, and you still get to sell it. See how it flies. Run those dudes with the girls up the flagpole and see if anybody salutes, eh?

    When you finally surfaced and said that you yourself put away things to please a neighbour (mentors described it as you swooping while a Linden came on the scene, as if guilty — they may have exaggerated obviously), you told your story. When I was able to confirm that the Lindens in fact didn’t *delete* anything, I corrected the headline and put in a headline with that explanation. The story is an ongoing one. It will have its updates and corrections. You can’t hold it for 3 days while it ages, while you all remain silent, and nothing comes out. Sorry, but that’s not how you run a news operation.

    >Well, some just start writing stories for cheesy magazines with stories about Elvis who’s still alive and UFOs who replaced the President with a robot-clone or whatever.

    Well, no, this was more of a story about some cheesy art by these lesbians from Holland, one of whom made a picture of some adult dudes with erections ogling little shy girls, underwater, which attracted the prurient interest of some zealous and overreaching Volunteers who blew you in to the Lindens. I don’t think any robots were involved.

    I think your problem here may be with sex. You seem to want to find ways to “stamp it out”. It sickens you that people are aroused and wish to have it — men especially, evidently. I quite understand, it can be upsetting, but if you are going to grant yourself freedom to do what you want and have whatever kind of sex you wish, with whomever, and walk around nude, you’ll have to accept that other people are going to go around the same way and not be “sick” on them. I certainly am not sickened by people who wish to go to a nudist camp or sunbathe nude on a beach, I don’t mind them at all. I do think seeing nudes at the cash-register, the car wash, my kids’ school — well, that could get tiresome. I suppose that’s unhealthy though, not wanting to see, oh, the lunch lady’s sagging tits. But think of what I’m sparing YOU all by not subscribing to nudity, and then you’ll do a smart about-face on this issue, surely : )

    >Yet the Lindens felt different about this. No warning was issued and they didn’t remove any content. They came, they saw and so far haven’t done anything since the material might be borderline, but not illegal in their expert opinions.

    Um, no. Let’s walk back the cat here. They came, they saw and..you removed it. Put it back out, doll, and let’s see what they say then.

    Maybe they’re still undecided about this all so we’ll just have to wait on their final response. But they had no reason to immediately remove it.

    The dude with the dicks and the girls are still out? Ok, let’s see how long that lasts.

    >There’s still something called “Freedom of expression” in this world and this gives me the right to voice my personal opinion about things like nudity. Not porn, nudity.

    Well, it’s in the eye of the beholder *shrugs*. You’ll have to respect that subjectivity, which is the basis for your own fervent beliefs.

    >When I have some time, I’ll generate a few images of just Kelvin with his penis in several different positions so people can see what this model looks like in all these positions. Then again, people who already use Poser will probably already know what he looks like when nude.

    Uh, well, Kelvin sounds like one hell of a happenin’ wild and crazy guy.

    >I also want to point out that the model Laura in Poser was used without any modifications. Combined with the Vivien, Emily or Ashlyn skin from the DAZ3d site, you get a look of a reasonable adult model, including nipples and slightly larger breasts. If you question my art then you should definitely question these skins that are commercially sold by DAZ3d, since it would allow anyone with Poser, the Millennium teens and these skins to make similar images within a matter of minutes…

    Actually, the mentors do. But one source said to me, “They shouldn’t take the clothes off the models.” Sorry, but, that’s how they feel — teens are teens. They need clothes on them in Second Life.

    >Adding clothes takes more time…

    So does adding dicks.

    >And if people continue to disagree then the Lindens have to make a final judgment. But as you and I both seem to agree upon is that this whole witch-hunt is just a form of abuse by itself, making things worse, not better.

    I totally find this a witch-hunt. But I also realize that if YOU were in charge, if people felt like they had to put on a bikini on a beach, you might charge them with being sick, a danger to society, and throw them in the stocks. So, hey, it’s relative.

    >Quote: There is nothing wrong with men becoming aroused by naked women, and trying to suppress that is as bad as the most extremist of the Islamicists who cover women in burquas.

    >I have no problems with men getting aroused in general anyways. As long as they manage to control themselves. About four years ago my friends and I discovered some elderly guy masturbating in the bushes while he was looking at a couple of (adult) guys playing beach-volleyball. This was at a regular beach, btw. But apparently looking at a couple of guys in swim clothing aroused him in a real sick way. This could never be prevented but who do you have to blame for this? The guys who played volleyball or the sicko who felt it necessarily to masturbate while watching them?

    People who are exhibitionists have some kind of condition. I don’t think that’s relevant to this story. You made a picture of dudes with dicks on looking at girls. I dunno, it’s all pretty clear. Put the picture out, see if any chibi squid appear in your waters.

    >In some Islamic countries, a woman who gets raped risks being stoned to death simply because she had sex outside wedlock. And several women have been executed already for this simple reason and many more are still awaiting their final judgment. But are these women perpetrators or innocent victims?

    We’re not in an Islamic country, we’re in Second Life, hon. Which is about as far as you can get from an Islamic country and still be on planet earth in some sense. So why the hysteria, the agony, the histrionics? My word, woman, you really have yourself worked up in to a total froth here.

    We’re talking about pictures of dudes with hard-ons and teen girls. It’s against the TOS. It bothered not only neighbours; it got them calling volunteers. Then everybody swooped, even the chibi. Now, if you really, really think this is fine, and that the Lindens don’t care, then put the damn thing out. Seriously, I think your neighbours be damned.

    >This is of course an extreme example but it’s not that much different from similar opinions in our Western world. It wasn’t even long ago when a woman wearing a short skirt could almost be legally raped since she apparently was asking for sex.

    Sign. You are very young. There was no such thing.

    >As if wearing short skirts is an open invitation. Fortunately, this opinion has changed too in the last years. And unfortunately for you and many others, the fact that people are naked is no invitation for sex. Just like a mini-skirt is no invitation for sex. Or showing your face in public.

    It will go on being seen as an invitation to sex by many men, especially in some cultures, and you’ll have to accept that and take measures.

    >Simple. Just educate each and every person about nudism. Get them to learn more about this culture. Teach them to accept the human body as it is instead of idealizing the perfect body. Is that so bad?

    I’ve always been taught to accept and nurture the body, it is the temple of the Holy Spirit, in fact. Why would I be forced to be nude, however? Why? Why do I have to “learn about” a sect, one practiced by only some people? I get it, and I’ve moved on.

    >The link nude=sex is not natural. It’s something parents teach their children. It’s made a taboo and thus it becomes exciting. Just like drugs is a taboo. Several people can resist their urges but it will also lead to obsessions for some.

    I’m sorry, but this is claptrap, ideologically, morally, and practically. It’s important that you get a reality dose, but hey, I’m done administering it. Find some more parent figures who can do this for you, I’m done!

    >We should just start with proper education. Teach children to accept their own bodies instead of worshiping the ideal shape. Why is it that so many people nowadays feel so uncomfortable about what they look like? Why are people so obsessed with their own looks? Who is teaching these people that they have to look beautiful, need long legs and big breasts or else no one will like them? Just look around SL and you’ll find that most female avatars tend to be over 7 foot tall with cup F or bigger. And often extremely thin.

    Well, my question is more about why some people are obsessed with flat-chested teens, prepubescent fairies, and mens with hard-ons staring at girls, but then, I guess I’m just um looking at the wrong end of the telescope here lol.

    >There are people dying every day now just because they can’t accept what their bodies look like. Models are starving themselves to death since the fashion industry has demanded extremely thin models for years. Several models had to actually die before the fashion industry decided to accept a minimum size and weight for their models. And still, that’s not commonly accepted.

    I think some violin music would work well with this prayer don’t you?

    >As a nudist I just accepted the way my body looks. I learned to accept it because I’ve seen so many other “normal” bodies. And of course I have a certain preference in appearance but I’m not obsessed by it.

    Well, gosh, I accept my body, and I don’t chase any model looks and never have, geez, but do I have to sign up to be a nudist and be a cultist TOO?

    >And I don’t believe that it’s healthy for people to have any fear about nudity, because they might actually get sexually aroused by it. I’ve met quite a few people with similar fears who decided to just look around the nudist areas for a few hours. Almost all of them even forgot about the fact that they were naked at the end of the day and none were sexually aroused because of all the nudity at the end of the day. It was an experience that opened their eyes, although this might not happen to everyone.

    I fail to see what “fear” has to do with it. It’s normal to be aroused by nude people — I think men would find this especially. I think as a nude cultist, you wish to fetch up examples that fit your theory. Other people might not.

    I’m not “anti-nudism”; I don’t wish to have nudism shoved down my throat, and I think a debate on this subject in RL terms is irrelevant to what happened in Blister. I don’t have any need to go chasing after nude art in SL; I find most of it terribly tacky. I do think you have pallavered and distracted from the root issue here.

    Let the reader judge.
19. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Sapphire Oh / Mercury Slade, thanks for coming forward and telling your story. It’s riveting. I can see my description of Blister was accurate!

    Now, some clarification: did you know this friend was a Volunteer? Did you call her *because* she was a Volunteer? Did you realize this was all being discussed in the Volunteer’s channel? Were there any groups involved that are “watch” groups about child porn?

    It’s unfortunate that the picture of this poor Madeleine lost in Europe had to be dragged to the scene — who did that?

    You say there is a RL policeman involved. Did he conclude that these photos were somehow RL-actionable, i.e. in RL would he have removed them in the line of duty under the laws of the country where you are?

    Finally, if this neighbours puts the pictures inside the cabana to sell, or under water, can you live with it? Becaue they aren’t in your face.

    And P.S. spying is against the TOS, but I’m not sure if you put a spy device on the edge of your property, with 20 m2 or 96 m2 radius, that it’s “Ok”. You could likely abuse report it, but I can also note that by deploying this equipment, Lisae is contradicting her purported good will. And what’s the need to spy on neighbours?

    If she thinks her art is cleared by the Lindens, put it out.

    Anyway, this is quite the circus. It’s not lost on me that the header on one of those avatars says Help Island Security. What the HELL is that?!
20. 

    Sapphire Oh / Mercury Slade
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Hi again..

    We just wanted to straighten out this story. thats why we decided to reply to this. all we see is lisae making accusations. including about 11 people.. honestly out of the list, there are more than half of those names we have never spoke to or met on SL.. so how she calls us a group we’ll never know?.

    The questions-

    The friend that we IM. is NOT a member of any Volunteer groups. As i can work out. this friend told others and them others told their friends.. somewhere along the line it got into the Volunteers hands. We were unaware of any group chats going on. none of us was involved in that. The only thing i knew that something was going on is because i received a group message from a lucky chair group. With message and landmarks of blister. And also because the amount of people landing in the area.

    To our knowledge their was no “Watch” groups involved.

    The answer from the RL police officer is simply YES!!!

    It would be removed but as we are aware there are different laws for different countries.

    The answer to your question about could we live with it.. is NO we couldn’t. Not because our eyes have to see it.. Its because i feel it would attract the wrong type of people to the area. And also seeing lisae place in Lotsawa i wouldnt like to see that next to the land. Blister is a lovely area and we have met a few people from around there. All great and we speak quite often.

    we feel know that we cant speak in main chat on the land.

    We have worked hard and made the ideal place for us. Its just a shame we feel uncomftable knowing she has set spy recorders. The place as you see from the pic is not near her house.. its put purposly near our boat. and she admitted that.

    As far as im aware nothing has been settled on the case.

    Lisae says we grief her.. thats not true.

    She also says that we have had warnings.. Still NOT true.

    Yes we made reports and upto now. no reply from Lindens saying the case has been settled.

    I dont know why she feels the need to make these statements.

    Anyway Helpisland security ??.. No idea… i am aware thou that there is a help island, but myself never been there.

    How she can say that i am responsible. Like i said we just made reports and IM one friend. So now she feels the cause to harass us the way she does.

    Lisae proved to me that she has NO good will…. Acting out she would remove the spy. yet leaving another in place that she knew would continue to monitor conversations.

    Since the day this all happened we have not approached her.. till last night about the spy. So you tell me… how are we doing wrong? How can she blame me?

    We have no intent to speak to this person again. even thou we see her hovering in the air looking over. Oh well thats SL i suppose..
21. 

    Sapphire Oh / Mercury Slade
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    One more thing to settle.. The lindens arrived there and very shortly after so did lisae.

    I used my camera view down into the sea. Lisae was there, her beam firing and the items was Removed ONE BY ONE.

    Upon that i stated in main chat that lisae has remmoved them from in the sea..

    Then someone asked Micheal Linden if he seen them..

    His reply was “YES i seen them”
22. 

    Alyx Stoklitsky
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Oh my, a huge explosion of drama… And it turns out the Lindens didn’t even do anything? Well, welcome to SL, the never-ending soap.
23. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Quote: The cultures that force women into the veil don’t predominate across the globe;

    But it does dominate a large section of Islamic countries. And considering the size of the Islam as a religion, it does affect quite a lot of people. And it’s a religion which is still growing. I have nothing against any religion, but I don’t want any religious rules to be enforced upon me.

    Actually, there is no real culture that predominates this world. There are thousands of cultures in this world. Small cultures, large cultures. There are 6 billion opinions in this world. It’s not that you can get everyone to agree with your -or mine- views. You’d be lucky if you even get 5% of this world to agree with you.

    Quote: whatever the cultures where the man where’s the wooden thing over his dick, these aren’t modern, urban cultures where we all who log into SL live.

    I don’t know, actually. It wouldn’t surprise me if some of those natives are quite familiar with things like the Internet. They probably will have problems getting broadband connection in the areas where they live but the fact that they don’t live in urban areas doesn’t mean they’re complete primitives. They just chose a certain lifestyle and I can imagine that others would feel uncomfortable about this.

    Quote: I don’t think that nudity as a practice is ever going to grow beyond a cult.

    Maybe in the USA but in Europe the opinions are quite different. Countries like France, Germany, Spain, Denmark and the Netherlands are quite open for nudists. There are already large villages in the more southern parts of Europe where it’s legal to walk around naked in the streets. In Germany there are thousands of parks where nudity is also accepted, just like in Denmark and the Netherlands. Actually, the number of clothing-optional locations are growing in Europe. True naturism areas are actually noticing a decrease in membership since there are so many new locations where people can walk around legally nude.

    But again, this is just a cultural difference and I don’t think we will ever agree about this. You don’t want nudism shoved through your throat, I don’t want anti-nudism shoved down my throat. I practice this in my own private area, marked as mature. And if people disagree with it then get the Hell out of MY land.

    Quote: This is a tabloid. It’s breaking news.

    Yes, but as a journalist you do have the responsibility to check out the facts first! You just saw an interesting article and wanted to be the first to post an article about it. You made it sound very sensational and later realized that the title was incorrect. No material was seized. But the article is still there and some people could think that you just did this to increase your own popularity. You’ve missed several true facts in your original story and as I heard, this is a mistake you’ve made several times before.
    In the end, your original article just added fuel for the mob that was on my land ready to lynch me. And all this just because you got the facts wrong. And you’ve still not added an update to correct these facts.

    Quote: Sorry, but Lindens coming, Volunteers coming, neighbours coming and YOU putting the stuff away isn’t all that much different than Lindens seizing the content, eh?

    The Lindens came and went but never took any action against the material. Nor did they give any warning or comments on it all. I haven’t heard them disapproving about any of the contents on my land.
    And as I’ve pointed out several times already, I removed material from my land on request, not out of pressure. The material is still available in my inventory and I have no doubt that the Lindens will be able to check the images in my inventory. And it’s a possibility that some of my art will pop up on other people’s lands, since it has been for sale. I am not going to tell how many people actually bought something from me during that raid anyways.

    Quote: But one source said to me, “They shouldn’t take the clothes off the models.”

    Probably true but complain to DAZ3d about that. They are the ones who provide Laura with a naked skin. By default, she’s naked. Buy the skin, she’s still naked. Just like so many other Poser models.
    Btw, adding a penis to a guy in Poser is a lot less work than adding clothes. And it tends to stick out a bit, away from the body so it doesn’t disappear in a leg that easily. Biggest problem with clothes is that every time you change the pose for a model you will also have to check the clothes and make minor adjustments.

    Quote: But I also realize that if YOU were in charge, if people felt like they had to put on a bikini on a beach, you might charge them with being sick, a danger to society, and throw them in the stocks.

    Nope. I’m not the one who wants to dictate what others have to wear. But I don’t want to be dictated by others about what I should wear! I don’t judge people based on their clothes. They can be naked, they can walk around in a Burqa, they could even wear big fur coats on a warm summer beach for all I care. People have the right to wear the clothes that they feel most comfortable in and I just happen to feel quite comfortable without them.

    Quote: We’re not in an Islamic country, we’re in Second Life, hon.

    Let me see. There are about 2.1 billion Christians. There are 1.3 billion Muslims. There are 1.1 billion atheists or people of non-specific religions. And the remaining people are divided over several other religions. Thus, one in 6 persons you meet in RL can be a Muslim. I would suggest that this doesn’t differ from what you can find in SL. I know there are several locations dedicated to Christianity and it would not surprise me to find several locations dedicated to Islam. Don’t think that a virtual game is free of any religious influence.

    Quote: >It wasn’t even long ago when a woman wearing a short skirt could almost be legally raped since she apparently was asking for sex.
    Quote: Sign. You are very young. There was no such thing.

    Link: http://www.irishhealth.com/index.html?level=4&id=8528 – A new poll in the UK has found that 34% of people believe that a women is partially or totally responsible for being raped if she has behaved in a flirtatious manner.

    This is from an article written in 2005! I don’t even dare to go further back in history since those stories tend to become quite horrific. So a more recent case then?

    Link: http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/opinion.cfm?id=1102342007 – YOU may find it difficult to imagine your 14-year-old daughter having sex. You may find it impossible to imagine her drinking half a bottle of vodka before she ‘agrees’ to said sex. Now imagine your precious child is having sex with a 16-year-old boy whose friend is capturing his antics on a mobile phone for the future titillation of their respective pals.

    It’s a story published the 15th of this month, this year! A case that happened quite recently. Yet for whatever reason, the guys who raped this 14 year old girl (!) were barely punished for this offense.

    So, looking at this case, it’s still happening…

    Quote: It’s important that you get a reality dose, but hey, I’m done administering it.

    Your opinion, my opinion… We can only agree that we disagree about this. We both believe the other needs to have a reality check. Maybe we both need a reality check? Then again, with 6 billion different opinions, who should be administrating it?

    Quote: It will go on being seen as an invitation to sex by many men, especially in some cultures, and you’ll have to accept that and take measures.

    So assume the following situation… A girl goes to the beach, puts on her bikini and spends some time at the beach with her friends. She has to pee at a certain moment and since there are no toilets close by, she decides to walk into the sea to make it slightly bigger. Out of view of her friends, some guy grabs her from behind, holds his hand over her mouth and rips of her bikini bottom. Did she ask for this just because she walked into the sea, a bit out of sight of her friends?
    Well, this story didn’t end bad. My girlfriend knows a bit about self-defense and since she had one of her hands free, she just reached downwards and grabbed the guy at his most sensitive parts and squeezed quite hard. When the guy loosened his grip, she used her elbow to strike him on the nose, breaking it and stunning him a few moments before help arrived.
    Still, for any other girl this could have ended much worse…

    Btw, it doesn’t even matter. A woman should be allowed to excite a guy, even invite him to her place, get undressed together and still refuse him to penetrate her, no matter how excited he gets. Since men are in general stronger than women, it’s quite easy for a guy to just force a woman to do things against her will. It’s a power that you should not abuse in any way. Respect the wishes of your partner: don’t force yourself upon her, no matter what.
    Or end up with nuts squeezed like lemons…

    Quote: Why would I be forced to be nude, however?

    No one is forcing you to go nude. Not in RL and not in SL. But you should respect the wishes of those who do feel more comfortable with nudity on their own property.

    Quote: Why do I have to “learn about” a sect, one practiced by only some people?

    Well, maybe because this so-called sect tends to be quite a large group of people. The naturist movement is becoming so big that it’s actually splitting up in all kinds of smaller subgroups, like family nudism, adult nudism, gay and lesbian nudism, clothing-optional areas, hedonism and whatever more. There are no real reliable statistics but it is suggested that up to 40% of people in Canada and even up to 50% in Europe have taken part in naturist events at least once in their life.

    Quote: Well, my question is more about why some people are obsessed with flat-chested teens, prepubescent fairies, and mens with hard-ons staring at girls, but then, I guess I’m just um looking at the wrong end of the telescope here lol.

    Perhaps readers of Flair magazine and other fashion magazines. Many fashion models are short, skinny and no bigger than a C cup. And quite a few have very youthful looks too. And I’m not even starting to mention the average age of these models but it’s very close to 18, with several as young as 15 or 16, depending on the region. Models age 24 and over are almost required to retire or find a job in another industry. And there are quite a lot of people who love to see fashion shows and look at the pretty young ladies showing all kinds of clothes…

    Of course, guys who read things like Playboy magazines are more used to models ages 18 to 24 with at least a C cup or bigger. Which reminds me… Is there much difference between a person age 17 and age 18, except that the latter is just considered to be an adult?

    Quote: It’s normal to be aroused by nude people

    Again, a difference of opinions here. Can’t be helped. But I STRONGLY disagree with this view. I don’t mind people getting aroused by nudity but for me it’s NOT an open invitation for sex.

    SL is in my opinion a reflection of RL, although in some locations things are becoming quite extreme or fantastic. There are some disturbing areas with very strong, sadistic ways of having sex. Special sex-dungeons all over where you can have your female avatar being impaled on a huge spear while a second poseball gives any guy a chance a position where you have to give him oral pleasure too. Sexrooms for furries and other nonhumans are also quite popular. And it’s weird but next to one of my lands there’s a complete kindergarden where people can hire or buy child avatars or whatever for some kind of NON-SEXUAL ageplay. I guess the mob didn’t even notice this while they were invading my areas. Should I report it? Already sent one single report about it to the lindens, warning them about possible ageplay but so far I haven’t noticed anything sexual going on in that area. Just adult people pretending to be young kids playing around on some playgrounds. I’ve seen lands dedicated completely to Jesus and other religious icons. I’ve seen quite a lot actually. And I just dedicate my lands to what I feel more comfortable about, which just happens to be nudism and the admiration of the human body. I’m not forcing you to visit my land so if you disagree with my opinion then just stay away from my land, okay?

    I’m not forcing anyone in SL or RL to do anything they don’t like to do.
24. 

    Yumi Murakami
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    > No, it’s going on land that is not your own, and public spaces that
    > aren’t near your own sim, or helped by you. It’s taking a busy-body,
    > excessively controlling interest in your neighbour’s affairs.

    Um, everyone on Second Life goes to land owned by other people from time to time. I could understand that if someone went to someone else’s land for the express purpose of checking up on their content and ARing them, that would be acting as a police force, but I’m not seeing where anyone has done that here.

    > If you can’t figure out what is meant by child pornography or images
    > that are also construed as child pornography means *+children*, and not
    > flat-chested 18-year-olds or “underage fairies”, you need more than a
    > Second Life.

    That’s true. But it’s the Lindens who are the editors of SL, not you, nor me, nor the people ARing. If people want to AR content, that’s their choice. If the Lindens want to ignore or process the AR, that’s their choice.

    Regarding the “underage fairy” issue, that’s reasonable, given the law. Legally all that matters is whether a picture looks like a child (or a child in costume) or not. Any “in-character” suggestion as to what it’s a picture of is irrelevant. As a general rule, always ask yourself if a particular interpretation of the law would give actual paedophiles a loophole to distribute real child pornography. If it would, chances are the law will not be interpreted that way in reality.

    > Um, that’s what they do. Is there a reason to be in Blister, a nothing
    > water sim like a million other water sims, unless you are on a hotline,
    > unless you are looking for trouble? Of course not.

    Um, can’t people explore? Or do people who are exploring have to make sure never to file an AR?

    > Volunteers are encouraged to monitor WAs and other big areas and they
    > always seem to find plenty to do.

    Volunteers are encouraged to monitor WAs, HI and OI to see if anyone needs help. Yes, they will report Mature content in these areas but that’s because the areas are all PG!

    > I think it’s wrong for the Lindens to ENCOURAGE posses. Because that’s
    > what they do. “You all go offlist and get together and run a posse and
    > mass grief-report and keep your eyes and ears open, so we have plausible
    > deniability and won’t have the record show in this official group”.
    > That’s how it appears; that is likely how it *is*.

    Um, I thought that the Volunteers group was supposed to be secret and unaccountable.. not to have a ‘record’ that ‘shows’. Please, make up your mind!

    Lexie Linden was asking people not to spam the Mentor/Volunteer channel.. that’s all. If someone’s spamming a group channel for a group you run, and you ask them not to spam and to talk about the topic somewhere else, do you expect to be blamed for encouraging “secret meetings” about the same topic?
25. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    >Um, everyone on Second Life goes to land owned by other people from time to time. I could understand that if someone went to someone else’s land for the express purpose of checking up on their content and ARing them, that would be acting as a police force, but I’m not seeing where anyone has done that here.

    Um, they just did in Blister? Hello? They were summoned, and flash-mobbed.

    >That’s true. But it’s the Lindens who are the editors of SL, not you, nor me, nor the people ARing. If people want to AR content, that’s their choice. If the Lindens want to ignore or process the AR, that’s their choice.

    I think the Lindens should make guidelines and police them, and stop this nonsense about “handing you the tools to empower you blah blah”.

    >Um, can’t people explore? Or do people who are exploring have to make sure never to file an AR?

    Um, we just heard that they were summoned, um.

    >Volunteers are encouraged to monitor WAs, HI and OI to see if anyone needs help. Yes, they will report Mature content in these areas but that’s because the areas are all PG!

    People join volunteers to play police. They get hugely angry at the chaos in the WAs. The Lindens should be deterring this, not encouraging vigilantes.

    >Um, I thought that the Volunteers group was supposed to be secret and unaccountable.. not to have a ‘record’ that ‘shows’. Please, make up your mind!

    Um, I didn’t say that it was supposed to be like that; I said it was like that, and it was a bad thing, um.

    >Lexie Linden was asking people not to spam the Mentor/Volunteer channel.. that’s all. If someone’s spamming a group channel for a group you run, and you ask them not to spam and to talk about the topic somewhere else, do you expect to be blamed for encouraging “secret meetings” about the same topic?

    She told them to abuse report and also go on meeting about the same topic. She didn’t say, “Let’s not get overzealous on this guys, or “hey, it’s going overboard to gang up on people’s lots you suspect,” or anything that should have been said.
26. 

    DaveOner
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Wow Prok, you actually had a good article and you had to ruin it with posting more of the same black helicopter bullshit we’re all used to.

    Yumi, keep in mind that Prok thinks that EVERYONE that belongs to a group is guilty if a few of it’s members engage in questionable activity.

    She also thinks that the Lindens are a totalitarian government out to crush our will and freedom when they’re really just a company that made a computer game/platform/whatever that she could just stop playing if such evil was going on…if she wasn’t so addicted.

    From the looks of it the people in question in the volunteers group are alarmists, much like Prok, only with different opinions and points of view. A couple wanted to figure out if what Lisae had on her land was “broadly offensive” or not and it spiraled into a big legal/moral/philisophical debate by people that don’t know how to properly debate using logic and reason and can’t handle other opinions well…much like Prok.

    According to the chatlog LL’s stance was “AR anything you find offensive but don’t talk about it on the volunteer group chat”. That’s reasonable. An AR isn’t automatically a trip to jail or even a ticket. It’s a report that LL looks at (or is supposed to anyway) and makes a decision on what should be done.

    LL needs to give better guidelines as to what they define “broadly offensive” especially in the ageplay department. This whole “we want everyone to like us so we don’t make big rules/we want to keep everything vague so we don’t have to do as much work” attitude is hurting SL.

    They also need to punish people that gang up on people and essentially grief like in the situation Lisae described when people were insulting her and attacking her.

    Prok needs a hit from the bong and a professional body massage. Relax girl! Join Amnesty International or something!!
27. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Anyone who tells me to “join Amnesty International” obviously hasn’t google witch-hunted me *chuckles*. And people who imagine they’re giving me a “great piece of advice” and modifying my behaviour by praising some things I do and condemning others are silly, it doesn’t work.

    I don’t say all members of all groups are guilty of what a few do. I say that the b/tards/v-5/Woodbury groups are specifically guilty for what their groups do because dozens upon dozens have banned, and those remaining have aided, abetted, and applauded.

    I do use logic and reason, which is why I don’t see that a picture of adult men, even if in lewd poses, is actionable if it has teenage like non-human images in it precisely because it seems borderline, like the “underage fairy”. I’d tend to leave something like that to the Lindens and wouldn’t abuse report it, just as I didn’t rush to report this grotesque anime with the hermaphrodite “children” because they so obviously weren’t human children. I’ll leave that to the busy-bodies, as I don’t feel I have sufficient grounds or guidelines.

    But guidelines are not what we are going to get from LL. The can’t define something without take responsibility for policing under that definition. So they’re leaving it this messy way on purpose until they can get age verification in and force people to check off their lots as mature.
28. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    FYI…
    I have just cleared my whole ban list of my lands in Blister.I hope I don’t have to add anyone to it again for behaving in an abusive way. I don’t like to restrict other people’s movements but I considered it a way to defend myself, and it’s a way that is sanctioned by LL. Since the matter is quieting down again and since the Lindens are already involved in the whole matter, I don’t see the use of keeping these persons banned. And if the conclusion by the Lindens and even that RL police officer concludes that none of the material was offensive enough to warrant any further actions then people will just have to accept that. Otherwise, it’s still a matter for the Lindens and possibly law enforcement to decide about this matter and not some big mob.

    I also heard that some members of this mob were worried about the recording devices that I use on my own land which I use to monitor it while I’m offline. I have used these in the past several times already since they are useful to kick out people who offend the other visitors of my lands. There have been a couple of griefers in the past who thought it was funny to fill my land with 10x10x10 blocks. Another couple of griefers decided it was fun to let some nukes explode on my land. A couple of persons made some very nasty comments to some of my regular visitors. And in one case I recorded a conversation by someone who admitted he was under age. My recorder helped me to find these griefers and helped me to make sure that those griefers only get one chance to do this while they are on my land. I have also reported these griefers and in one case one of these griefers actually had his account suspended for a few days. I don’t know what happened to that minor who happened to be on the main grid.
    My recorder also helped me at the moment that this mob invaded my land. It allowed me to trace back the whole conversation on my land from the moment when it started until, well… Now. It was also this recording log that alerted me of the situation and gave me a chance to discuss the matter with Michael Linden. It also showed me that there have been at least three other lindens on my land. So believe me when I say that it has received plenty of attention from them.

    Yet until now I haven’t heard a thing about this whole matter from them…

    About the matter of privacy related to these chat logs… My system only records conversations of the last 24 hours, automatically removing all older messages. Furthermore, it is stored in a way that’s not easy to access, especially since the script that I use has no direct references to the location where the information is stored. I use this information for one purpose and one purpose only, which is to keep all griefers off my land. Which is exactly why some people aren’t happy about it. I’m sorry but when you’re on my land and when I would be there too, I would hear exactly the same as what those recorders do. The difference is that these recorders allow me to read back all messages just for future references.

    The lindens want volunteer to report about any offensive material, right? Well, that is exactly what those recorders do. It is a tool to help report all offensive material, and I can provide them with exact details about the date and time of the offensive suggestion and the name of the offender. Since I have reported to them a few times making references to my recorder, I don’t think they disapprove this kind of usage.

    Furthermore, one of the signs on my land even warns visitors that all public conversations can be recorded. None of the information collected by these recorders is used to invade other people’s privacy. Again, it is a way for me to protect myself against any griefers.

    However, I do have a copy of the conversation that went on during the mob raid and it shows EXACTLY who started all this, and how. Want me to share the whole log here? Sorry, but I cannot do that because I do respect other people’s privacy. I will share a few exceprts from it below to show some of the lies that someone is telling but that’s it. If the Lindens request for this log, I will send it to them, anyone else: tough luck. But it did tell me the order in which people were invited and who started it all. Which is very useful information for the abuse report I’ve sent.

    Back to the conversation. Not going to answer everything anymore. This has wasted enough of my time already.

    Quote: Regarding the “underage fairy” issue, that’s reasonable, given the law. Legally all that matters is whether a picture looks like a child (or a child in costume) or not.

    It also matters in which position the child is posing. A child with fairy wings and a bikini doesn’t seem offensive to me, especially since this is an ocean area thus it’s likely to see people in bikini’s. Even kids. For those who will visit my land, there are even more fairies on my land now, flying around all over the place. A bit similar to the fish below my island. Not nude, not topless either. Just dressed in the teen sporting clothes set from Poser. Actually, if that image is considered childporn then even the Herald is in violating since a similar image is in the main article!

    Now to the remarks by Sapphire Oh on the subject…

    Quote: The friend that we IM. is NOT a member of any Volunteer groups. As i can work out. this friend told others and them others told their friends..

    Yep. My records do prove this to be true.

    Quote: We were unaware of any group chats going on. none of us was involved in that.

    Nope. Then you must have missed some of the conversations that went on. Someone clearly said: “do we contact through the group if we find anything else?” after which someone else confirmed this. This occurred about an hour after the first people came over to my land. Sapphire Oh was close by at the same moment, but did she miss this?
    Nope, because right after this remark, she said: “contact everyone u can if you find anything you think isnt right”

    Yes, that conversation was recorded! And it’s one sign that someone here isn’t as innocent in this as she claims… Further records shop that they have been actively using group chats for their discussions, although Sapphire herself might not have done that. Yet she knew that those conversations were going on and now she dares to deny this.

    Quote: The only thing i knew that something was going on is because i received a group message from a lucky chair group. With message and landmarks of blister. And also because the amount of people landing in the area.

    Not true, again. A complete line from my log this time: Sapphire Oh (2007-07-13 07:32:29 PDT): recording device outside here
    At this moment she was one of the first who was on my land. Also, she immediately noticed the recording device which recorded exactly what she said. Up until this moment there weren’t many conversations going on in the area so everything was done in group chat (which again makes her previous statement an outrageous lie) or there weren’t that many people around at that moment.
    Actually, this whole statement of her about receiving a message in a group chat while denying that she knew about any group chat going on about this is already contradicting each other! So yes, she knew about a group chat…

    And she knew it was recorded too, almost immediate upon arrival.

    Quote: The answer to your question about could we live with it.. is NO we couldn’t.

    Which is technically your problem, not mine. SL is open to everyone. It’s one of the things that can happen in SL. You find a nice piece of land, buy it and then suddenly you end up with a neighbor whom you happen to dislike.
    Then again, the offensive material has been removed as requested by some of my neighbors. For many, that’s enough to start business as usual again. However, there is still this small group whom I have named who appeared to work together to take all kinds of actions.

    Quote: And also seeing lisae place in Lotsawa i wouldnt like to see that next to the land.

    I actually was one of the first people in Lotsawa and bought a large piece of land there when most of it was still empty. The people who came after me knew what they could except from this area.

    Quote: Blister is a lovely area and we have met a few people from around there. All great and we speak quite often.

    True. Which is one reason why I don’t want to upset the people around me. Still, a large area of Blister is still available for sale.

    Quote: We have worked hard and made the ideal place for us. Its just a shame we feel uncomftable knowing she has set spy recorders. The place as you see from the pic is not near her house.. its put purposly near our boat. and she admitted that.

    The picture that is shown in the article happens to be the one between my boats, on the dock. Another one is a fairy dancing above the water and it’s only purpose there is beautification. Since I have lots of fairies flying around, it’s just interesting to have one there too.
    Spy recorders? Well, you already knew they were there the first time you arrived and you didn’t start to feel uncomfortable until you realized that those where actually working! It’s not very useful to plot against someone when they can hear everything going on in your secret society, right?

    Quote: As far as im aware nothing has been settled on the case.

    True. Haven’t heard anything yet so LL is either still undecided or are just going to ignore the whole thing.

    Quote: Lisae says we grief her.. thats not true.

    Well, let’s look at the recordings again:
    Sapphire Oh (2007-07-13 08:47:51 PDT): sorry i set the dome to phantom and it took u up for some reason
    This was right after someone put a dome around my place…

    More like this has been recorded and it proves why she feels uncomfortable. It also shows that having these recorders is a good DEFENSE system for me.

    Quote: She also says that we have had warnings.. Still NOT true.

    Not true. The first thing she noticed when she arrives happens to be the recording device! Thus it’s clear that anyone could have noticed it.

    Quote: How she can say that i am responsible. Like i said we just made reports and IM one friend. So now she feels the cause to harass us the way she does.

    Yeah, IM one friend and suggest to invite even more people. Because that is what you did. (And what was recorded.)

    Quote: Lisae proved to me that she has NO good will…. Acting out she would remove the spy. yet leaving another in place that she knew would continue to monitor conversations.

    I have removed the devices near your boat. The closest device is now at least 20 meters away from it and as long as you’re not shouting, it won’t hear you either. Actually, the fact that those recorders became silent again is the main reason for me to lift the ban I put on you and the others.
    I am working on a new recording device that works only when the person talking is actually on my land. Or on the group land if the recorder is deeded to the group. Does that make you feel more comfortable? That way, I could put a recording device on my land next to your boat and still none of your conversations would be recorded. Noticed the walking crabs on my land? The floating spy cams? The floating fairies? I’ve used these to make sure that the code I need to use for this will actually work as it is supposed to. So don’t worry, in one or two days all conversations outside my land will be private again. I hope to have a better-working script by that time.
    And no, I don’t want to listen to conversations that happen outside my own land area. I just need a system that can warn me about griefers on my own land.

    Quote: Since the day this all happened we have not approached her..

    Actually, you did when you noticed that I had lifted the ban. You asked me why I did this. It’s simple. Even though you have been a real pain in the *** I still have no bad feelings towards you or your friends. I needed to act in self-defense and will do so again if need be. If you consider some images that I put in Blister offensive then don’t hesitate to just ask me to remove them. Do you want me to remove the texture vendor from Blister? And the other vendor? All you have to do is ask. I’ll probably just replace the JEVN vendor with one selling the script for the fish generator that’s under my island, though. And other scripts and projects that I have been working on. Not all of the things I’ve been working on are related to nudity. I build, I write scripts and I do some attempts to generate art and textures. I’m still in a learning process here.
    (Reminder to self: next time give the guy a koteka (penis sheath) to wear. It makes him look more tribal and probably a lot less offensive.)

    Quote: We have no intent to speak to this person again. even thou we see her hovering in the air looking over.

    Personally, I don’t care if we ever chat again. And me hovering in the air? That’s true but it has nothing to do with you but me looking at a few things on my land, in the air and under water. It’s still under development so I will be hovering above it for some while now.

    And Prokofy,
    Quote: I don’t say all members of all groups are guilty of what a few do.

    I don’t think any single person of such a group should be held responsible. They are guilty as a group, not as a single person. I don’t blame single persons for their actions. I blame the whole group and the mass hysteria it created. In a group, each and every member can always deny any guilt and blame all other group members for it. Since every member will attempt to do so and since it’s difficult to put the blame to just a few single individuals of such a group, you can say that all members are not guilty of anything the group committed. I don’t hold any grudges against any single member of this group anyways. I do hold grudges against the whole group, though.

    And I don’t like it when individuals of this group are denying their own part in it, even when there is plenty of evidence proving otherwise. But they’re only damaging their own reputation by this.
29. 

    DaveOner
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Don’t worry, Prok. You’re old enough that you should already know better…like 3x over.

    And I wasn’t disagreeing with your article, but the goofy ass comments and responses you put up after it.

    In reality the volunteers aren’t the problem. It’s vague guidelines and a busy-body’s misdirected sense of doing right that’s letting the issue fester. Unfortunately neither of those will ever go away.

    Just like Prok, some of these people seem to be on a crusade because of their misunderstanding the situation (or their hunger for needless drama) and their simplistic need of an antagonist to crusade against.

    What Prok and these other vigilantes on the opposite end of the spectrum from her don’t (want to) understand is that the AR system is simply meant to make LL aware of a situation so THEY can decide if there was wrongdoing. There are no concentration camps for avs (other than at the AN base ) that you are in danger of getting shipped off to if you are accused of crimes against the State and these people’s actions are more likely to get THEM in trouble than the “evil-doers/conspirators” they champion against.

    Griefing is still griefing even if you have a cause. Trolling is still trolling even if you do it on the SL forums!
30. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Hi there,

    About the pictures where people were claiming the guy in it clearly had an erection while I disagreed with that view… I did a search on the Internet and for a site called erectionphotos-dot-com which shows what the average penis looks like when it’s erect and when it’s not. Since this is a site full penises, I replaced the dot in the URL with -dot- just to make it clear to everyone who reads this that this is a site displaying lots and lots of nude guys and you might become offended by those images.
    However, it has a useful photo section for people who are unfamiliar with what penises look like when erect or not. There’s the photo section called “soft-hard” and it shows images of many different male models with and without an erection to be used as reference. On the 4th page of this gallery you can see pictures of a male visitor of this site showing his penis both flaccid and erect. When I compare it to the image I created myself, I wasn’t far off what this guy has. Only my model has an even darker skin.
    I always thought that an erect penis would always be at an angle of 90 degrees, or just horizontal when a man was standing. Pointing straight forwards as it were. Or probable even upwards. It’s not that I’m that familiar with erect penises anyways. However, some of the images on this site made it clear to me that an erect penis could also be lower than horizontal instead. Never really realized that.

    The site also clarifies about the angle of an erect penis when a guy is standing. It quotes values found by the Kinsey research team and compares this with the average angle of the pictures on the site itself. It shows that on average, the erect penis tends to be horizontal or higher. Based upon this information I continued my search and found that according to this Kinsey research, the average angle would be 106 degrees. At 0 degrees it would point to your feet and at 180 degrees it would point to your head.
    For the Poser model I used, this angle is measured in opposite direction. In Poser for the Kelvin penis, 90 degrees would point to his feet, 0 degrees would be horizontal and -90 (minus) degrees would point to his head. By default it is 60 degrees yet I put it at 35 degrees. If you recalculate this to how Kinsey is measuring this angle, you would end up at a default value of 30 degrees which I raised to 55 degrees. Still well below the AVERAGE angle of an erect penis.

    So, realizing this I am still convinced that there was nothing wrong with this image. I won’t display it in Blister since it offends people in that area, yet it was NOT erect. It might have appeared to be erect due to size and perspective but this was NOT done on purpose.

    Well, that’s enough penis research for one day. I don’t know if any research has been done for the angle of a penis when it’s not erect. Haven’t found it so far. And I’m sorry if people do get offended by this short discussion about penis angles but the whole discussion suggested that the guy in the image had an erection. As I’m pointing out now, he had not. Still, feel free to disagree about this with me. Yet for those who still have any screenshots, feel free to check those again. (Then again, if you feel those images are child porn and you keep them on your computer, you are putting yourself well at risk!)
31. 

    jumpman lane
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    I’m personlly all for abuse reportin kiddie porn…no one supports child porn but sickos, but the comical sight of wanna be Lindens menotrs goosesteppin around second life looking for stuff to rat-fink snitch out to lindens labs is just furthur entertainment added to the meteverse! Next them clowns will want a paycheck! Sanctimonius-powerlustin-think- they-Lindens mentors need to go find a noob to help! If ya see these morons about talk shit to em!
32. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    Update: I just added a check for llOverMyLand() in my recording scripts and will now hunt down and modify my recorders so they won’t record anything outside my land borders anymore. However, on my land, as several devices already indicate, I feel I have the right to record all conversations as a safeguard against griefers and people who just want to cause a lot of trouble.
33. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 16th, 2007
    

    This: I actually was one of the first people in Lotsawa and bought a large piece of land there when most of it was still empty. The people who came after me knew what they could except from this area.

    Should have been: I actually was one of the first people in Lotsawa and bought a large piece of land there when most of it was still empty. The people who came after me knew what they could EXPECT from this area.

    Sorry, typo…
34. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    Quote: I’m personlly all for abuse reportin kiddie porn…

    Actually, so am I. And I have reported a few AV’s in the past for both age-play and for admitting they were under age. I hate it when people prey upon children for their personal satisfactions since laws will be enforced in those cases which will restrict the options of EVERYONE. Child abuse is as terrorism in my opinion. And as we all can see now, terrorism in the USA and Western Europe has led to several more stricter laws and quite a few protests and signs of intolerance.
    Thing is, I would love it when everyone has all the freedom they need to express themselves and to lead their own lives. In a perfect society, we would not even need any laws since no one would even dare to think about doing something that could cause harm to others. Unfortunately, society is far from perfect. Thus we need laws which put some restrictions on our freedom. Restrictions that are required to keep us safe against abuse.

    Quote: Next them clowns will want a paycheck!

    Well, more likely these clowns would prefer to have more power over anyone else. They just want to dictate what others are allowed to do. They own a small area in some sim yet they own as if they own the whole sim. They definitely don’t like the fact that I own about 3072 sq.m. of land in the same sim.

    Quote: Sanctimonius-powerlustin-think- they-Lindens mentors need to go find a noob to help!

    This surprised me the most. You would think volunteers would be helpful and politely point out what the problem is. One did. Everyone else did not.

    Quote: If ya see these morons about talk shit to em!

    And LOWER myself down to their level? Definitely NOT! I am above them! I have complied to several of their wishes, I have allowed them access again to my land in Blister yet I still haven’t received a single sign of regret from this mob. All they are doing is denying they have any blame in the whole matter, claiming their friends did it, refusing to accept the blame for their own stupid actions. Well, fine by me. Cockroaches don’t apologize for their actions either since it’s just natural for them to be a plague. Disturb them and all they do is hide below the next rock. I would expect and actually hope that we humans are above the cockroach but so far I’m very disappointed about the current responses from this mob.
35. 

    Sapphire Oh
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    ok here we go again. Lisae you continue to write here its good.. you are digging a deeper hole for

    yourself. You need to have a good memory to be a good liar. And piecing chat logs together to try

    to make seem worse, your just a big joke.. not even worth the energy im using in my fingertips to

    write this.

    As you have said you know i was the 2nd person on your land that day. Yes i did see and notice

    that messages was being recorded. so !!!

    IF WE WAS IN GROUP CHAT WHY ON EARTH WOULD WE CHAT ON YOUR LAND KNOWING THAT IT WAS BEING

    RECORDED.

    ——

    YES I DID SAY “contact everyone you can if you find anything you think isnt right.”

    BUT I WASNT FORCING MY OPINIONS ON ANYONE. And i wasnt telling them to chat thru the groups? WAS i

    ??

    You contradict yourself Lisae

    (Quote: The friend that we IM. is NOT a member of any Volunteer groups. As i can work out. this

    friend told others and them others told their friends..

    Yep. My records do prove this to be true)

    ——
    there was alot of people there that day and you still think that everything was done in a group

    chat?.. well not on our side it wasn’t.. IM yes but not group !!!

    I never knew about any group chat going on or was we involved in that in any way if that occured.

    ——

    *** Lisae *** – (EXACTLY who started all this, and how. Want me to share the whole log here?

    Sorry, but I cannot do that because I do respect other people’s privacy.)

    PRIVACY ???? yet you stated to me — “”The ball is indeed a spy. Will remove it now, btw.
    [11:15] Lisae Boucher: Not to remove evidence, btw. Just again as a sign of goodwill”"

    So tell me how you respect people’s privacy?

    ——

    *** Lisae *** – (You find a nice piece of land, buy it and then suddenly you end up with a

    neighbor whom you happen to dislike.)

    OMG thats the most correct thing you have said so far

    —–

    Come On then.. Lets see the chat log of us supposed to be plotting against you..

    —–

    *** LIsae *** – (The picture that is shown in the article happens to be the one between my boats,

    on the dock) http://i16.tinypic.com/537uniw.jpg

    Thats Bull and you know it. You see the silver fence surrounding your land and it not even inside

    there.. no where near your dock. now i know why suddenly you extend the jetty on your dock, but

    lisae its still no where near.. good try thou !!!

    —–

    my statements do not make me an outrageous lair. as said i never was involved and never knew about

    any group chats discussing this case. Do you know the difference between 1 to 1 IM messages?????

    just why you have to twist everything?

    —–

    The caes hasnt been solved yet and so why are you presumming the the lindens have not found any

    illegal content. after all you quickly removed it yourself.

    —–

    Ok now to the griefing part.

    this is exactly how she twists things.

    I did dome a dome yes..but not intended for griefing..how can i grief with a dome?? something i

    was working for on our land, There was my 2 other friends on Lisae land at the time if i recall

    right.. BUT LISAE WASNT THERE … so how on earth was i griefing you Lisae… Your brain needs a

    retune.

    —–
    HOW can you twist this yet again!!!!!… we all know what it meant.. it meant that we all have had

    no warnings from linden labs like you seem to think.

    Not true. The first thing she noticed when she arrives happens to be the recording device! Thus

    it’s clear that anyone could have noticed it.

    —–

    Ok so im responsible you say? all because i have my opinions and asked another for opinion…

    suggesting to invite others to take a look is the correct thing to do in my view. After all if i

    was wrong wouldnt i have been corrected.. but instead you got 4700 people to your land that day

    and where are the people saying im wrong. Get a life Lisae

    —–

    Ok now as for you removing the spy recorders..its just admitting wrong yet again.. just like you

    removed the contents from the sea. I know dam sure if i knew my items was ok and legal then i

    wouldnt remove them just because a person got upset… but you did just the opposite lisae..

    showing the guilt for both .. the images and spy recorders.

    —–

    and as for approaching you since that dat.. you basicly saying i did.. your wrong and twisting it

    yet again… the first comments was to ask you why u lifted the ban to see if you would be

    honest.. then i continued to ask you about the script ( The spy )

    ok im not affraid in any way to show my chat logs. The very first approach after the day in

    mention

    [11:03] You: what this ball supposed to be lisae?
    [11:09] You: LIsae..why have you taken me off the ban list now.. all of a sudden?
    [11:10] Lisae Boucher: Just a gesture of goodwill. I decided to start with one person. You, since

    you happened to be in the area.
    [11:11] You: ok but we and several are always here.. and you havent un-banned them
    [11:11] You: and also this script?????
    [11:12] Lisae Boucher: Well, that’s because I’m also banned from several other areas.
    [11:12] Lisae Boucher: And the script? It just records conversations which I’ve also used a lot

    lisae not only banned us 4 ( neighbours)

    she also banned another neighbour.. so its a great neighbourhood she has made since she came to

    blister.
    —–

    Lisae quoted- “”I don’t hold any grudges against any single member of this group anyways. I do

    hold grudges against the whole group, though.”"

    this just dont make sense..

    everyone see how much of a grudge you have towards me.. you are just an angry person and cant

    admit to being in the wrong.

    All i see you as in a very agrumentative person who likes to get the last word in.. I have no

    doubt you will reply to this. like i said you need the last word.

    Everyone else must see the sort of person you are. You have to reply and twist everyones comments

    on your sore subjects.

    Its very obvious that you have had a hard RL.. its just a pity that SL has to suffer too.

    I wont be replying to you anymore. its just a waste of my time and you aren’t worth it..

    The lindens will sort this in there own time.

    Maybe thats it… You are on nervous edge until the outcome.
36. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    What’s wrong with this post?

    >Don’t worry, Prok. You’re old enough that you should already know better…like 3x over.

    Agism, tone of superiority not commensurate with actual abilities.

    >And I wasn’t disagreeing with your article, but the goofy ass comments and responses you put up after it.

    hateful characterization, highly-subjective disputation, simply “doesn’t like” some comments; adopts tone of spiteful superiority.

    >In reality the volunteers aren’t the problem.

    Claims superior philosophical position, adopts prostrating fanboy postiion, but in reality, volunteers as a system contain built-in abuses.

    >It’s vague guidelines and a busy-body’s misdirected sense of doing right that’s letting the issue fester. Unfortunately neither of those will ever go away.

    Like I said, built-in flaws of volunteer system of unevenly prepared, poorly supervised, badly guided people — which can’t change in a large *volunteer* system.

    >Just like Prok, some of these people seem to be on a crusade because of their misunderstanding the situation (or their hunger for needless drama) and their simplistic need of an antagonist to crusade against.

    Hateful comparison of reporter to objectionable vigilantes; false claim that Prok’s crusade is simplistic; misplaced claim that covering crime stories is “drama”; wrongful belief that a reporter “needs an antagonist,” instead of just a subject of a story.

    >What Prok and these other vigilantes on the opposite end of the spectrum from her don’t (want to) understand is that the AR system is simply meant to make LL aware of a situation so THEY can decide if there was wrongdoing.

    Facile adaption of prostrate Linden fanboy position; claim that reporter is like the odious thing reported upon; belief that all LL does is “make itself aware” with its vast informant’s network, as if there are no consequences, sometimes wrongful and arbitrary, to this “awareness”.

    >There are no concentration camps for avs (other than at the AN base ) that you are in danger of getting shipped off to if you are accused of crimes against the State and these people’s actions are more likely to get THEM in trouble than the “evil-doers/conspirators” they champion against.

    Incoherent paragraph.

    >Griefing is still griefing even if you have a cause. Trolling is still trolling even if you do it on the SL forums!

    Dispensing of superior and smug nostrums; belief that having a moral position is akin to griefing; misrepresentation of polemics as “trolling”.

    Ok, my work here is done!
37. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    Sapphire Oh: I did dome a dome yes..but not intended for griefing..how can i grief with a dome??

    Well, you can’t deny that you did this anyways. Too many witnesses have seen it. I’ve checked and at least one of the Lindens have seen it too. And it doesn’t matter what your intentions were, but you created a dome on someone else’s land during this invasion. I don’t know what your intentions were but since you were there together with a hostile group, it’s just considered to be part of the hostilities there. Thus, griefing.

    And some older response by Sapphire Oh: We were unaware of any group chats going on. none of us was involved in that. The only thing i knew that something was going on is because i received a group message from a lucky chair group. With message and landmarks of blister.

    Don’t you even realize that you’re contradicting yourself here? You received a GROUP message about this and yet you claim to be unaware of any group chats going on? Come on, do you really think we’re stupid?

    Sapphire Oh: After all if i was wrong wouldnt i have been corrected.

    And my recordings show that several people in this mob did indeed their best to get people to calm down. Yet when people started to attack them and challenge their sanity, they just decided to leave.

    Sapphire Oh: Thats Bull and you know it. You see the silver fence surrounding your land and it not even inside there..

    I am commenting about the picture from the article and you’re claiming it’s not where this picture clearly shows where it is? You can even see the boat next to it! Yet you’re trying to make a point by showing a picture from a completely different object. Not the thing I was talking about. Please, take some care and read a little bit better before responsing. Otherwise you just keep shooting yourself in the foot.

    Sapphire Oh: Ok now as for you removing the spy recorders.

    They aren’t removed. They are modified. It has always been my plan to just let them record anything on my own land so people can leave a message for me behind during their visits. Helps me to respond quickly in case of any problems. All I did was add this modification a bit faster than I’d planned, since you’re so sensitive about your own privacy.
    Yet you’ve shown no consideration for my privacy. Nor have you shown any regret yet for some of the stupid things you’ve done, like putting a dome on my land and take your part in this group mob.

    Sapphire Oh: everyone see how much of a grudge you have towards me.

    Yeah, right… If I do hold any grudges against you personally, then why were you even the first who was unbanned? I could just as easy kept the ban for you indefinitely. I protected myself against you and once I felt it was over, I could undo the protection again.

    And Sapphire Oh, can I ask you something? Less than two hours ago you were on my land shouting something to my recorders while I thought you were just going to ignore me. Since my recorders are adjusted to only record messages from persons on my land, I know that you explicitly visited it to leave that message. So why do that if you’re going to ignore me? Care to clarify that?

    Btw, I’ve noticed that Sapphire Oh is shouting on several occasions in her last post so who is on a nervous edge now?
38. 

    DaveOner
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    Wow, Prok. You seem to want to seek out hate where there is none to be found. I don’t hate you by any means. I just think you need to relax and find some other, more productive avenue to channel your anger and frustration with your life.

    >Agism, tone of superiority not commensurate with actual abilities.

    So it’s agist to think that through life experience you should know better than to write the kinds of things you write? I guess it’s agist to think older people have more maturity and wisdom.

    >…hateful characterization, highly-subjective disputation, simply “doesn’t like” some comments; adopts tone of spiteful superiority.

    Wait, were you commenting on my post or giving your overall philosophy?

    >Claims superior philosophical position, adopts prostrating fanboy postiion…

    Yeah, “fanboy” is a good fallback term when you don’t actually have any valid point to make but still want to be negative about someone.

    >Hateful comparison of reporter to objectionable vigilantes;

    Are you not the one who chose the “griefer watch” title for yourself? I know you won’t admit to it since you’re a flawless being and all but you constantly use slander against parties you are in disagreement with…and most people that read SLH agree and have stated this before. You’re still a vigilante, just with a web site instead of a scripted weapon.

    >…false claim that Prok’s crusade is simplistic; misplaced claim that covering crime stories is “drama”…

    It’s not crime. It’s a computer game/platform that people such as yourself take too seriously sometimes. If you ever wrote anything POSITIVE then maybe it wouldn’t look like you seek out drama so much.

    And your “crusade” IS simplistic…no crusade in history has been well thought out and grounded in logic and reason.

    >…wrongful belief that a reporter “needs an antagonist,” instead of just a subject of a story.

    I guess, if you consider yourself a “reporter”. Like I said, this story started okay but then you went on to show your regular colors and posted the same type of malicious, negative and otherwise hateful diatribe while adding little to the conversation.

    It’s always hard for me when I agree with someone like you because I start to second guess myself. If I’m agreeing with someone with a track record such as that, how can I be right??

    >Facile adaption of prostrate Linden fanboy position;

    There’s that buzz word again!

    >claim that reporter is like the odious thing reported upon;

    Hmmm…people that strongly believe that someone/something is wrong to the point that they harass and attack using the resources available to them. Yeah…nothing like you!

    >belief that all LL does is “make itself aware” with its vast informant’s network, as if there are no consequences, sometimes wrongful and arbitrary, to this “awareness”.

    Well, according to Lisae’s testimony in the comments here LL was aware and dealt with the situation appropriately…as did Lisae. The consequences she’s dealt with weren’t because of Big Brother Philip so much as busy bodies on a moral crusade against what they believe to be wrong and getting out of hand. This flame was fanned by LL’s unwillingness to better define the whole “broadly offensive” rule. They’re doing it out of some “California happy shiny holding hands and being friends” philosophy not out of malice. It doesn’t make it right but it doesn’t make it as evil as you maintain.

    Don’t be bitter because LL booted you off the SL forums and won’t return your emails. If you find LL to be as malicious as you constantly claim then why do you use their services? Seeking drama??

    >Incoherent paragraph.

    It’s amazing that such an “accomplished writer” wouldn’t be able to understand what I was talking about. I guess if you have to ask, you’ll never know.

    >Dispensing of superior and smug nostrums;

    Welcome to the world of people that deal with you!

    >…belief that having a moral position is akin to griefing;

    Maybe you should pay attention a little better because you just shot your article into pieces.

    Having a moral position isn’t griefing. Using various malicious tactics to further a moral position and force it upon others IS akin to griefing.

    >…misrepresentation of polemics as “trolling”.

    Actually you seem to have a tendancy to misrepresent trolling as polemics.

    >Ok, my work here is done!

    So SLH can get to posting better articles now?? I want to see more stories from Uzi!

    Get over yourself, Prok. Everyone else has.
39. 

    DaveOner
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    Oh and I made a typo. I meant “Uri” not “Uzi”, although Uzi would be a cooler nickname!
40. 

    Deeka Hold
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    To me, i dont give a damn about what is legal in wich country. Childplay is sick, even more sick is abuse of the child, sexually or otherwise. If someone wants a teen av in the SL world, they should be banned and reported to the police for suspected beeing pedosexually active(I believe that that is illegal all over the globe!). If the person IS a kid, they shouldnt even be in the “mature” version of SL.

    LL better take notice of kid avies in SL rather then cartoon pictures.
41. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    Quote: The lindens will sort this in there own time.

    And this they have done! I have had a short chat with Michael Linden and his words were: “We have looked at your images, and so far we haven’t seen anything against the TOS or Community Standards.”

    Am not revealing the rest of the conversation since I do respect other people’s privacy. But I want to make it clear that they have looked at my images and they did not violate the TOS or CS. I have asked a few more questions so I know for sure when certain images would be considered inappropriate and I have received a clear enough answer to that. Clear enough for me anyways. The rules are quite strict for PG rated lands. But for mature land the generic rule is that no (legal) offensive material can be visible from PG rated land. The material still needs to be legal, though. So true child porn is not allowed. But it’s up to the Lindens and to the law to decide if an image qualifies as child porn and in my case, the images they’ve seen did not violate anything. Well, maybe good taste according to some…

    I have also had a discussion about recording devices. They are allowed as long as visitors are made aware that there are such recorders in the area. Furthermore, the contents of the recorded logs can NOT be published in any way. I can keep logs but I cannot disclose them. Since Sapphire Oh realized quite fast that there was a recording device on my land, I think that qualifies as a good enough warning.

    Actually, disclosing any chat logs to the public could be considered a violation of the TOS. Thus if someone would publish a complete chat log here, they are in violation. Using any recorded logs for private use is fine. Disclose the contents of these logs, you put yourself at risk. The chat log from the volunteers group as published in this article could already be a violation. Residents need to have a reasonable expectation of privacy, no matter where they go. (And as I’ve said before, I’m not disclosing the contents of my logs to others.)

    About the use of copyrighted material, Linden Labs will not make any judgments about that. At least, not until they get a complaint from the copyright holder. Copyrights are a matter between the copyright holder and me. Linden Labs operates just like many other ISPs. They provide a service but are not directly liable for any copyright violations by any of the users of these visitors.

    I’ve also had a short talk about the mob action on my land. I know Michael Linden cannot tell me about the actions they are already taking based upon my previous reports but he did gave me one important advise: report the group leaders, if possible, and add a comment that this is a group mob action, thus they will check the involvement of the other group members.
    Soliciting abuse is considered a violation too, btw. Thus asking your friends to come over to visit some area just to cause trouble or whatever can be considered a TOS/CS violation. Verbal harassment and/or assault is also a TOS/CS violation.

    Disclaimer: The above is my interpretation of the conversation I’ve had with Michael Linden. He made it quite clear that I haven’t violated the TOS or the Community Standard. (Not yet, at least.) And he cannot disclose any information about the actions he and/or the Abuse Team will take against the members of the mob who raided my place.

    There might or might not be a new blog entry related to this on the SL blog related to this all but that is something the community blog will have to decide upon.

    Anyway, as far as I’m concerned, I have NOT violated anything. So for me this whole thing is now over. And the mob/griefers? I don’t know and really don’t care at this moment.
42. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    Quote: I guess it’s agist to think older people have more maturity and wisdom.

    They also can have Alzheimer…
    No, I’m not claiming anyone here is demented. It’s just a common disease amongst many older people.

    Quote: You’re still a vigilante, just with a web site instead of a scripted weapon.

    I actually would not know about that, although I do realize that many people tend to be a bit negative about Prokofy’s articles. Since I am one of those people who had to point out that the whole article was based on false facts, I do have some serious doubts about the journalism qualities of Prokofy. I did NOT violate the TOS. I did NOT violate the CS. I have done NOTHING that I need to apologize for. Unfortunately, several others including Prokofy, still haven’t really apologized for their behavior. And I don’t expect them to ever offer their apologies anyways.

    Quote: It’s a computer game/platform that people such as yourself take too seriously sometimes.

    Hmmm. My opinion? I take SL very seriously. I happen to have a concierge account which isn’t cheap and I do take my money seriously. Considering the amount of money that I would receive if I sold my land, even at L$ 5000 per 512 sq.m. also makes me think twice about a lot of things. Considering the investments made in my land, it’s definite not something to take matters lightly. It is more than a game anyways. It’s one big social experiment with lots of small players in it and a few people who are willing to make investments to please these small players. There are even people who make a decent income out of this “game” since you don’t need lots of hardware. All you need are some good ideas, some good products to sell, plenty of attention from people interested in your products ans -sorry to admit this- a lot of people willing to make big investments in this game. For large companies, SL hase some interesting marketing options but it does require a special approach to reach the potential markets. RL advertising doesn’t work well in SL anyways.

    Quote: I guess, if you consider yourself a “reporter”.

    First thing I would expect from any reporter: check the facts before you publish an article. If Prokofy has been a real reporter, this article would be the end of a short career…

    Quote: Well, according to Lisae’s testimony in the comments here LL was aware and dealt with the situation appropriately…as did Lisae.

    I am glad someone dares to admit this. Especially since Michael Linden confirmed to me that my images did NOT violate the TOS, thus there hasn’t even been a valid reason why I would have to remove them. And again, I did remove them because a neighbor requested this nicely. Since we have to share the area, I think it’s just better to get along nicely with my neighbors.

    Quote: This flame was fanned by LL’s unwillingness to better define the whole “broadly offensive” rule.

    This rule is still not clear to me and to others. I do know that you can do quite a lot on mature ground, as long as none of it is visible or available on PG rated ground. Near PG rated areas you should just make sure the material is not visible for someone standing on the PG land and looking into the direction of the mature land. A bit like closing the curtains of your windows before having a big orgy or whatever. All kinds of legal smut and dirtiest legal hardcore is allowed on mature land, especially when it is indoors, out of view from PG areas.
    Iza being boned by a skeleton, being displayed on my vendor in Blister is just one fine example of what is allowed. It might be a sign of bad taste and thus no one with any taste would ever buy it but I’m still allowed to put that image there. I could even put some real offensive hard gay porn on my land inside my house of 20 bodybuilders chained together equipped with huge penises that stick in from one end of the next guy and stick out of the other end of the next guy and it would still be legal.
    Yet I just focus on generic nudity with some erotics. Big deal… No violation here. And I never expected it to be, after seeing some of the mature material in the very mature areas of SL. Go have a visit in the BDSM dungeons in SL if you dare…

    Quote: Maybe you should pay attention a little better because you just shot your article into pieces.

    This article has already gone in all directions and I am surprised it’s still available here. Since the original article is clearly disputed and shows many signs of false rumors and bad journalism, I would have thought the Herald would have just removed it by now.

    Quote: So SLH can get to posting better articles now?

    Well, some postings on the Herald are okay. This one actually sucks and is a fine example of bad journalism. I’m sorry, Prokofy but that’s my opinion. In some of your comments you’ve almost managed to get things right but then everything fell down again with your next post.
43. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    DaveOner, you’re one of those unimaginative little mediocrities that imagine that no one should ever feel passionately about something; no one should ever raise their voice; no one should — God forbid! — ever condemn something, or call it “evil,” because Gosh, that would just be too emotional and dramatic, eh? Everything should be bland, safe, predictable — but more than anything, *conformist*. That’s the message we get out of your nostrums and homilies and dispensed folk wisdom. Someone like me who makes a sharp polemic; a pointed comment; a definitive judgement — why, we’re just not conforming to the bland techno-pudding of Second Life, and therefore we need to “chill” or “get a massage” or “get a life”. It’s always the same drumbeat. Shut up, fit in, don’t stick out, never question, don’t ask, don’t differ.

    Always the constant theme — any opinion, strongly impressed, must be an opinion *forced* on someone. If someone disagrees, then doesn’t *come around* to the wisdom of the Techno Tribal Elders on the Forums, why, they must be “crusading”; they must be “forcing their point of view on other people”. If you continue to disagree, continue to make sharp judgements, continue to hold your own, why, that’s wrong, that’s not fitting in, that’s not adjusting, conforming, because if you shut up, adjusted, conformed, and realized you were wrong, and that everything is always vague, unclear, lukewarm pablum and never crystal clear, so you should just STFU.

    Seriously, I don’t understand how people think they can live in the world that way. It’s more and more the case these days especially for young people that they can’t stand dissent. They can’t accept that a minority view — or even a majority view — will go on existing, and not conform, and not homogenize, and not change. They can’t imagine, once they’ve spoken the wisdom of their tribal elders, that someone won’t shut up, cave in, shrivel up, die. If they keep persisting and insisting they are right, they are crazy, a cat lady, needing meds, etc.

    Lisae, if Michael Linden said you art is ok, and is not a violation of the TOS, then put the goddamn pictures out on the deck and be done with it. Seriously. Anything *less* than that is a cop-out, and insincere. Few people get clearance from the Lindens of that nature — ever. You have. So put it out, and stop fearing witch-hunters and stop posturing and prancing as the drama-queen victim-attention-whore acting like you are a long-suffering victim of oppression, compromising with the suppression of your creativity only to harmonize with your neighbours. Bullshit. You’ve now turned the entire story around in your favour, you are no longer a victim, you have the Lindens on your side, and you’ve gotten your neighbours condemned. So roll with it. Put the pictures out.

    I never said your material was in violation of the TOS. How did you pull that out of your ass? OTHER PEOPLE said that and I COVERED IT. I didn’t see it! And I couldn’t be sure it was! I pointed out that if it showed men in lewd poses looking at clearly underage girls, yes, indeed, it would be construed under the TOS that clearly states that such images are prohibited — but I didn’t see it, nor did I pronounce on it. I *reported the issue*. These distinctions seem utterly lost on you, and you feel enabled, by the general tone of this awful comments session where everyone piles on, to vent your spleen on me. You’ve come to the wrong address. I’m the one who reported on the vigilantes *cough* remember?

    As for being a “bad journalist” or “losing your job in RL” — I strenously object. And you, too, are of that mediocre, conformist, vicious little sectarian mindset that says if someone differs; if someone disagrees; if someone writes a story “incorrectly” or especially “politically incorrectly” — that they must go to the wall, be fired, be covered in shame. You can’t absorb and abjust to diversity and pluralism. You demand from the mainstream that they absorb your decidedly minority and sectarian point of view about the cult of nudism. But if anyone disagrees; if anyone finds it unjustified; if anyone questions the ambiguities, reversals, and murkiness in your story, why, they are “a bad journalist”.

    I didn’t do a goddamn thing wrong here. And this is so typical of the new media blogation madness that a reporter who does a story in good faith must endure endless wordsalading and endless crazy story mongering in comments, and wind up having a subject that was in fact covered sympathetically and with concern come back and bite the hand that fed them. It’s uncanny. It’s why people won’t blog. It’s why there is no critical press around SL but just a lot of corporate-sponsored pablum.

    I came on a tip from some mentors that I strongly suspected were going overboard on a zealous witch-hunt. I was told the artwork was taken by the Lindens in one account; force-copied in another. I was careful to word that exactly the case: “apparently” and “allegedly” and “seemed” etc. etc. Go back and read it.

    When it was confirmed that YOU came and whisked it away under pressure, and Lindens were said only to REVIEW it and COPY it (apparently), I PUT THAT. IT’S ON THE UPDATE.

    I knew from my previous material from other sources about how crazy the volunteers were going in their group and going on posses that there really was a danger of volunteers becoming just too zealous and doing the Lindens’ dirty work for them. So I reported on that — AND THAT, THE HEART OF THE STORY IS CORRECT. It’s a hugely important story. If anything, in RL, I’d get a prize or at least an honourable mention for such a story, uncovering social problems like this in a secretive society with unaccountable governance — not kicked in the teeth, and not told I’d be fired. Because I didn’t do anything wrong here; I did everything right, and by the light of my conscience.

    It was wrong for the volunteers to be so overzealous, to over-report and drag people to come gawk and create a scandal. The neighbours, too, seem over the top. Yet…the problem is that this art is troubling to quite a few people. They fear that in fact it is deviant, and the last place anyone should look for a deviance radar is Linden Lab. So LL, as personal individuals, many not find anything in it. But mentors, neighbours, did. They should just accord to people “the right to do the fuck they want on their own land” and not snoop on them if they aren’t in their faces with this; but they are busybodies.

    And I covered that. Being curious, and always questioning, I questioned at length all your cover stories. They still look really strange, over-wordy, self-justifying, and unconvincing to me — as they do to others. I can’t understand why, if the point here is to do experimental art and celebration of the beauty of lesbian love and such, that a picture of men with erections staring at shy young girls is put on the menu — and I’m sorry, but I don’t believe for a minute that the angles of their cocks is some kind of “natural” or “scientific” phenomenon. I think it’s exactly what it looks like, and you were making it to appeal to popular tastes and sell it, or to do your own exploration of this topic of attraction to prepubescent girls — and that’s troubling.

    It’s astounding to invoke other people’s bad art or porn as somehow a relativizing or justifying of your own questionable images. We are trying to figure out if this is actionable. If it is not, put it out. I can’t even be sure Michael Linden said THAT PICTURE NO LONGER OUT is in fact OK.

    I fail to see how there is any “false journalism” and “many errors” in my story. Huh? The ONLY issue at stake that was updated when it was confirmed was whether the Lindens *confiscated* the material or not. It turns out they didn’t literally take it and remove it. That issue was clarified and concerned, but it wasn’t a “correction” because in the original statement, the failure to confirm it was noted, and the ambiguity was noted. The issue of Michael’s alleged force-copying isn’t clarified.

    Since the original version of the story very carefully couched this in “allegedly,” I don’t see that in fact there is anything “false” about my story.

    People lose sight of reality in a thread like this, so here it is again:

    “Tipped off by some newbie helpers who staff a monitoring network with Linden support, Linden staff may have seized or “force-copied” anime paintings said to contain what was deemed illegal child anime pornography from a cabana tonight in the working-class water sim of Blister — leaving only adult nude amateur art mostly made with a 3D modeling program: Poser.”

    Every. Single. Word. Is. Correct. And. True. So deal with it. Your desire to send *me* to the wall, when I’m the one who publicized the evils involved in this story is absolutely incredible. You imagine that a journalist, if they cover you, must come and flatter you and butter you up and get you talking and sympthize with you and chat for 2 hours, like someone else I know *cough*.

    Huh? No. This is a crime report. You remain suspicious — you have to be, as everybody has a racket and an angle in a story like this. I think my questioning of you in the comments was exactly on target, and is absolutely the right thing to do. I can’t be partisan on behalf of you and your wacky sectarian cultic views, now, can I? I can only *cover them,* and show *the right degree of skepticism about them* — and try to *get the story*.

    What I can tell about you is that you are a shrill, vindictive, zealously orthodox sectarian. You’d silence the free press in a heart-beat if you were in charge of society, even while bleating about the right to your own sexual self-expression. It really is scary and Orwellian, this kind of sectarianism which is growing, and so cripples young minds.

    The smug, superior SUFFOCATING aura around a thread like yours makes me seriously ill.

    I didn’t “shoot my article to pieces”. It stands. It’s a story that won’t go away. The Lindens have unaccountable volunteers in a system prone to abuse and even corruption. Only coverage by the media of this sort of thing might help to correct it, one hopes. It’s no more accountable now as a result of this story than it was before, because the mentors who abuse reported you didn’t change their minds that the material is broadly offensive, and do not feel at all deterred from going out and doing the same thing again. After all, Michael Linden didn’t contact them and say, “Hey, this stuff was ok, after all, you all went overboard, now don’t do that.”

    We might never have even heard what he thinks if you didn’t happen to report what was likely meant as a private conversation. And he’s not even in the volunteers department, and doesn’t feel it’s his job, most likely, to stop overzealous volunteers.

    This story is an example of *good* journalism. It’s an example of good reporting — the best you can do under the circumstances where it is very hard to get information in a closed society with constant rumours. And it’s a good example of self-correcting blog reporting in real time, with constant updates. AND it’s an example of the Herald Classic Phenomenon of making the story come out in the comments — we got an amazing amount of useful material here. If I didn’t probe and persist and stand up to bullies, including the bullying even of the person I covered sympathetically as a victim of witch-hunting, *we wouldn’t have this story*.

    My God, people just don’t understand, nor value, the role of a free, unimpeded media in society, especially one like this. And perhaps we should leave them to their fate.
44. 

    DaveOner
    

    Jul 17th, 2007
    

    Prok, your heart is bleeding!

    Ever on a quest to find a demon to exorcise you throw out massive generalizations about me and others with little ground in the real world let alone SL.

    There is a difference between feeling strongly about something and working to see a goal acheived and SEEKING CONFLICT. You do the latter.

    If that wasn’t the case you’d write something positive once in a while because you’d actually see positive things around you on occassion. If we were to base our opinions of SL on your catalog of “articles” then it would be full of death squads and terrorist griefers who all seem to ultimately target…YOU!

    There is a difference between promoting a free press and USING YOUR RESOURCES TO SPREAD MALICE AND ACCUSATIONS. You do the latter.

    You talk so much about me wishing you would be quiet because I disagree with your opinion (or more accurately, ranting) and that I’d prefer a society of conformist automatons. That’s quite the opposite, in fact. I definitely value the many freedoms we’re afforded “in society, especially one like this”. That’s why you need to back off and make an attempt at objective, unbiased, non-sensationalist journalism. Anyone in the real world expecting legitimacy and respect have to!

    In truth, I only wish you would be quiet because whenever you speak it is negative and borders on trampling on other peoples’ rights as a person. That is…

    -NOT to be accused of phantom crimes and conspiracies without any verifiable facts or statistics…and no, “verifiable” doesn’t mean you already wrote it before.

    -NOT to have their name dragged through the mud if all they do is stand up to you or even simply disagree with you…although at this point you tend to help people with their credibility. Most people I’ve met or otherwise come across on SLH seem to be of the opinion that if someone is consistantly slandered by you then they must be alright folks afterall!

    -NOT to be bullied by you and your “accomplished writer” “successful-yet-persecuted land baron” “griefer watch” ass. You remind me again and again of the “for us or against us” attitude our RL president has. It doesn’t seem to be working to well for him, either.

    As far as trying to compare yourself to a RL journalist…I think you WOULD have been fired by any legitimate news company after the first time you posted the hateful things you have grown to be so notorious for. I suspect that the only reason you are still allowed to write for SLH is because of the attention and traffic you bring.

    And no, it’s not good journalism when you provoke the subject of your story to leave comments to clear up the tangle of misinformation due to erroneous conclusion-drawing and a lack of fact-finding on your part. This story was revealed IN SPITE of your lack-luster efforts. The same was true of the UW story that you beat into the ground, too.

    Unfortunately your track record heavily implies that YOU would be the one content with such a totalitarian system so long as your ideals were the ones being conformed to. This is apparent by the venom you spit whenever someone questions or otherwise discredits you. There is many-a-time where you get backed into a corner and have to resort to “I swing hard” and “fuck off” as talking points for your agenda. Are you sure 51 is not just transposed 15??

    I draw many comparisons between you and the volunteers you were criticizing in this “article” because you two are basically doing the same thing only in completely different directions.

    They attacked and insulted someone who they felt was doing something they are completely against…without the burden of proof or tangible fact to worry about. You do the same time after time. The difference in this case is that they are overly concerned about children being taken advantage of whereas you’re overly concerned about yourself and maintaining the “embattled bringer of wisdom and light to a world that doesn’t really exist”. If only you put this much effort and self-righteous determination into something that actually matters.

    Again, maybe you should join Amnesty International or find Jesus or something!

    I don’t want you to conform to someone else’s ideas. I want you to respect the fact that others have ideas that are different from your’s and they are just as entitled as(sometimes MORE entitled than) you to have them and express them.

    I want you to learn how to have a positive and constructive debate when discussing subjects you feel strongly about. You’re never going to get anyone to see things your way with the current tactics (or lack thereof) you employ whenever you speak. No amount of trolling or “redirecting criticism” so you can better control the conversation will make anyone say “Wow, Prok is right! Life really DOES suck!”

    All you’re doing is making you look good to yourself. The rest of us think you’re a lonely old cat lady who can only find satisfaction in bringing others down to her level and provoking those that are already down there with you.

    I don’t wish you ill, Prok. I just wish you’d stop wishing ill on everyone who even REMOTELY disagrees with you or is the subject of your crusades. Maybe then there wouldn’t be protests bearing your likeness and name!
45. 

    Lisae Boucher
    

    Jul 18th, 2007
    

    Quote: Lisae, if Michael Linden said you art is ok, and is not a violation of the TOS, then put the goddamn pictures out on the deck and be done with it.

    Actually, no. Neighbors asked me to remove them so I did. Again, I don’t want conflicts with the people around my land. Btw, if you haven’t noticed it, I still have vendors at some locations that still sell the images that they found offensive in Blister. I never removed those vendors from the other locations. In Blister I just put a different vendor with some lesser offensive material.
    I could also open an underwater hardcore BDSM brothel on my land in Blister which still would not qualify as a TOS violation. Then put some camping sexbeds in it so people would even get paid for having Avatar sex in Blister, with loud moaning noises. But why would I do that if that would be too offensive for my neighbors?

    There are many people in SL who think “Me, me, me!…”. I think about “We”, all us as SL members together keeping SL just a nice place to visit.

    Quote: I never said your material was in violation of the TOS.

    The headline of your original article mentioned that the offensive material was SEIZED by the Lindens. That only happens when it violates the TOS, right? The very headline was already suggesting that this was a major TOS violation. Even if you never claimed it, you were very suggestive about this. You even had to update the article to put some of your facts straight. But feel free to blame me for your errors if that makes you feel happy.

    Quote: I didn’t do a goddamn thing wrong here.

    Of course you did something wrong here! You reported on something without first getting the facts straight. You’ve helped to create an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust and you just continue to do this since you are unable to admit that you were wrong about the facts. You had to add two updates to put the facts straight yet you haven’t added a third update yet that tells the casual reader that the Lindens decided that none of the material on my land violated the TOS. Why haven’t you added a third update yet?

    Quote: I don’t see that in fact there is anything “false” about my story.

    Yet you had to add two updates and even alter the title of the original article…
    You had to do that because you realized the original story did not have the correct facts.

    Quote: What I can tell about you is that you are a shrill, vindictive, zealously orthodox sectarian.

    I have learned one important thing. People who start with name-calling know they’re running out of valid arguments because every valid argument they think they have is just taken down again. You don’t even realize that you’re crossing the lines with these remarks and just show why you’d never be a good journalist. You’re not even a journalist. You talk about free press because you want to have the right to insult others and falsely accuse others! However, free press doesn’t mean you cannot be held accountable for such remarks.

    Quote: After all, Michael Linden didn’t contact them and say, “Hey, this stuff was ok, after all, you all went overboard, now don’t do that.”

    Actually, he can’t even do that. Not legally anyways. These things are a private matter between him and me. Just as he cannot tell me how many abuse reports were sent about this matter. Or other information about this. He can’t even be more clear about the kinds of images that are and are not allowed since that would then be seen as the company policy. So he and the abuse staff just make judgments on a case-by-case situation and keep as quiet as possible about the steps they have taken.
    That my art did not violate the TOS is actually none of your business anyways…

    Quote: And he’s not even in the volunteers department, and doesn’t feel it’s his job, most likely, to stop overzealous volunteers.

    Actually, that’s the job of the abuse team. As far as I know, they are still undecided about the steps they’re going to take against this mob. Difference is of course that I just files one complaint for every offender while this mob could have flooded the abuse team with their reports. Actually, their actions might even have caused some delays for the abuse team and preventing them to take actions against those who did violate the TOS.

    Quote: This story is an example of *good* journalism.

    Do you realize that I actually consider contacting the web host of the Herald site about this article? Telling them that I feel offended by your article and telling them you violated my rights and my privacy? That could actually result in the Herald being thrown off it’s host. Pretending your insults are just free press won’t hold up for long in that case, I think… Free press, yes. Free insults, no…
    You know what? I will report this to the webhost. Let’s see if he too considers this free press.
46. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 18th, 2007
    

    >Actually, no. Neighbors asked me to remove them so I did.

    Actually *yes*. Don’t make it a matter of a sliding scale of subjective morality; make it a matter of law. Anything less is a cop-out

    >Again, I don’t want conflicts with the people around my land.

    So, it’s not law that regulates conflicts between neighbours, but subjective morality. OK, but in SL, which is very diverse as to religious belief or not-belief, nationality, political affiliation, etc. etc. — whose subjective morality or belief then should prevail?

    >Btw, if you haven’t noticed it, I still have vendors at some locations that still sell the images that they found offensive in Blister. I never removed those vendors from the other locations. In Blister I just put a different vendor with some lesser offensive material.

    Let’s get the coordinates? That would be helpful. A picture saves 1,000 words.

    >I could also open an underwater hardcore BDSM brothel on my land in Blister which still would not qualify as a TOS violation. Then put some camping sexbeds in it so people would even get paid for having Avatar sex in Blister, with loud moaning noises. But why would I do that if that would be too offensive for my neighbors?

    Hard core sex with adults isn’t the issue. The Lindens call that “adult” and if it is displayed, require it be on land marked “mature” (as to sim rating and as to parcel). We’ll see more of that. But this is about children and teens, not adults. Let’s not distract, shall we? That’s the issue.

    >There are many people in SL who think “Me, me, me!…”. I think about “We”, all us as SL members together keeping SL just a nice place to visit.

    Dear Mother of God! Am I the only one here noticing that this collectivist, coercive concept is completely akin to Daniel Linden’s “Keeping SL Safe, Together?” I quite agree that there are far too many people in SL thinking of “me, me, me” in the usual fuck-you hedonism, and I’m the first one to call for a better sense of obligations to one’s neighbour, but I see that as individual accountability and awareness of the consequences of one’s actions, not a collective group grope. Um, I don’t want to be in a yoke with “all of SL” and “keep SL nice”. Who will determine what the hell THAT means? It might not mean tacky cabanas on water sims with soft kiddie porn, for example.

    >Quote: I never said your material was in violation of the TOS.

    A distraction, and not at issue.

    >The headline of your original article mentioned that the offensive material was SEIZED by the Lindens.

    Yes, it said SEIZED by the Lindens because that was the version of the story given to me by sources. People fail to understand what a closed, contradictory, and frustrating situation SL is in trying to get a story. You make a judgement, and you go with it. As there was *five police blotters in the past two days at the time I was doing the story showing that yes, Lindens DO seize broadly offense content* number one, and number two, *a documented chatlog from Volunteers obsessing about how to get Lindens to remove content* and a strong dispensation May 31 from Daniel Linden, gosh, it seems reasonable to assume that Lindens can confiscate material after a posse of volunteers whistles for them.

    Is this presumption that makes an ass out of you and me? No, it’s just going with a story to the best of your knowledge. I don’t *need* the Lindens to confiscate it or “my story falls apart* because that’s not the heart of the story. The heart of the story is about the misuse of volunteers, witch-hunting, and the inherent flaws of volunteers under this new dispensation. That subtle notion continues to elude you.

    I CORRECTED this “SEIZED” the MINUTE I had confirmation from the horse’s moth (you) that it wasn’t. Did you answer my IM? No, you didn’t. Due to the time difference, due to the need to first being buttered up and heard out by the editor, whatever, we did not have that confirmation. There is no way to put a strike-through physically using typepad. An update with a correction was published as soon as the confirmation was made.

    That’s how it works. Don’t like it? Think secondlifeinsider.com or SLNN does a more cautious job? (They didn’t cover this story AT ALL. And I mean THE SILENCE WAS THUNDEROUS). Then go read those periodicals and pester those reporters. Seriously, people have no sense of what it takes to get, do, publish, and keep correcting a story.

    >That only happens when it violates the TOS, right? The very headline was already suggesting that this was a major TOS violation.

    Uh…an that wasn’t MY idea? Duh? That was THE VOLUNTEERS’ IDEA AND I REPORTED ON IT. My God, why are these distinctions so hard to grasp? Why am *I* to blame for COVERING a story I had no special reason to cover — I was merely trying to be timely and relevant.

    Why did volunteers report it if they didn’t think it was a TOS violation? Four Lindens came and reviewed it as to a possible TOS violation. Apparently they have PRIVATELY and NOT PUBLICLY given a ruling on this that we have to take your word for. So? Why would it only have to be a TOS violation to be a story? The story isn’t about whether or not a TOS violation occurred; the story is about witch-hunting in the belief that it occured.

    >Even if you never claimed it, you were very suggestive about this. You even had to update the article to put some of your facts straight. But feel free to blame me for your errors if that makes you feel happy.

    Um, I stay on a story; cover it; publish it; spend time on it, *consult with the editor, Pixeleen Mistral about it who approves it after long consultation, who reviewed it, edited it, and approved it before publication precisely because of its complexity and sensitivity*.

    I don’t blame people for any errors; and I refuse to somehow sit in shame as if *I* have made an error. I haven’t. The SOURCE was in error, but not in malicious error; they reported what they believed to have happened; I reported what I believe had happened. It was a confusing scene, they also saw you swoop in LATER; remember, the first appearance of volunteers and Lindens was in your ABSENCE.

    One could always say, “The Herald is a tabloid” due to the nature of the Herald and the nature of SL, but I won’t do that. I stand by my reporting, my good-faith effort to gather confirmation, my good-faith effort to consult with the editor and gain her approval and editorial changes, and my subsequent updates. And that’s all there is to it. I’m simply unwilling to be further harassed, vilified, pilloried, second-guessed, misrepresented, lied about on a story that I undertook out of a sense of civic concern; out of a sense of journalitic duty; out of a sense of news judgement and ability I stand by.

    The story was about witch-hunting, and I refuse to sit in and serve as the witch now that *you* hunt, simply because you are a hysteric and a zealot, and merely yesterday’s victim of a posse but today’s leader of one.

    If you can’t appreciate those things, then you deserve the awful world of SL you live in. If you have further concerns, take it up with Pixeleen.

    And it’s not about “having” to update an article, as if being driven “in shame” “into a corner”. It’s about updating the story as you confirm it. Sorry, but that’s how it works.

    >Of course you did something wrong here! You reported on something without first getting the facts straight.

    No, I got them as straight as they could be at that time, and reported the story because it was urgent and timely. I had already sat on the Volunteers chatlog for some days, waiting to find out more about it, rather than just pasting it up on my blog.

    I’m sorry, but nothing in the way you have handled yourself in this story, nothing in your long, self-justifying, meandering, ambiguous and even misleading rants, leads me to conclude that you are a good judge on the question of when the facts are “straight enough” to go with a story.

    If they aren’t “straight enough” here, go tell your story elsewhere and read other publications.

    >You’ve helped to create an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust and you just continue to do this since you are unable to admit that you were wrong about the facts.

    I was not wrong about the facts. I reported them as they were at the time. Sorry, but I refuse to be bullied and harassed on this one. You have to go with a story as you find it to the best of your ability. If neither the victim or the Lindens are online and aren’t answering questions, you still have to for forward. Any updates or corrections were added as soon as they became available; the question of whether the Lindens seized the material is still not completely settled, as the issue of the copying of the material (for later examination by superiors?) is not answered; furthermore, it is not the main point of the story; the main point of the story is about the troublesome nature of hysterical volunteers roaming the grid and whistling for Lindens.

    >You had to add two updates to put the facts straight yet you haven’t added a third update yet that tells the casual reader that the Lindens decided that none of the material on my land violated the TOS. Why haven’t you added a third update yet?

    Because the Lindens did not state this officially? It is not on the blog? We have only your subjective word of it? Because if I were to try to get an answer out of them, I’m 150 percent certain they would not answer because they do not wish to set precedents or make too-fixed judgements about a very sensitive area? Because you already placed your version of the story in the comments, and that’s enough? Because as far as I can tell, you are not entirely a reliable witness on this matter?

    Because if none of the material violates the TOS, you need to put it out on your land? Because your claim that you don’t do this merely out of consideration to your neighbours is a cop-out?

    It is not “realizing the original story did not have the correct facts” as if in some horrible Puritanical excess of guilt and shame, it’s UPDATING THE GODDAMN STORY AS IT DEVELOPS.

    And unfortunately, you only get the story 50 percent in the comments by putting it out there. That’s the law of the Herald. Deal with it.

    >What I can tell about you is that you are a shrill, vindictive, zealously orthodox sectarian.

    I have learned one important thing. People who start with name-calling know they’re running out of valid arguments because every valid argument they think they have is just taken down again.

    No, I’ve made a hundred valid arguments that are sailing right over your head, as you are not subtle and intelligent enough to grasp them, I guess. You refuse to see what the heart of this story is. It’s not about YOU. It’s not about your subjective notions of art. It’s about volunteers’ subjectives notions of art. We’ve confirmed here that if YOU were in charge, we might have the world rid of many, many things — people who insist on wearing clothes on a beach; people who insist that they continue to be aroused by naked bodies — and much, much more.
    Sorry, but I’m going to call this one as I see it.

    >You don’t even realize that you’re crossing the lines with these remarks and just show why you’d never be a good journalist. You’re not even a journalist. You talk about free press because you want to have the right to insult others and falsely accuse others! However, free press doesn’t mean you cannot be held accountable for such remarks.

    Well, um, see you in court then, hon. And I have to warn you, that even European libel laws won’t be able to be invoked in your favour.

    A good journalist covers a newsworthy story; stays on it; doesn’t shy from controversy; corrects it and updates it; stands up to bullies. That’s what I’m doing.

    Crossing the line is *exactly* what is needed in a situation like this where readers — as airheaded, clueless, stupid, vindictive, subjective, sectarian, and uneducated — feel they can second-guess reporters and editors. Because that’s what blogging and open commentary on news are all about. So if we’re all going to have Web 2.0 social media blah blah blogging empowering of reader-driven news judgement, sorry, but I’m going to feel MORE THAN entitled to push RIGHT back on this.

    >Quote: After all, Michael Linden didn’t contact them and say, “Hey, this stuff was ok, after all, you all went overboard, now don’t do that.”

    >Actually, he can’t even do that. Not legally anyways. These things are a private matter between him and me.

    Huh? What’s up with THAT? Lindens are not available to issue private and confidential readings on what is or isn’t objectionable. Michael Linden probably personally felt sorry that you, as a politically-correct personage like himself, were victimized by busybodies, that’s all. But if the Lindens are making rulings on what is or isn’t broadly offensive, sorry, hon, but that IS NEWS. It’s not your personal property. It’s a matter of the public’s right to know. My God, we absolutely have to know what the Lindens are up to on this matter.

    Only through assiduously reporting on their jurisprudence and trying to find out as much as we can from their police blotter admissions and any other anecdotal evidence we can gather can we get what they, being a secretive state, aren’t telling us: what THEIR INTERNAL guidelines for “broadly offensive” in fact ARE.

    I realize this is, again, too subtle for you. I state it for those who can grasp it.

    >Just as he cannot tell me how many abuse reports were sent about this matter. Or other information about this.

    When a person becomes a target of an unwarranted abuse report, the Lindens do not come and chat with them as a norm. God knows, when I was repeatedly harassed by Csven Concord, inside and outside of SL, when he was snapping pictures of my tenant’s swingset and intimidating that person and me, I didn’t get a housecall from a Linden saying, “Don’t worry, Prok, your tenant’s swingset is fine, and that mean Csven Concord is overzealous”. I got bupkus.

    And when I repeatedly asked in office hours about the dangers of witch-hunting and over-scruplulous AR reporting or misuse of AR reporting to get at people, I got very vague answers.

    BTW, what happened to your version of the story that these neighbours did this to get your water for their own?

    >He can’t even be more clear about the kinds of images that are and are not allowed since that would then be seen as the company policy. So he and the abuse staff just make judgments on a case-by-case situation and keep as quiet as possible about the steps they have taken.

    AND THAT IS WRONG. AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE CHALLENGING HERE. I realize it’s turning out that you, like the volunteers, and the mentors, and the FIC, imagine you can turn the state or authorities to and fro to your bidding, and have them in your pocket, and have your private little understandings with them.

    But sorry, there’s a public interest at stake here. And we sure as hell DO need to see what they are “privately” making judgements on as the aggregate lets us know how they are policing this and how people can avoid liability and undue harassment.

    And if you can’t take this ‘private understanding’ to the bank and put out the images, it’s worthless. So if you are too chicken, tell me where they are for sale, and I will put them out *shrugs*. Let’s all share in the Lindens’ reading of a situation, shall we? Let’s not just have it benefit one resident?

    >That my art did not violate the TOS is actually none of your business anyways…

    It would be great if this sort of statement could be blamed on ignorance or youth, but the problem is far more severe and urgent; it’s blamed on an insidious ideology that refuses to concede the rule of law as something beyond one’s self, and above one’s own subjective reading, and one’s own little private understandings with one’s own private little government chibi.

    No, we need all to share in this information so that everyone can a) have the freedoms YOU enjoy to put out art to the limits they can b) to stand up to vigilante neighbours and volunteers; c) to define in general what broadly offensive is, since it’s so elusive.

    Sorry you feel these public goods are things only you should enjoy.

    >Actually, that’s the job of the abuse team. As far as I know, they are still undecided about the steps they’re going to take against this mob.

    Again, wrong. It’s not the job of the abuse team to *train volunteers* and tell them what’s wrong.

    If this story ends up burning these overzealous volunteers at the stake, that would be so very SL, eh?

    >Difference is of course that I just files one complaint for every offender while this mob could have flooded the abuse team with their reports. Actually, their actions might even have caused some delays for the abuse team and preventing them to take actions against those who did violate the TOS.

    So…are we to understand that now that the Lindens no longer have a “one-person, one-offense, one-response” approach to crime (a horribly, awfully, corrupt and hopeless story all on its own) that whoever can lob in the most mass number of reports wins? They get to determine “what the community thinks”? Is that how it works?

    >Do you realize that I actually consider contacting the web host of the Herald site about this article? Telling them that I feel offended by your article and telling them you violated my rights and my privacy? That could actually result in the Herald being thrown off it’s host. Pretending your insults are just free press won’t hold up for long in that case, I think… Free press, yes. Free insults, no…

    Go ahead? I seriously think you have no grounds for this. If you truly felt your privacy was invaded, would you be posting 3000-word essays here now, hon? Try to look at the consistency of your actions. The matter of your privacy was considered, but it was judged to be a story in the public domain as numerous people, because of the nature of information flow and groups in SL, already had your name and the location.

    Are you to suggest that being a target of an AR which you are now working overtime to assure us was misplaced gives you the status of a rape victim?

    >You know what? I will report this to the webhost. Let’s see if he too considers this free press.

    Good! And please note that your friend Pixeleen Mistral at pixeleen.mistral@gmail.com who you discussed this story with for hours saw it, approved it for posting, and followed its corrections. Any further consideration, take it up with her, please.
47. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 18th, 2007
    

    >Actually, disclosing any chat logs to the public could be considered a violation of the TOS. Thus if someone would publish a complete chat log here, they are in violation. Using any recorded logs for private use is fine. Disclose the contents of these logs, you put yourself at risk. The chat log from the volunteers group as published in this article could already be a violation. Residents need to have a reasonable expectation of privacy, no matter where they go. (And as I’ve said before, I’m not disclosing the contents of my logs to others.)

    Actually, no, it’s not a violation of the TOS whatsoever, you’re wrong.

    Sorry, but you need to get the facts straight on this. It is not a violation of the TOS to publish chatlogs outside of SL’s world and official forums on third-party sites. The Lindens cannot overreach to third-party sites. Read the story about Meta Linden if you need some brushing up on the facts and the law in this regard:

    http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/05/linden_cracks_d.html
48. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 18th, 2007
    

    >Ever on a quest to find a demon to exorcise you throw out massive generalizations about me and others with little ground in the real world let alone SL.

    Kettle to pot?

    >There is a difference between feeling strongly about something and working to see a goal acheived and SEEKING CONFLICT. You do the latter.

    Reporting on news and engaging in critical commentary is not about sitting around and singing Kumbayah. You have very little sense of what is required for these things.

    >If that wasn’t the case you’d write something positive once in a while because you’d actually see positive things around you on occassion. If we were to base our opinions of SL on your catalog of “articles” then it would be full of death squads and terrorist griefers who all seem to ultimately target…YOU!

    Sorry, but there isn’t a requirement to make one’s blogging and one’s reporting “positive” or to “balance it” to fulfill some pedestrian notion of whatever bland pablum one needs to achieve one’s comfort level.

    >There is a difference between promoting a free press and USING YOUR RESOURCES TO SPREAD MALICE AND ACCUSATIONS. You do the latter.

    I haven’t spread any malice or accusations. I reported on a story of accusations of another, and ultimately, in part due to the scrutiny of the press, the person was exonerated.

    >You talk so much about me wishing you would be quiet because I disagree with your opinion (or more accurately, ranting) and that I’d prefer a society of conformist automatons. That’s quite the opposite, in fact. I definitely value the many freedoms we’re afforded “in society, especially one like this”. That’s why you need to back off and make an attempt at objective, unbiased, non-sensationalist journalism.

    No, I don’t “need” to do this whatsoever. Not at the Herald, surely. And not anywhere. You need to filter your news consumption, however, if your sensibilities are so delicate.

    >In truth, I only wish you would be quiet because whenever you speak it is negative and borders on trampling on other peoples’ rights as a person. That is…
    -NOT to be accused of phantom crimes and conspiracies without any verifiable facts or statistics…and no, “verifiable” doesn’t mean you already wrote it before.

    No such accusations have been made. It’s a report on *other people’s accusations and how the story played out*.

    >-NOT to have their name dragged through the mud if all they do is stand up to you or even simply disagree with you…although at this point you tend to help people with their credibility. Most people I’ve met or otherwise come across on SLH seem to be of the opinion that if someone is consistantly slandered by you then they must be alright folks afterall!

    If some people read the news backward like that, I pity them, and they get the country they deserve.

    >-NOT to be bullied by you and your “accomplished writer” “successful-yet-persecuted land baron” “griefer watch” ass. You remind me again and again of the “for us or against us” attitude our RL president has. It doesn’t seem to be working to well for him, either.

    I didn’t vote for our “RL president” (who is we?). And I hardly have to justify *responding to bullies in the comments by making my own strong pushback*.

    >As far as trying to compare yourself to a RL journalist…I think you WOULD have been fired by any legitimate news company after the first time you posted the hateful things you have grown to be so notorious for. I suspect that the only reason you are still allowed to write for SLH is because of the attention and traffic you bring.

    The idea that someone is “allowed to write what they write” over the “attention and traffic they bring” is silly. That’s not how the Herald works. And it’s not true. If the Herald chased traffic, they’d print more pin-up girls and stories of mafia bling and fashion.

    And any review of my stories would conclude they’re good, and done in good faith. I am bullied and harassed in comments, and I fight back. Some people don’t like that, but I don’t know that anyone has found a good solution to the problem of witch-hunting and griefing here.

    >And no, it’s not good journalism when you provoke the subject of your story to leave comments to clear up the tangle of misinformation due to erroneous conclusion-drawing and a lack of fact-finding on your part. This story was revealed IN SPITE of your lack-luster efforts. The same was true of the UW story that you beat into the ground, too.

    Hardly. If I hadn’t reported the story to the best of my faith, and urged the parties in it to speak by covering them, there’d be no story. The subject of my story began with my sympathy, but doesn’t end with it, because she’s sadly no different than the people who harassed her and will only turn the tables to use surveillance, specious abuse-reporting, Linden-vest-pocketing and every other offense herself.

    And the only “tangle” I see here isn’t my story and updates, which are fairly brief, but the very long-drawn-out, self-justifying, contradictory story of the victim.

    >Unfortunately your track record heavily implies that YOU would be the one content with such a totalitarian system so long as your ideals were the ones being conformed to.

    Hardly. That’s why I’m here trying to prevent this from coming about in SL.

    >This is apparent by the venom you spit whenever someone questions or otherwise discredits you. There is many-a-time where you get backed into a corner and have to resort to “I swing hard” and “fuck off” as talking points for your agenda. Are you sure 51 is not just transposed 15??

    I think most people wouldn’t fight as hard as I have and stand up to a phenomenally obsessive and brutal mob that has formed against me in SL. And that this mob has become more vicious is surely the case, but that’s due to its nature and what is at stake.

    >I draw many comparisons between you and the volunteers you were criticizing in this “article” because you two are basically doing the same thing only in completely different directions.

    I think you need to lay those concerns at the door of the victims, who is now busy hob-nobbing with Lindens as to the best way to AR her neighbours and the volunteers and eavesdropping on them.

    >They attacked and insulted someone who they felt was doing something they are completely against…without the burden of proof or tangible fact to worry about. You do the same time after time. The difference in this case is that they are overly concerned about children being taken advantage of whereas you’re overly concerned about yourself and maintaining the “embattled bringer of wisdom and light to a world that doesn’t really exist”. If only you put this much effort and self-righteous determination into something that actually matters.

    I reported a story. It’s not my crusade. Not my story. I reported it.

    >Again, maybe you should join Amnesty International or find Jesus or something!

    I’ve done both, thanks. How about yourself?

    >I don’t want you to conform to someone else’s ideas. I want you to respect the fact that others have ideas that are different from your’s and they are just as entitled as(sometimes MORE entitled than) you to have them and express them.

    Nobody is “more” entitled. And your notion of “respect” means that someone you don’t like has to drop the defense and propagation of their beliefs because you find it objectionable. Well, suck it up.

    >I want you to learn how to have a positive and constructive debate when discussing subjects you feel strongly about.

    Um, well, perhaps you need to administer some Haldol with that involuntary psychiatric detention and rehabilitation you’re planning there, son.

    >You’re never going to get anyone to see things your way with the current tactics (or lack thereof) you employ whenever you speak. No amount of trolling or “redirecting criticism” so you can better control the conversation will make anyone say “Wow, Prok is right! Life really DOES suck!”

    And you are…who? And you do…what in SL and RL? Such as to be in a position to make these homilies and these pious prescriptions?

    >All you’re doing is making you look good to yourself. The rest of us think you’re a lonely old cat lady who can only find satisfaction in bringing others down to her level and provoking those that are already down there with you.

    Actually, the cat-lady faction is a faction — and a small one. I get many comments from appreciative readers and I think most people “get it”. They just don’t get involved.

    >I don’t wish you ill, Prok. I just wish you’d stop wishing ill on everyone who even REMOTELY disagrees with you or is the subject of your crusades. Maybe then there wouldn’t be protests bearing your likeness and name!

    It’s actually evidence of the correctness of my position that my effigies are burned, so to speak, by the perpetrators of the Big Lie.
49. 

    Alexander Hayes
    

    Jul 18th, 2007
    

    Oh, what the heck. The girl asked you to add an update to the article to make it clear she did not violate the TOS. Why don’t grant her that favor?
50. 

    Prokofy Neva
    

    Jul 18th, 2007
    

    The story never made a claim she violated the TOS?

    No comments of mine made any claim she violated the TOS?

    I don’t retract non-statements I didn’t make.

    Furthermore, if we have an official reading from a Linden now on what really constitutes “broadly offensive” or doesn’t constitute broadly offensive, we need to get it from the Lindens. I’m working on that. Meanwhile, the “victim” has made her claim amply and repeatedly in the comments, and the story never made a claim about her violating anything in the first place.

    This was a story about other people claiming this; take it up with them.

Leave a Reply