W-Hat Goon’s Land for Rent in Baku Sim
by Alphaville Herald on 05/09/08 at 7:00 am
Intlibber Brautigan, Woodbury helping keep W-Hat afloat?
by Pixeleen Mistral, National Affairs desk
rent where Plastic duck got his first ban – and the first mega prim was created
Metaverse urban renewal experts and history fans may want to look up IntLibber Brautigan at the Woodbury University suite at the Tampa Marriot Waterside during the SLCC this weekend – it seems that Mr. Brautigan has secured the rights to rent mall space in both the W-Hat sim retail area and the W-Hat land in Baku sim – both sites where the goons have gained a certain level of notoriety for controversial builds – and possibly other activities.
While controversy may upset some, it also creates traffic as curious onlookers come to gawk and anti-griefers come to abuse report imagery they find objectionable. High traffic creates opportunity, but the burden of with endless tier payments to Linden Lab has resulted in a new direction for Baku – an attempt to cash in on the traffic and offset the Second Life land tier payments.
Masakazu Kojima: “SL is an expensive habit”
Major landowner Masakazu Kojima was quick to point out that Baku is not for sale – it would not do to have this valuable piece of property fall into the “wrong hands” – but rumors have been circulating for some time that associates of Woodbury and Longcat sims have made significant donations to the Masa Foundation in support of the W-Hat land tier payments. Could those payments have been significant enough to result in the actual sale of these historic sites – or is the new land management agreement simply a creative approach to cost cutting by W-Hat?
The text of the BnT press release is below:
***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
W-Hat Hires BNT To Manage Properties
Sept 3rd, 2008
Baku – Standing here on this historic piece of real estate are w-hat leader Masakazu Kojima, BNT CEO IntLibber Brautigan, Zac Wilcke, Orty Wei, and Breakfast Bijou, who reminisced the sands of time.
The reason for this historic meeting was the completion of an agreement between Kojima and Brautigan to have BNT Holdings manage both the Baku property, and the What Mall in ‘what’ region, to benefit W-Hat and the Masa Foundation. Member donations for tier on the sims have been varied at best, in recent months accepting funds from Brautigan, Scout Detritus, even Woodbury University has helped fund the sim, among other non-what residents.
In order to get the properties on a more even financial keel, Masa sought the advice of Brautigan, who recommended BNT help manage the sims. “What members are some of the greatest content creators on the grid,” Brautigan said, “but business expertise is not very common, which is where BNT can help. Baku is a historical district of SL, and has high traffic on a consistent basis, as does ‘what’ region, they are both prime locations for retail facilities and should command excellent rents for merchants seeking to tap that traffic, including many what members who are renowned content creators themselves.”
Masakazu Kojima: “Baku is open to everyone for the first time ever. what is a different story, only cool people are allowed in what. Breakfast why are you in Baku?”
Even furrys, “skill” gamblers, “zero interest” bankers, ad farmers, and legitimate ageplayers will be allowed in Baku. It will be a veritable hotbed of commerce and capitalism.
Rent in the Historical Baku District!!!
An important part of getting the property on its feet is promotion and marketing. As Baku is a crucial location in the development of the metaverse, it seems natural to laud its historical importance….
Masakazu Kojima: OWN A PIECE OF HISTORY
Masakazu Kojima: or rent it
Masakazu Kojima: RENT A PIECE OF E-HISTORY
IntLibber Brautigan: RENT SOME OF MY HISTORICAL E-LAWN
Masakazu Kojima: this was where it all began, sort of!!
Masakazu Kojima: lounge on the lawn where plastic duck got his first ban
IntLibber Brautigan: ah yes, where Gene Replacement made the fabled megaprim
Masakazu Kojima: have a tea party on the site of twin towers
Masakazu Kojima: all 15 of them
Masakazu Kojima: we had one over there
Masakazu Kojima: and over there
Masakazu Kojima: and over there
Masakazu Kojima: and over there
Masakazu Kojima: dave made one with planes that flew into it and people jumping out of windows and stuff
Whats in what?
The What mall in what region is already well established with many what member/content creators renting store space. The new theme for the sim, of a nerf military group, should also attract significant traffic to the mall.
Who is what?
What is a group of content creators, satirists, humorists, and other creative individuals who come to Second Life from the somethingawful.com web forums. They are most widely known for thier involvement in making the Relay For Life as successful as it is, and have made significant contributions to SL in the form of the largest name2key database (needed for many scripted objects in SL), the muginet communications protocol, and their offworld lsl testing/compiling application. While frequently spoken of in a more disparaging manner by certain web-demogogs, what is an important part of SL history and culture. For more information, see http://www.w-hat.com
http://slurl.com/secondlife/Baku/107/166/29/
http://slurl.com/secondlife/what/128/128/0/
Rental queries can be directed to:
Saiasunshine Fackler or Duchess Shepherd
Brautigan & Tuck Holdings
http://bntholdings.com
bntholdings@yahoo.com
Reality
Sep 15th, 2008
Ethics is the SOLE basis of this discussion. YOU just don’t want it to. You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.
reality (none of the above realities)
Sep 16th, 2008
Oh dear, you guys are still at it?
Please do us a favor, and continue in private.
There must be some private room in some private sim where you two can go at it without making us witness this endless, pointless argument.
You’re never going to admit who is right and who is wrong anyway, so there’ll be no end to it.
Reality
Sep 16th, 2008
No Dearie – this is not an ethical discussion and WAS NOT from the moment you decided to respond to my original comment.
Sorry Dearie – you do not get to tell me how a discussion that is spring boarded from my own comment is to go. If you do not like it you are welcome to walk away.
Now then – I will lay this out for you in the plainest language a child like you can understand.
Drop. The. Bullshit. There. Is. No. Ethical. Or. Legal. Precedent. For. Your. View. In. Second. Life.
YOU responded to a comment I made. I set the criteria of the discussion Dearie. I did NOT state that this was a discussion on Ethics – of which not a SINGLE Human Being is capable of bringing into a discussion without an ulterior motive.
I have challenged you again and again to find a court case concerning the removal of content in Second Life caused by an Abuse Report. This has been a challenge to provide a LEGAL backing for your outrageous and quite frankly childish view regarding Privacy. Second Life REQUIRES that you bend your own views on this quite a bit … Unless locked out of a region there is NO such thing as Privacy in Second Life and by extension NO ‘Private Land’ outside of a locked off simulator.
Reality
Sep 16th, 2008
There is a simple enough solution if you find this endless and pointless – Do. Not. Read. The. Comments.
Reality
Sep 16th, 2008
Ethics is the SOLE basis of this discussion. YOU just don’t want it to. You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.
Witness X
Sep 16th, 2008
If ethics have no basis in Second Life, as you so claim, then why are the griefers you are so adamantly against not accepted? IF ethics don’t come into play, the unethical people like that must surely be acceptable. If it is accepted that griefers, being just one example, are acting in a behavior that can be ascribed to as being wrong, then by definition it follows that there are ethical guidelines in Second Life.
Reality
Sep 16th, 2008
X Dearie – This is not a discussion concerning Griefers, nor have I said nor implied anything like what you seem to think I have said.
I was telling the little hypocrite/coward/naive child that his view concerning a user of Second Life being able to send in an abuse report for content that they find on a PUBLIC ACCESS simulator has no Ethical nor Legal Precedent.
How you were able to leap from my essentially telling someone that their entire viewpoint is total and utter bullshit, lacking even the most basic criteria to truly support it – to saying that ethics are not present at all in Second Life is beyond me.
Oh wait – was it perhaps the fact that I decided to throw in the truth concerning just about every single human being and Ethics into the mix?
Get a fucking grip. Once again – another internet twit who only reads what they want. Sorry X Dearie … You lose this time around. Go back to school and relearn how to comprehend what you read instead of looking for what is not directly stated or implied.
Reality
Sep 16th, 2008
Penance, once again
Ethics is the SOLE basis of this discussion. YOU just don’t want it to. You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.
Royce Boa
Sep 16th, 2008
I am proud to call Baku my home, and I have nothing but high praise for the goons and for W-hat.
I run the RAGE Fighting Championships in that Boxing arena high above the sim, and I have never had any trouble with griefers at all. I will add that my first company I set up in Baku was a security company as well…so you’d think I would have been a prime target for abuse. lol. Anyways…I only hope the sim does not get polluted with lame clubs and horribly ugly stores now that the historic memorial park has been taken down.
Nikola Shirakawa
Sep 17th, 2008
Don’t bother trying to argue with UnReality. The only thing that shuts up egotists like that is to concede victory. If you aren’t willing to do that, you’re wasting your time.
Reality
Sep 17th, 2008
Nope, sorry Dearie. My discussion, my rules. Period and end of story. You responded to my comment – deal with it or move on kiddo.
By the by – I see you are back to using that old AOLer tactic of attempting to link a person to a Screen/User Name which has no relevance to them whatsoever.
Congratulations! You have proven that you are little more than a child – if not in physical fact then your mind is at least that immature.
I do believe it is time for me to add in a new rule to this discussion Dearie (which is – so you know child – a term I use to refer to mindless twits or persons that have earned my hatred. You are the former): When you have grown up enough to leave behind this immature and childish need to try and link a person to a Screen/User Name based on little more than vapor … Then you can come back and try to continue this little discussion.
One that has NEVER been about Ethics Dearie – My responses have only contained such since YOU decided this was somehow going to go down a different road.
what is the matter? Having trouble finding that court case I have required you to find?
Reality
Sep 17th, 2008
Penance, this is a public article. You did not write it, nor do you own the website hosting it, so once more.
You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.
And for the last time ethics do not require court cases. I am not arguing legalities. I am arguing ethics. You do not get to demand proof for an opinion you made up for someone., nor do I have to prove an opinion that is not mine.
Reality
Sep 17th, 2008
Dearie – I see you have failed to grasp two simple concepts:
1. Your prepubescent AOLer attitude will not be tolerated. when you have grown past this infantile need of yours to make false accusations and falsely link a person’s pseudonym to a person you dislike in an attempt to discredit the person you are having a hard time actually debating with. it is a tactic that belongs in a grammar school – keep it there.
2. The comment of mine that you originally responded to contained nothing concerning ethics – thus our debate is not about ethics. If you wish to debate further concerning that original comment you WILL find a court case. If you cannot, you WILL move on as at this point all you are doing is attempting to dodge around the requirement of the debate.
Deal with it kiddo. when you respond to me and engage me in debate – the article means nothing anymore. You are debating with me – not the author of the article nor with the web master here. I have set the rules for this debate and did so only a few responses in. It is YOU attempting to dodge and control this …. Hell it isn’t really a debate anymore.
Child – go back to school. when you have graduated – then come back and post. Until then – I am just going to ignore you. Your bullshit will simply keep on going and you will simply keep attempting to bring in an extra bit – which will not help you anyway.
Reality
Sep 17th, 2008
Penance, this is a public article. You did not write it, nor do you own the website hosting it, so once more.
You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.
And for the last time ethics do not require court cases. I am not arguing legalities. I am arguing ethics. You do not get to demand proof for an opinion you made up for someone., nor do I have to prove an opinion that is not mine.
Reality
Sep 18th, 2008
You know something Dearie?
You have failed to provide the required proof long enough.
Until you can provide it and until you can drop you 12 year old AOLer bullshit (sorry child – you never provided proof that I am who you accuse me of being. Having a sock puppet posting and using my own information doe not count either) this ‘discussion’ is over.
Have a good day/night.
PS: When you engage someone in a debate, certain ground rules are laid down. I laid down the rules – you failed to follow them and have now chosen to hide behind a rather flimsy excuse. I do not give a flying fuck whose web site this is nor do I give a flying fuck who wrote the article. They are not the ones in this debate – they have no say. Nor do you.
Reality
Sep 18th, 2008
Penance, this is a public article. You did not write it, nor do you own the website hosting it, so once more.
You don’t get to change the rules just to fit your argument. Sorry. You try again, dearie.
And for the last time ethics do not require court cases. I am not arguing legalities. I am arguing ethics. You do not get to demand proof for an opinion you made up for someone., nor do I have to prove an opinion that is not mine.