Advances in Equal Opportunity: Where We Are Now

No, I'm not. I am saying, I didn't understand your post. I responded to it in the only way I could, having not really quite understood it.

coco

Assuming this is more or less your modus operandi, I think I can safely explain a few things that have left me scratching my head now and in the past.

i have an idea. don't throw stones!



if you need to get paid to post coherently, i need to get paid to grade your paper.

I am NOT being cute!

I said, "I may be missing your point," which was being polite. I was meaning that I didn't understand her post, but I was going to respond with something that might be appropos. I GET to not understand a post.

When she replied, "No, you didn't miss it, you just didn't get it," well, you know, that is what I was SAYING.

She could have helped explain it without being so rude to me about it.

coco

Hey! I haven't thrown any stones! I didn't accuse your wife of marrying a gibberish-spouting idiot!

coco

And again, that's not true.

First of all, I'm noting that your argument has shifted. You originally were arguing against the point that "success depends on recieving gifts from lucky and powerful people". You have now shifted, and are arguing that there is a skill - "promoting themselves" - which attracts those gifts. This is probably true, but it would not change the fact that success would depend on getting the gifts.

You also contradict yourself by saying that "some people are great at promoting themselves, others are not.. those others don't want to put in the work necessary". If those others could do just as well by doing a particular set of work, then surely they're not really in the "not" group? Is it predecided or the result of work? Inquiring minds want to know!

Also, the people I'm referring to are new players who were given opportunities because people saw what they were building in the sandboxes. This was typically the result of them happening to be online and in the sandbox at the right time. The people who were passed over were doing exactly the same thing in exactly the same sandboxes at different times. Well, there were one or two other differences - some of them were practicing different skills, since building automatically gets noticed much more easily than anything else because the results are visual.

But what they weren't doing was doing much to promote themselves other than standing around building stuff in a public place. In fact, if they had been promoting themselves in the sandbox, they'd have been breaking TOS.

But you're talking about the government. None of us, even those who are successful, got a "plot of free land from the government".

We started with nothing, too. Actually, check that. We started with *less* than what newbies now get.. So I don't get how there's a disparity?

What argument? All I've said is that a) some people have a pathetic outlook on the possibility of success and that b) some people are great at promoting themselves and that has nothing at all to do with government taxation.

Let us know when you're ready to stop recycling from your little sociology paper and actually engage in the discussion.

Thoguh that does nothing whatever to explain your apology...

My point is, you are expecting the property management group (Linden Lab) to hold auditions (the Developer's list) becasue a film company (Wells Fargo) rented a building from them.

I am saying that is has been and should be up to the actors to seek and contact the film companies. It is unfair and innappropriate to ask the building management company to do any of that work for them.

Any pinhead can sign up for the developer's list. I know - I did. That devalues the list - the interested company still has to sort through all that chaff to find the wheat.

i didn't accuse your wife of any such thing either. what's your point?

"The goverment" was used only as an example of a powerful group. The point is that there's a difference between advantages that are handed out as a result of other people's decisions, and advantages that are part of the natural human experience.

As a corresponding example: you run a shop in a mall. Another shop in the same mall competes with you. The mall management decide to give the other shop a gift, by halving their rent. When you protest that this is unfair, they argue that you should not complain about that because it's unfair that you get to run a business in the first place, as opposed to all the other people with no business talent. Is that reasonable? I hope not.

Please stop arguing with examples that have no corrolation with reality.

I'm sorry. To me, I was merely pointing out that you had completely missed the point. Due to my Asperger's I can be very, very gruff and blunt without knowing I'm doing it, Coco, as I've explained to you before.

Probably when you're ready to respond to the latter part of my previous post? As I say, I've stood right there as a newbie myself and observed what happened, and the successful ones weren't "promoting themselves" any more than the unsuccessful-but-similarly-skilled ones were. It just happened they were there at the right time.

Your husband, then. Whatever.

coco

I'm not sure what point you're ever trying to make with this stuff. It all comes off as emo fatalism dressed in New Yorker magazine clothes.

Ow!
I got a brain cramp trying to imagine that.

Yes, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that being gruff and blunt without knowing it was a part of Apsberger's. But I am saying that I didn't understand your post, and in pointing out that my reply might be off the mark because of that, I said "I might be missing your point." Just a linguistic snafoo, I think. I can be gruff and blunt without knowing it, too, and in any case, my apologies, as well, for the foul-up in communication.

coco

"i'm not getting paid to decipher your cryptic gibberish either though. your husband has no choice. he vowed to put up with your gibberish when he said "i do"."

This is where I think you're just being evasive.

My point is, how can you claim that these complaints are the result of "people not being prepared to do the work promoting themselves" when I have stood right there in the relevant locations and observed that the cause of the differences was nothing to do with some people doing "work promoting themselves"?

As for the Wells Fargo situation, I'm saying that if Wells Fargo came to them and asked for suggestions, the Developer's Directory is the way to go, and not just thinking of who they happen to know of who would be good for the job.

As for us seeking out our OWN Wells Fargo deals, I say - more power to it!

coco

Yumi saw it.

Therefore it is an absolute, and all of SL functions this way!

Abolish the PowerBall and all lotteries NOW! Jeez, it's not fair to those who bought tickets and didn't win. Heck, it's unfair to those that didn't buy a ticket - you should be given a winning ticket just for setting foot in a gas station or convenience store! *Smacks self on forehead* Why didn't I think of that earlier?!

I really wish you people would stay on topic, as was previously stated this thread is now about the time Toast burnt the pot roast and then Cory yelled at her and they went to bed mad. Might even escallate to more revealing screenshots if we all stay on topic. And I'm not even real interested in seeing more explicit make-up pics, but it would be a much more sensible alternative.

I dunno, because your anecdotal evidence doesn't really mean anything to me?