Support for the "Impeach Bush" Guy

I support using the virtual world as a tool for real-world political messages. I support the Impeach Bush sign guy.

~Ulrika~

Oh you rebel you!

I've been away for four months.

It seems you're still up to your old tricks, Ulrika.

No bite from me though, sorry

Please do not feed.

I'm sure alot of people would support them if they weren't annoying, or if they actually worked.

I support his right to build what he wants on his own SL land. I knew virtual folks tended toward the dramatic, but lately it's been drama queen overdose with all these threads about some one-prim signs.

Well, one guy came on and made a whole buncha threads hollering about the signs, which doesn't exactly help the cause. I'm pretty wiped on the whole thing too, but I will tell you - the longer it lasts, the more it proliferates, you can just absolutely totally forget the problem ever going away.

People are constantly coming into SL, and, as we've seen 75% of them want this problem fixed. LL may not want to fix it, and y'all make this that's great, but see, we still got 75% unhappy players, and the problem is not going to go away.

So it's gonna screw up SL, and screw the Lindens, and cut their profits, and mess up their PR and all this, so I hope you won't mind that either.

Which should pretty much prove once and for all it has nothing to do with free speech. No matter how little any of you might think of other people, 75% of people simply do NOT get up in arms simply because one guy has stated that he thinks Bush should be impeached.

They get up in arms for other, legitimate reasons - such as griefing and extortion, and, I would add, total blighting of the landscape, everywhere.

So you can support the Bush guy all you want, and his right to do all this - but you are also supporting LL's right to deliberately go down with their own SL ship, due to misinterpreting what this is really all about. Which isn't free speech.

coco

I support the supportation of free speech..

Now surely you cannot be claiming that the results of any non-scientific forum poll can possibly represent how 75% of SL residents feel, that is absurd. At most, it represents how a subset of forum posters and their alts feel about a given issue, it is not representative of SL at large. You can't speak for 75% of SL unless you have spoken to 75% of SL and found out exactly how they feel.

Well, that is not completely true. Pollsters do it all the time. They take a sampling of of the entire group and based on that, they figure out what the most likely results will be. That is why they have the +/- % error.

The problem here is that that's not what's happening.

A forum poll is a sampling of a sub-section of the /forum/. The forum is not the game... It has a different population demographic. By default, for example, most forum posters are more 'involved' or 'obsessed' or whatever term you want to use, than those who can't be bothered to post here.

That's just one difference of many, and it's not in and of itself 100% accurate, but it's an example of why data obtained from poling the forum does not inherently accurately represent a similar opinion breakdown in-world.

I'm building a push gun that shouts "IMPEACH BUSH!" whenever it fires. It's a political statement. Ejecting you from the sim is a metaphor for ejecting Bush from office.

I support this abuse - and the AR's that follow (mmm i want waffles)

As many said MANY times..."Its not about politics."

What it IS about:

1) The right to sell land at any price you set. (I think a few land barons would like to keep that one intact.)

2) The right to put whatever you want on land you own as long as it conforms to the TOS and CS that we all agreed to when we joined. (I think a few people that could use some lessons in building would be happy to know they can at least learn without getting abuse reported for it or asked to leave SL or ELSE!)

I 100% support these two rights. If we make exceptions for THIS case, we open up another slippery slope that starts the protest warriors on the next "disagreeable" thing. Personally, I've not liked how I see our world evolving. I'm seeing too much of first life in it in fact. We all agreed to a TOS and a CS. Those in violation of that should and in many cases are warned, suspended or banned. Yes he's annoying, but as I read one poster say today already, "becareful of what you ask, you may get it."

*A disheartened Rose now swears an oath to never look at another "Bush Guy" thread having gotten that off her virtual chest.*

I don't have time to address this carefully right now, Cristiano - but those are the stats we have, and I'm not going to argue how weak such a poll obviously is. That's not the point. More to the point, what are you trying to claim with the above?

coco

P.S. Since I'm pissed off, I will take a little extra time to add that - Obviously, I would never have meant to claim I spoke for every member of the game for God's sake, or make any claims about the forum respondants representing everyone in the game or anything like that, but it is a significant indicator, do you not agree? Ignore that indicator at your own peril. Let LL ignore it, too, at their own peril.

I took graduate level statistics, so I promise you, I really don't need to be educated about polls and sample sizes and margins of error.

Love it! Perfect analogy.

Sign me up for one.

coco

As a political statement I support this as well. Because you are giving an uninvited push, however, you might have to answer to charges of griefing. This is not atypical for protesters though, who often engage in practices that can be illegal (trespassing is the most common).

~Ulrika~

There you go, whipping out the credentials again. Whether you took statistics at Stanford or took the Cosmo quiz is irrelevant. You placed so much emphasis on the 75% number in your post, and that is what I was responding to, so your college transcripts were completely unnecessary. You were claiming that 75% of the players of SL are unhappy about the signs, and that is just ridiculous.

It is not a significant indicator, because it has no meaning in the wider spectrum of SL - it only represents how 75% of those who even chose to respond to a forum poll felt about it. Those especially who dislike the signs would be much more inclined to vote yes with more than one account - so the sample is tainted anyway as you can easily vote more than once.

here is 1% who has never seen one .. now sl hustler, yea i see those all the time (and no its not becuase im reading them either)

I'm with you there - I have seen the SLUSTLER crap signs more than I have seen the Impeach Bush ones.

Granted it's a match made in Heaven, but who cares what you think?


You think everyone is Tcos Bach.

Yes. It's a logical fallacy known as the argument from authority. In this case it's being used to defend an erroneous conclusion.

The polls in the forum can not be extrapolated to the greater SL population because they aren't a random sample. Statistically speaking, one can use a small group to predict the opinion of a much larger group within a small margin of error provided the methodology for both sampling and questioning is done properly. A forum poll fails on both counts.

~Ulrika~

Huzzah! It's my old Prokofy Triple-Neg-Rate Ass Hat back from the archives.

~Ulrika~

Isn't it strange how an advertisement for something in world (no matter how ugly or pretty) doesn't cause as much commotion as a real world "political statement"?

Ok, who took an A-Level in estimation?