A New Blow for Freedom of Speech?

Wishful thinking?

Well, that's clarified the position, hasn't it.

Pep (I'll stick with my unambiguous position, thank you.)

ETA And you managed to impress Jig, even.

Do you understand the context of the word respect in my posts?

It means that where people of a different culture than you would see your behavior as griefing if you came in the midst of them and did whatever the hell you wanted.

I dont give a damn about you OR what you do in SL, but I do respect that you and your SL lifestyle has a right to exist, even if it doesnt appeal to me. I never have to see you inworld and I never have to go where it's in evidence.

This should work both ways and not play a double standard.

Do you understand me when I say that you have to earn respect, not deserve it?

You have absolutely no rights to specify what I do and where I go, other than in locations over which you have authority. LL have some rules, but if they are not enforced then what good are they?

This does work both ways. You can do as you want and go where you like as long as the land owners allow you.

Pep (But don't even think of trying to tell me what I "should" or "should not" do, because real life doesn't work that way, much less SL.)

I'll make it even clearer, if you like...

The *only* thing I know about your nature is that the overwhelming majority of posts that you write are written for the sole purpose of finding fault with what other people wrote. Not only does that not earn you any respect points with me, it does exactly the opposite.

But that's just one part of you, the person, and you certainly have other facets of your nature. It may be that one or more of those would earn my respect, but I don't know what they are so I am left with just that one facet of your nature, which has the opposite effect of earning my respect.

Having said that, you are still a fellow human being, and regardless of what I think of you, I would still treat you with the respect for a fellow human being, and not be inconsiderate enough to do things, or to use language that you might find offensive.

Thanks for agreeing with me, Phil.

Pep (The first concept is "respect", the second "consideration"; you have even used the words "not be inconsiderate" which tends to reinforce my argument.)

PS There was no need to edit your post for typos; I wouldn't have mentioned them as diluting your argument.

You may think so, but you are wrong - yet again. Stop squirming and grow up.

You just contradicted yourself, since I find your second quoted post offensive.

Pep (You're not being very considerate, are you.)

That's odd. I didn't think that truth could be offensive, but there ya go.

ETA for clarification:
You were squirming, and the mind that majors in finding fault with people hasn't yet grown up.

It was the inaccuracy of your words that I found offensive, since I was not squirming, but explaining a position which makes considerably more sense than your inadequate model, nor am I immature in any way . . .

Pep ( . . . and most certainly, accurate criticism is not a juvenile characteristic.)

You were squirming - my words were accurate.

Accurate criticism is not a juvenile characteristic, as you said, but the mind that majors in finding fault with other people hasn't yet grown up - and it may never do so. Almost all you ever do in this forum is find fault. You need to grow up, Pep.

Pep:
There was a recent thread in which the OP found fault with a sim owner because the sim owner banned her after she'd sent him/her an unrequested critique of the sim. If my estimation is correct, the overwhelming view in that thread was that the OP was wrong to send the unrequested critique. I don't ever recall anyone here asking you for a critique of their posts, however accurate the critiques may be.

What little I know of this comes from the few educators I do know in SL, and from some participation in and browsing of the SL Educators list.

Most university activity in SL is not about research, but rather about teaching. Real (i.e., credit) courses are taught in virtual classrooms or other environments here for a number of reasons, but I suspect that most of them are "distance learning" courses -- which is to say, courses offered electronically to out-of-town or off-campus students. But I know also that there are others who teach courses here because the immersive 3-D environment enhances their teaching in some way. As an example, the recreated "Western Front" that I visited a couple of days ago was set up by Oxford University as a way of contextualizing the poetry of six WWI "war poets."

Others are actually teaching Second Life itself to students; most of these, I take it, are information science instructors. In other words, librarians or library studies teachers. The "virtual world" has been tagged in the library/information studies field as "the wave of the future" for information delivery. (No, I don't really get it either: go ask a librarian.)

As for "research" being conducted here, I suspect that you'll find that most of that is coming from students who are themselves studying information science, or doing simulated exercises (like "operating a small business" in SL.

You must live in an interesting place. Do you walk into MacDonalds and poledance in your hometown? You have every right to do it apparently.

Or walk up to cops and spit on them. You can do whatever the hell you want where you live, and it's ALL OKAY.

I dont care what you do where you do it away from me inworld if it isn't compliant with the TOS or my property's rules while in their borders. But apparently people whom you dont like shouldnt exist because they get in the way of your gridwide tyranny (for wont of a better word for someone who feels they own the whole place). You seem nothing more than a bully to me.

This is the Residents Answers sub-forum in case you didn't notice after all this time. Any posting here is fair game for comment.

Pep (Why don't you start a thread about comparing apples and oranges?)

Do you have a problem of comprehension? I hadn't really clocked you in the forums and I initially presumed you were an EFLer but you seem to be finding English a little difficult. You obviously can't tell the difference between "must" and "should", between rules or laws and politically correct, motherhood and apple pie, pinko inclusionary mores.

I also had presumed you were male, but this hysterical outburst of nonsense is worthy of the most over-emotional of "female" forum participants.

Pep (Now all you have to do is wish death on me and you can join the macabre cadre.)

"Because I can", yet another mantra of the not-yet-fully-grown.

That's actually the attitude that conquered Everest.

Pep (For someone who isn't fully grown, Kid, you don't seem to know much about it.)

Around my house it's "because I said so", the mantra of the at-the-end-of-my-patients-overreacting-discipline-dispensing mom. It usually results from the "because I can" attitude. Bad behavior usually screws it up for everyone.

Pep, do you suppose we could put the female-bashing to rest for a while?

It isn't really relevant to your argument anyway; it's not as though you are only in conflict with women here. This sort of thing just reads like a cheap and unnecessary shot that is insulting the innocent as well as those whom you are targeting. And I don't see how smearing half of your audience unnecessarily is going to enlist much sympathy in your "cause."

This is the Residents Answers sub-forum, in case you didn't notice after all this time, and posting here is fair game for answers. Posts are *not* fair game for uninvited grammar critiques.

Earlier today I was dismayed to discover that I'd typed the F-word into group chat (along with some rather more substantive indiscretions), when I thought I was typing into an individual chat.

My dismay wasn't because I particularly care that certain unintended recipients might think less of me because I sometimes use vulgarities. In fact, I think it foolish to forswear all use of vulgarities with the silly presumption that those words are not as effective in communicating as some other choice of wording. I don't have Tourette's: when I say "f*ck", I mean to evoke precisely the effect "f*ck" conveys. English is not Sanskrit: it expresses much more than hyper-precise meaning, if one uses the whole language, vulgarities and all.

What bothered me, rather, was that I meant to convey what it means to say "f*ck" to an individual, not what it means to say that to a group. Had I known I was chatting to a group, I would have used quite different language to convey the same meaning.

I think everyone intuitively understands that the audience and setting are parts of the context in which language is decoded. The relevant social conventions can't just be wished away--and nobody much frets about it because it's basic to our experience with language.

Online and in Second Life, however, we are inventing new modes of communication in which such conventions are not automatically understood by all. Although we have something like "profiles" in other services, there's nothing exactly like SL profiles in content and use. With LL's guidance here we are going about defining these new social conventions.

If LL says profiles aren't the place to say "f*ck*, it's probably best to follow that rule, and not just because otherwise we may get in trouble, but because otherwise we can't know quite what our words are saying.

This, emphatically.

This may be -- no, is -- the most intelligent and sensible post I've seen on this thread and this subject.

For some reason I wouldn't expect to see Sir Edmund Hillary compulsively criticizing people on an internet forum, when he was alive.

I would, however, completely expect to see you compare your achievements here with those of someone like Sir Hillary.

At least someone in a Macdonalds is getting some exercise if that is the case.

All this seems a bit too deep and educational for me.
Let's get back to talking about sex and what men want for christmas.
That is the direction I steered my meeting in today and it worked.