Pre-Nups in Paradise

All of which do not require any fiscal trust at all with another person.

The reality of the furries, dragons etc. is that we *know* they are not real and we play along, where as the reality check here is that you seem to really beleive that you have some security in this type of "contract".

That is the big difference.

Not at all Gab. But I did enter into my parnership seriously, knowing the man, kowing his intelligence and what he could offer me even in a sl world. It showed we rspected each other. Inn all teh time I have been here I have only had two partners. He and I invested a good deal of ourselves into this and explored the possibilities of a computer generated world. Relationships and commitment ar ejust a part of it.

You refute me by saying its because you trust him? Well, D'uh of course you would say that because your relationship is still OK. A pre-nup though actually shows distrust of someone not trust.

It boils down to this, either his is trustworthy or he is not. Either way an SL pre-nup makes zero sense at all. If he is trustworthy then the pre-nup is not necessary, if he is not trustworthy then your SL pre-nup is useless to you.

That several of us have had to point this out and you still argue with it backs up my statement that it shows a weak grip on the reality of the situtation.

break ups are usually not fair, or calm.... emotions will be factors in how you end a relatioship.... best course of action is to not get partnered.

Duh . . . No!

And you feel the need to make your mutual "non-existent" mistrust explicit as well?

Pep (I thought *I* was comfortable with ambiguity . . )

While I don't really believe in pre-nuptial agreemnts, I find it interesting that no one seems to believe Jig's can have any point. There is no legal method of enforcement (or at least none that would be cost-effective, I see no reason why an RL court couldn't enforce an SL pre-nuptial contract if anyone could be bothered to take it that far), but for some people the mere fact that they had made the agreement would be sufficient moral obligation to honour it. The agreement might at least reduce the arguments if they ever were to split.

I suppose if we want to get pedantic then it depends on whether "pre-nup" in this case means:

a) what almost everyone in RL considers it to mean (ie. an agreement, under law, you are bound to regardless of your intent to follow through) or
b) whether it means only what the words say, that it is a pre-nuptual agreement.

If a) former then an SL pre-nup is totally a waste of time for what should be obvious reasons. No RL court is going to enforce an SL pre-nup to determine for you how a SL break-up share out should go.

If b) then why does it have to be pre-nup?, surely at some point you should just agree on who gets what? Breakup time seems as good as any time. If you cannot agree then, a little bit of paper you both agreed to in the beginning is not going to make you agree. So again the whole charade of creating one seems totally pointless.

You dont fc*king give up, do you, Epe? God help any person who has a table next to yours at a restaurant and has to listen to your pontificating.

I've met a few of the RL ones you couldn't trust either.

lol, true! But at least it doesn't cost anything extra to get your SL stuff back. hehe

First of all - as I understand how SL works, a pre-nup isn't worth anything. LL will not get involved in disputes between residents.

What I don't like with this post, is that someone could think that a pre-nup is actually binding in SL. It is NOT.


I would say that the only ones who will respect a SL pre-nuptial, is those who would try to make a clean break and act fair without a pre-nup. The assholes will not bother no matter how many "contracts" and "agreements" you have.


So, have you got a pre-nup with your sl partner?
- No. I doubt I will have it if I get partnered. If the other part suggest it, I will be surprised.

What is it?
- A form of roleplay, to make the SL partnership look more "real".

Should we have them?
- Of course, "your world, your imagination". If you feel more responsible and more connected to your partner by discussing such things, why not. Go on.

Any horror stories to relate?
- No, but I am seldom involved in fictional horror stories. Terrible boring, isn't it?

"Physician, heal thyself"

Pep (It's a shame we can't have a poll to see who would be considered the least - or most - amusing "next-table" occupant from the Forums)

A. a prenup in SL is as good as their "word" in RL or SL...without lawyers involved, pointless.

B. Trust and knowing, why would you need one if you had those two things?


Tadaaaa

I accept your challenge.
Jig

You write teh poll and phrase it fairly. I think MOST amusing is teh best choice. After all, I dont eat with people for being "least" amusing.
And you must not try and influence people in any way. Just let them decide for themselves based upon our previous record in teh forums and our postings.
Should it be AT our table? Or is that a diffrent question?

Can't be done without transgressing the Forum rules.

Pep (Which I said, but you obviously didn't understand, yet again)

Actually, it can. By describing each of you in a general way, without naming names, and posing a general question. Well, it still breaks the rules, but nothing we aren't all constantly breaking anyway.

The trick, of course, is finding someone who can write unbiased descriptions.

Talk e through the way to present a poll and I will make one as neutral as possible.
I suggest names are "Andre" and my other real life pet name "Lynx" - is that fair?
Someone has made one BUT many votes ar egetting wasted on Oz.

Oz is my rl alt

Pep (Didn't you know?)