Have you tried SL's new search capability?

If you use a word like questionable when describing someone's personal choice Michael, it would hardly be surprising if it was taken as criticism

Personal choice, that's all.

*Really*? I actually can't imagine why anyone would doubt that. It's a fantastically rich source of information about interests and associations, free and mind-numblingly trivial to mine, compared to the old bot-based approach. And no nice Bayesian spam filters on in-world IMs and inventory transfers--yet. I am 99.9% certain that "targeted marketing" spam will end up being a *big* problem for anyone with web-searchable profiles.

yeah nothing like being accused of a questionable act, and being told in the same breath you are not being po.rtrayed negatively. And I have no doubt , personally that this is a step toward mass marketing, which is fine as long as I can refuse to be marketed.

Some people place email addresses, general locations, even cities sometimes in their FL tab.

So.. though most people it would be hard to link to their RL, some are actually quite easy...

Yes, Michael is very big on denotation, but seems to have absolutely no undertanding of connotation. I'm sure it's not deliberate.

Having worked for far too many years in the direct mail (i.e. spam) industry as a software engineer, I have some feel for how they think. They are worse than piranha when they get the whiff of fresh blood to harvest. And, yes, harvesting this info will be far too easy for them with a bit of LibSL code and a web crawler picking up names, payment status and keywords... Not a matter of if, just a matter of when.

One: 'personal choice' is not an answer--it's a dodge.

Thank you Matthew...very helpful.

Ya, sorry...I warned you guys that sometimes I'm not the most diplomatic. Try and see the forest, not just the trees.

You guys should no I'm harmless by now.

You asked a question, I provided an answer. You may not like the answer or be nosing for more information, but that's your personal choice

I'm well aware of connotation--that is why I threw my disclaimer in there. You all should know by now, 1) I do more good than harm, and 2) I mean well.

I may not be the smoothest rock in the river...but I'm no fool.

This still doesn't discount the truth in what I said...another dodge.

You continue to astound me, Michael. So every personal choice we make is a dodge?

Every single one?

You honestly wouldn't know truth if it hit you in the face. The only truth you seem to believe in is your own and any world or universe ruled by your truth would be a very sad and limited place indeed.

Eh? I think you're confused. The dodge was the answer 'it's a personal choice.' Any warm-blooded intellectual would agree.

Citizen: "Mr. President, why did you invade Iraq?"
Bush: "Why, personal choice, son.
Citizen: "Ah, OK. Thanks."

Your comment Chas doesn't relate at all.

You guys just get ticked...you don't have answers, so you start bashing me on other things...things which make no sense, have nothing to do with the subject matter, and are completely untrue.

Tell me Chas...what 'truth' don't I know? I dare you to explain.

Actually Michael it's not. You asked why one would not want to disclose information, the answer is: personal choice. What that personal choice is based on, is another question and another answer.

Semantics anyone?

Oh, so now we can add another word you obviously don't understand, and that's 'intellectual', as if you regard yourself as an intellectual then you're very sadly mistaken, and as for warm blooded .....

Reporter: Why do you choose to wear only black clothes?
Citizen: Personal choice, mate. What's it to you?
Reporter, backing away: Oh, nothing, just curious.

Hi Michael,

I really don't think it's a dodge; it's the answer to your query that the person wanted to give you. Just because the answer may not be as complete, detailed or whatever, as you would like it, it is an answer none the less and you should just respect that. No offense.

As for me, I don't care really. I'm already so bombarded with spam and junk mail, etc. that I don't think it will make much of a difference if it's about mass marketing. I do like the ability to search for items for sale and what not without logging in. That's cool.

Sol

Why I don't want my Profile on the Web:

I fully believe that the web-accessible data WILL get used to spam people. If not via email, then via in-world bots, after the marketers realize there are millions of user accounts that have enough free information on them there for the harvesting. It doesn't matter if that spam ever gets to my Player directly. It will get to my Avatar...

Placing the profile info on the Web also opens access to hoardes of data miners that have NO CLUE what SL actually is. As far as some PI in New Jersey is concerned, the BDSM club that Suzy Strumpett is a member of in SL is just as real as the one in his town's red light district. So some PI starts doing random data mining on the web, and conects the data point "Suzy Strumpett: Member of a BDSM Club" with a casual reference on a personal Blog where some lady in New York mentions that her sister is called "Suzy Strumpett" in Second Life, and with the fact that that sister's real name came up on an employer's general search for background check data when that real woman applied for a job...

Suddenly a FICTIONAL club membership becomes a reason to deny the Player a real job...

Meanwhile, Suzy is only part of that group because she got spammed with a group invite when she poked her nose curiously into the club.

Profiles contain information on personal associations and group memberships that a person in-world likely has at least some understanding of. But the general Joe Bloke on the Internet? No clue.

The information can too easily be abused. It shouldn't be public information unless we want it to be.

Spam for one. The message system here has a capped limit, I'd rather not have to wade through tons of spam to find genuine messages.

I'm not bashing you, Michael, I'm just objecting to you bashing others, probably due to to your inability to understand and appreciate other people's points of view.

I've promised myself I won't get into any more slanging matches. This is not the place for them. So I'll bid farewell to this pointles debate and go elsewhere.

Have fun being you.

You're just playing games. You know what I mean by a 'dodge.' It's a simple conversation tactic, and this situation fits like a glove.

Semantics anyone?

I'm not an intellectual? Why is that?

In your example MR Citizen has a right to a more precise answer. In the case here "personal choice " is the only answer anyone is entitled to. Mike, I sometimes agreed that people used you as a lightning rod, amything you said would be contested just because you said it . But, you do approach everyone who doesn't see things your waythe same way. They are automatically placed on the defensive either because: they don't understand your points, are either shortsighted or read too much into it, or they are not seeing a "truth" that you are the absolute bringer of,or you don't see their reasoning and won't accept it, therefore it's wrong. Then you graciously and condescendingly state you don't mean to insult or anger anyone, that's just the way it is. Oddly enough I do believe you when you say you don't do this intentionally. A lot of times you say valuable things, that wind up being discounted by how you say them. Think a little more before you hit that send button.