How have you been griefed?

HAH! Nice.

Did you find a dessicated corpse, fingernails bleeding from clawing at the walls in desperation, when you returned?

We'll call this tactic the "Cask of Amontillado Gambit."

The closest encounter I had with anything like sexual griefing was at one of the Linden owned properties and it was a storm trooper who was dry humping everyone's legs. Until he got caged. The only time I actually approved the use of caging on a PG sim.

I did watch a Linden get shot at repeatedly when he tried explain to a griefer why he was about to get the ban hammer brought down on him.

I've never had anything targeted at me specifically, well, except for the idiot wanting me to pay him for protection on my own land.. but I hardly count that as actual griefing. More like unpaid for amusement.

Lol.

Oddly they looked that way when they flew in. Some never learn, I suppose.

I really do have to stop reading the forums late in the evening, my neighbors who know I live alone are already concerned about me talking to myself (on Vent)...my loud laughter is gonna have them whispering in the morning.

ok just in case this thread hasnt been derailed yet.... Hi all!

1. well Heads falling down on me didnt notice cause I was in my paint shop pro at that time.

2. Central Park pretty much the same thing. Well was doing inventory then.

3. Held up at gun point to give the new one all my Lindens I said shoot me he did I went home came back and he said I was supposed to be dead. Shot again rinse repeat.

so dont know if it is griefing but well it was there.

Don't you realise the principle? Scylla does, and responded as I anticipated.

There seem to be a lot of responses to my posts, which suggests that there are quite a few people here (including yourself! ) who don't have Rhett Butler's attitude to me.

"Multiple"? One or two bandwagonners - and since when did a billion flies make cowdung taste good?

"Hurt me"? I think you have the wrong end of the stick, big time. I have little regard for the insults of others, but am implacable in my pursuit of those who are demonstrably out of order and should be removed from the view of others who are less sensitive.

Pep (I was asleep by 11pm by the way; I have an early start and an easy conscience.)

But you haven't, so does that make *you* sexist? One attitude for women and another for men?

So appalled that the day after you were fawning over her pix and throwing gratuitous compliments around. That's not exactly what I would call "keeping communications channels open" if that is how you choose to justify it.

And I'll reply again that it has *nothing* to do with this.

Of course I can. Look at the history of my involvement in the forums. Brann started it off a long time ago by criticising something that I didn't say, but that "someone else had heard that her friend had thought I said"; Blyss attempted to seduce me for nefarious purposes using an alt and, when I exposed her, whinged about the injustice of it; Love is permanently upset by my distrust of subs/slaves/pets because you can never be sure when it is them talking or their masters; Elora got very confused (as usual) and lied to cover her embarrassment; Rhonda wished cancerous death on me because I suggested that she had chunky thighs and even you, supposedly the voice of feminist reason, have publicly lost that reason, and acknowledged it.

I simply respond extremely effectively to such goading by highlighting the underlying inadequacies. It just so happens that you are all "females". I have also had an extended run in with Talarus but you don't hear him whinging around the place that I am anti-dragon, and Phil isn't accusing me of being anti-male in his current lamentable excuse for antagonism. *You* are the ones turning this into a sexist issue because you have no logical justification for your actions.

It isn't *me* that is being lazy in attaching labels. I am merely grouping those who behave in a hysterical (I presume you know the etymology of the word) and over-emotionally irrational fashion, using quotes around "females" to *avoid* accusations of sexism, particularly since it is fairly evident to me that some of them are assuming exaggerated female characteristics in the presentation of their persona here in the forums and inworld. I am not attacking all women by any means (and I am delighted to say I have staunch real female supporters) but if the cap of illogicality fits I can't stop people from wearing it.

If you are talking into the mirror I would entirely agree. I am demonstrably an equal opportunity opponent . . .

Pep ( . . . but there are none so blind as those who will not see.)

Just clarifying . . .

Pep ( . . . although there is, of course, no way of confirming this; your PhD may be in Virtual Violence Against Women for all we know.)

Mea culpa.

Pep (That's four very minor typos since I started here; yes, I count them. I think Lil does too.)

The "worst" I do inworld is mute . . .

Pep ( . . . as you know.)

PS I don't think there is anything in the Safety Kit about the Forums, Scylla. Perhaps you could suggest strategies like thinking before you post or . . . never mind.

Jiggy, you hit the nail on the head. I give it another day at least before the current arguing fizzles out and is replaced by a fresh batch elsewhere.

I would much rather get back to fun and slappychundering, whatever that may be. Did you know about the skin fair? And the Winterfest? Both look suitably distracting

How insulting. As one of Pep's staunch friends, as you know, I will point out that the last person who publicly implied I was stupid was the tin foil vaccine lady.



Pep is mean. No shocker. Threatening? LMAO.

Here's another tidbit you may have missed: It was suggested (ad naseum) that Pep be muted by anyone disturbed by his commentary. A number were sensitive to the fact that his posts were upsetting and offered to stop quoting him in replies. A couple of people who REALLY like to argue with Pep refused to do either and it continued to go downhill from there.

The driving off has resulted from the entire situation, all parties involved, and not one entity. Seriously, how could it? I am by no means thin skinned, but there is a difference between being a pedantic PITA and being totally, totally, totally out of control repeatedly and waiting for pats on the back for it.

Not everyone approved of the outburst. In fact there are people who originally condoned it and cheered it on and later decided they were ashamed of themselves and apologized.

But it was Pep who was at the centre of it, Pep who was being stupid and insensitive (as normal), and Pep who continually wound it up regardless of anyone else's feelings. *He likes doing it!*. Doesn't that tell you something? What you posted here says that, and what we know of him suggests you are right. In short, Pep asked for the outburst. He brought it on himself and he deserved it. Some of the content was way ott, but that's different. He's an unadulterated dickhead who deserves what he gets.

When one person is winding people up and people are being wound up and responding accordingly, whose fault is it? Whose doing is it? Answer: the one person who is winding them up - Pep in this case. He has a nasty nature.

There you are then. It appears that everyone approved of the outburst, but not some of its content. Why would everyone approve of the outburst? Because Pep is a nasty person who brought it on himself - and thoroughly deserved a strong outburst against him.

He's a retard whose pleasure is to find fault with people and keep on digging at the faults if they respond. People point it out to him over and over again here, and what does Pep do? He pleads innocence and continues unabated. He has a sick mind. Look at this...

He has an easy concience. He did things that drove one person away and caused another to write that incedibly strong outburst, which, as you said, was applauded by the people there, and he has an easy concience. He doesn't have any concience at all. He's a retard.

We will have to disagree then. If you understood me to say EVERYONE approved of the outburst, that is incorrect. Everyone did not, although some were vocal at first they later rescinded. A few immediately expressed disgust, myself included. The disgust was twofold: content and proportion over someone on a message board you don't even have to read.

All the rest, the winding up, dickhead, nasty...it goes both ways. I'm not particularly nasty to people, or I don't go out of my way to be, and do you know what nickname I earned here? Mrs Barbi Douchebag. Isn't that nice? It certainly wasn't Pep that called me that, but some of the people you are defending.

It is a public arena and we are all entitled to our opinions. I would be mortified if I lost my temper to such an extent over the internet. Crazy.

There you are. You mentioned two groups of people - those who applauded and those who were disgusted. And, from what you've said, those who applauded, applauded the outbusrt and later realised how bad its content was and were ashamed of applauding it, BUT they applauded the fact of the outburst. Those who were disgusted, were disgusted at the content and not at the outburst. That's what I've understood from you. The content *was* bad - very bad - but the outburst itself was very merited by Pep and you haven't pointed to any group of people who thought that an outburst against him shouldn't have happened or wasn't deserved.

I don't know you and I don't recall reading that expression to describe you - whatever it means.

True. But Pep's purpose is not to express his opinions - it is to find fault with people, and that is not a normal entitlement in a forum.

So would I. And I'd be very down if I thought that I'd been the cause such an outburst. Wouldn't you? Wouldn't Pep? No he wouldn't. He actually did it and he has "an easy concience" about it all. That's the person you are defending?

Yeah - they are many, but also pretty pathetic forms of griefing really. I was deliberately pushed into the sea at Help Island once too - but I didn't count that as it seemed sort-of par for the course.

I've not yet been hit by a deformer - I await that one with interest though as I could retaliate with a more imaginative deformation.

The last set of giant replicating prims I came across had an animated texture depicting that historical figure that gets a thread "godwinned" and a nasty, spamming follow box actually caused me to crash last week!

I dealt with the last particle spamming attack by setting the "Pay to enter" on my land - and they TP'd away pdq.

I think one of the nastiest griefing attack I have come across (not involving me) was someone who had used a HUG attachment to gain permission to animate someone and then changed the HUG animation for a less innocent and much more embarrassing one. From then on in, every time the avatar came into the sim, they were thrown into this embarrassing animation - and there was nothing they could do about it except to keep away from the griefer. So - be careful to whom you grant permission to animate!

No, everyone would have to speak for themselves, and frankly this has all been done to death. Not everyone applauded the outburst (regardless of content) either. Not at all. Nor the second outpouring. There is a policy against naming names, you know that. Maybe it was the group that treats all humans with respect/consideration/pick your term



I you have missed the bit about me being called Mrs Barbi Douchebag, that is by no means all you have missed. If you dislike Pep, anything goes. Whatever you do is excusable.

If you are a friend of his, you are fair game. If you defend him, you are fair game. I can't be fair game today. You aren't going to get me to see the 'error' of my ways.



You have missed more than you think. It most certainly is average behavior in numerous threads from many posters. And boring and tiresome and terribly predictable.



Phil, i really couldn't say I would be down over it. I wouldn't be likely to do it in the first place. I really don't think our opinions would be that different were the subject not Pep. I am still astonished that that was the response (2 major blowouts over this now) over the size of thighs. WTF? Seriously now. Cut down on the caffeine of something.

The last one??? Well he was dressed up with his cowboy hat on and all, and the pose balls just were the usual blue and pink and the hovertext just said "dance". So I asked him if he would mind helping me test it and, although I say it myself, it really _is_ the very best pas de deux in SL. I guess he was thinking of something more like line dancing. I just made him feel a bit silly - so he didn't come back and bother me again.

I have never had any problems with any response to any of my posts, except where (as I keep saying) the views expressed therein are not cogently formed and presented, which was patently not the case in the cancerous deathwish post. I may have "deserved" or "merited" a reply in the same way as anyone else who posts here, where we are all offering our views publicly for response. You are imputing and giving approbation to an emotional content to the dialogue that is completely out of context. Those that applauded and have supported (as you are now doing) the poster are tarred with the same brush as far as I am concerned; if they are unable to control their emotions in this environment then they are no better than animals.
Since when is exposing the faults in the arguments and views of others *not* expressing an opinion? Is comparing an avatar's thighs to those of a linebacker not an opinion?
That is your prerogative, but then you would seem to be less the bluff Yorkshireman you normally play and more like a failed social worker. Perhaps you, like Rhonda, are getting too sensitive for these forums.
Since I have honestly expressed my opinions in response to the posts here of others, why would I not have a clean conscience. As I have said in other threads, I am *not* responsible for the reactions of others to my words.

Pep (That's all they are, remember - words.)

I'm only going by what you say. I've never posted in that thread and I only look in it when there's something specific to look for - like Pep quoting that outburst more than once. A number of people have made comments in the threads like this one, though, and I haven't seen anyone say that the outburst wasn't merited - only that the content of it was wrong. I haven't even seen you say that an outburst against Pep was merited.

You are not "game", fair or otherwise. You are someone who is discussing this topic from a particular point of view, that's all.

I think you misunderstood me. I didn't say that people don't find fault with other people. I said that Pep's main purpose for being in the forum is to find fault with people. It's completely different. To be honest, I don't recall ever having seen a post by Pep that answered an OP's question, or that passed on useful information in a thread. I only ever see him write posts that are either intended to be humorous or unnecessary fault-finding.

Well, I can say truthfully that, if I affected someone to that extent, I would feel really down about it. Perhaps I am more sensitive than you. That's not to say that I've never been the cause of such feelings, and I've felt very down on occasions. I think the worst one in this forum was with someone (I forget who) when we wound each other up really badly. We got together in IMs to calm things down. Pep's reaction to such things is to have "an easy concience". I'm sorry, Laurin, but it's all as plain as day.

A funny one from 2004ish.

I was out flying in my spaceship/flying saucer one day and a 10m penis missile chased me for 4 sims.

Not so funny and ongoing are the random asshats that land on our property and proceed to harass myself and other family members because we are gay. This takes multiple forms. Usually verbal. Occasional self replicating cubes that spout various verbal abuses. There was however one persistent jerk that would walk up to us when we were cuddling whip out his prim parts and piss on us. Eject Ban AR then he would return on another alt... lather rinse repeat.

First paragraph:
That's the only but that is worth responding to. Pep: I am not the slightest bit interested in what you are concerned with.

Most of your fault-finiding is about the way that posts are written. Sometimes, as in the 'linebacker' comment, they are just out of the blue and nasty - for the sake of being nasty.

Why? because you caused that outburst. You wrote things for the sake of being nasty, and you pick and pick and pick at it. It culminated in driving one person away completely, and in that outburst. You still pick at it, by posting it in other threads - and you caused it all. You don't have a concience. You're just a nasty retard.

There's none so blind as those that will not see. I bring enlightenment throughout Residents Answers, exposing emotional arguments as the nonsense they are and highlighting flawed thought processes. Far from lacking insight, I am demonstrably empathic; otherwise I would not be able to elicit such hyperbolic responses from those whose most desperate need is to look at themselves in a mirror. I am not surprised that you fail to appreciate the nuances of my commentary; you are rather a one-trick pony here in the threads, and your expertise is in an area in which I have no interest. As with many others here, you seem to think that because you have some knowledge in one field, and are acknowledged for it, that you are able to pontificate on other subjects where you have little intuition or capability. Of course you can try, but be prepared for your fallibilities to be exposed and your credibility impugned.

Pep (is *not* a social worker.)