Thank You SL

Don't be so flippant about that. Half of them are lizards - remember? And that's exactly what they are up to. The other half don't notice because they spend their time fiddling their expenses.

Let me repeat, just to be sure:


These 2 quotes do speak for themselves,don't they


If the 2 quotes above did not, these do
Of course the to be expected answer came in the form of:

We are not intelligent enough to argue against this... go figure.

Ironically, I actually share a lot of the OP's misgivings about the big corporate and government entities that control our lives, and could be a lot more supportive of her views if she didn't voice them in such a rude and arrogant manner.

You don't educate someone by shouting at them,insulting them or talking down to them.You state your facts calmly and clearly, keep your argument focused, and respond to counter claims with factual informtion. If they insult you, you do not lower yourself by responding in kind. If there are no maore intelligent responses to your claims, you disengage. Staying in just to have the last word invalidates your credibility. The OP kicked in the door and came in guns blazing. There was no chance anybody would take her seriously, even people who may be somewhat in tune to her views.

That's easy enough. Civil cases are a way of sorting out disputes between two parties -- I owe you some money and don't want to pay it back, so you bring a civil action to make me. But maybe I say I don't need to repay you, because the thing you sold me doesn't work.. a civil action is just a way of sorting that out. So the answer to your question is that, in the normal course of events, sometimes people fall out over money and property and, because they can't reach an agreement between themselves, have to ask the courts to decide the matter.I wasn't aware of the Law Society issuing circulars saying that words now mean something different. Perhaps you can direct me to one of these? And, speaking as someone who spends a good deal of her professional life the criminal courts (no, not as a defendant), I have to say I don't recognise the picture you paint. Can you give me an example of what you mean?

Or, if you mean the civil courts, certainly they use technical terms to describe technical legal concepts, but the question is whether the set of facts that you, as the person bringing or defending the action, describes, constitutes something that may (or may not) be described by lawyers -- for the sake of precision -- with a particular technical term. The general idea is that the court has to sort out the facts of the case and then, having decided what's going on and -- in the case of a dispute over facts -- whom it believes, and then try to apply the law to the facts as you've described them in plain English.

Oh sweetie, they're not so bad. You need to maybe calm down a tad, have a nice cuppa. No-one's perfect, but you're beginning to sound quite unwell.

As to who gives a toss what I say, well, I don't really expect many people will do so, outside my immediate circle. That's life. I have my vote and use it to show support for the candidate with the nicest hair, just as countless others will use theirs to support the most left wing, the most right wing, the one with the shiniest shoes, best smile, firmest handshake, least wobbly policies etc.

Where do you live? Please tell me. I really want to know. Go on, I won't try to steal your identity, or keep track of you. Honest, you can trust me

Don't sweat it, Debra. A few months from now, you and Phil will find common ground on something, and be best buddies. Just make sure you remove him from your ban list, before inviting him over for the BBQ - it's a little embarrassing to have him ejected during the olive branch ritual.

Since the latest greedy corrupt politicians scandal, I think I shall have to make it a rule to vote for the Most Badly Turned Out and Least Telegenic Candidate. This is on the grounds that the ones with the nicest hair etc, should they unfortunately be elected, will inevitably fiddle very expensive haircuts, designer clothes and an Image Consultant who charges massive fees, all on their expense account and paid for by the long suffering tax-payer.

Let's face it, we just can't afford that AND stump up for bankers' bonuses too.

I can't be bothered with you idiots anymore. Talk about people with their heads up their arses. All you people are interested in is using threads for your own amusement. It has nothing to do with solving problems or finding truth. When you can't find arguments to reply with you just resort to character assassination. You are sad people. You all know that it gets harder and harder to continue answering the posts here as more and more of what I write gets split up between you and distorted. You pinheads can all go to hell. And then I'm accused of being a troll in the thread that I start. You sad idiots.

But Phil just called for my famous potato salad recipe. The BBQ is a no go?

So long and thanks for the thread.

See You Next Tuesday

How do you distort this response:



Or this one:



Certainly says great things for your cause when you have to resort to debate tactics that most of us grew out of sometime around Kindergarten. If you don't know what that is, that's public schooling you attend around the age of 5.

I certainly have to agree with the poster who said it's time to stop feeding the troll, we should all stop feeding you now.

We offered you three simple solutions to your problem very early on -- verify, don't verify and put up with not being able to access Adult lands, find something other than SL to do. The truth is that there aren't any more options open to you.

Hey Brenda,
True words! Even I share some of it, though I think it is completely irrelevant to the original posting.

If we are talking about Second Life and the need to verify somehow to access certain parts of it, we are hardly talking about the entities controlling our life. And they probably are controlling it even more then we know. David Icke though, is not the most reliable source to mention

Bottomline is that LL is the provider of this platform, and is entitled to set these rules. Smart rules even, though badly implemented. Any provider of services can set their own rules, which has nothing to do with controlling our lives as long as we are free to choose whether to use the service. Institutes like banks, gas companies, governments, those are hard to avoid. Second Life, however, is easy to avoid. Plus it is still possible to use it, only not for adult stuff.

Fixed it for ya, babe.
MWAH

BRENDA! That's soooooo ruuuuude! I didn't actually know that was current on your side of the pond. In the UK that's still considered 'the worst swear word evah'!

I think in the circunstances tho, entirely justified.

i'm sorry that I had to use it, which equates to a tactical nuke, but it was necessary to spare perhaps millions of innocent lives. Like I said, I agree with a lot of what she feels, maybe not the lizard people part, put her delivery is that of a rudee, and arrogant intrnet warrior, a smug generation Xer who needs to get out into the world and deal with people face to face instead of through her computer.

/me looks at her horrifying post count and decides to take her own advice.

I'm taking my dog to the park now.

Wow....don't know what this thread was about, ......but I'm glad i gave it a wide berth having read the last 3 pages!




.

Bummer, you could have made it to pinhead! No ambition, have you?

@Debra: bothered enough to edit your post to add some more insults though...

hehe

I'll be honest, my knowledge regarding laws and Government legislation are not my strong points. I would have nothing meaningful to contribute........plus i get incredibly bored reading legalese or any related commentary.
When i see "copyright theft" threads...i tend to steer clear!



.

To be fair to Debra, she did say that she doesn't agree with David Icke about the lizards.

Her original post was perfectly fine, and she got all the on-topic replies to it, and all the relevant information, that she could possibly have wished for. Where she really went wrong was posting those two huuuuuge posts which, combined, were an extract from David Icke's latest newsletter. Anyone who takes David Icke seriously, as Debra does, genuinely needs their head examined, and I think we've seen ample evidence of that in this thread.

I honstly think that, being as suspicious of the world in general, as Debra appears to be, must be an unpleasant way to live and I feel a bit sorry for people like that. Maybe it's akin to phobias, where people can't help it. But, then again, I have no doubt that some people enjoy such things. Personally, I prefer to live pleasant, carefree days, and as long as my days continue like that, I don't care how many big brothers are watching and taking notes. Life is for living pleasantly - not for worrying about defending one's personal fortress. Having said that, if Boxcar Willie really was a lizard from another world, I damn well want to put up all the defences I can around my personal fortress

Yes but you missed all the good stuff about our world being run by shape-shifting lizards from another world

Up to the bit about Linden Lab conspiring with the NSA.

HOW DARE YOU QUOTE ME AS HAVING WRITTEN SOMETHING I DID NOT WRITE. YOU HAVE PROVEN WHAT A LOW LIFE YOU ARE. I HAVE TAKEN IMAGES AND AM GOING TO REPORT YOU TO THE MODERATORS OF THIS FORUM. YOU ARE A SICK PERSON THAT NEEDS TO BE BANNED FROM THIS FORUM.

Good grief. It really must be hard being you.