Last name of "Suicide" - The Poll

You know, Chip, you just can't define good taste out of the human experience.

You can't make words not have negative connotations. If they have negative and painful connotations for a sizable number of people, you can't do anything about that either.

It's just the way it is.

Insisting that a sizeable number of people just stop being bothered isn't really going to work, either.

Personally, I find it intrusive for you to decide for me that I'm not supposed to be bothered by something. Or - in fact - by anything.

People may have very good reasons for not wanting to encounter Suicide used flippantly as a last name in an entertainment medium. You can't just expect them not to on the basis that nothing bothers you. I find that to be telling others what to think and how to feel.

There are places people can go where there are no holds barred, and you go into them realizing that you are going to encounter such things. Sociolotron is an example. If the Lindens want to be Sociolotron, fine. But the impression they have given to date - including the guidelines - is that they didn't intend that.

coco

My point exactly. Why are expressions like "career suicide" and "political suicide" in such common usage? They don't seem to make people have a coniption when they're used. It's a "feel good" exercise to play "let's be ultra-sensitive to everyone" but it's disingeuous at best.

2 threads closed, one to go.

So far, in this completely unscientific poll, over half the respondents don't give a flying phooey about the subject.

Cory I refuse to vote in this poll 'cuz you left out "Some people need to mind their own damned bizness".
Other than that I'm not bothered at all.

Perhaps Coco would like to answer my questions in this thread.

{Edit: here's the link to those: Link }

...... however, from the same results, it can be seen that almost half are not in total favour of the subject.

It's all down to perception.

Lewis

That was the "lint brush" portion of the poll, Leck. READ BETWEEN THE LINES <3

Oh shit.
*goes to vote*

goodness the last thread that got closed seemed way too much like this:



(in case anyone is wondering... that's a nosy neighbor, i think there's not enough MYOB going on around here)

Well, if one includes the "pie" respondents (which has traditionally been the poll choice of those who can't even muster enough care to give a serious response), its over 60%.

I answered your questions in the other thread, Csven, in two different posts.

coco

ZOMG are those boobies ????

Not possible. The thread was locked right after with only Jeska and Joy after. Here's the Link

HAHAHHAHHAHA nope, I edited the post afterwards to note it's a nosy neighbor - not enough MYOB around here



***EDIT*** MYOB = Mind your own business

Well, I think it's important to distinguish things - I don't want to attack any of the SG personally, but merely express some concern about the LL policy concerning them.

As I've mentioned, the "why do they get a custom surname when no other community did" thing is a small issue, but I'm more concerned by the privacy risk. Basically, at the moment, the last name Suicide is a signal that says "hey, look, I've been verified as a RL female model". This brings up two concerns, namely that:

a) the SG players themselves could wind up getting harassed; and
b) if one of them decides to, say, dance at a club, and that club starts advertising "VERIFIED RL FEM MODELS DANCE HERE!!", then it could lead to dancers/escorts/whatever at other clubs being pressured to release RL information (because in spite of the suspension of disbelief, you can bet many male players would rather watch a female av dance who they know is an RL model, rather than someone who might be another guy).

I realise this probably wasn't LL's intent, that they just wanted to invite a social community over to SL, but I'm concerned this might come up as a side effect.

What's the over/under on when this thread will be closed, SL time? Maybe around 1:30pm SL time?

Lewis, your "can be seen that almost half are not in total favour of the subject" is way-off. Did you even LOOK at the poll?



The pie voters obviously don't have a problem with it being available, so the total of people who think its just hunky dorey would be 70.01% with 6.88% fine with it, but pissed they didn't get to pick their own last name. Then there's the 23.3% of grown adults who wants to be protected from such horrible content by our wonderful, censoring, benevolent overlords.

70.01%...wow, that's enough of a vote to override a presidential veto in the Senate!

-Flip

That's an interesting point. However I imagine that the SG's can get an alt account if they want, just like anyone else can. I'm completely out of the club scene, so I'd be interested to see if that prediction comes to pass - I hadn't thought of that possibility.

Heh nice touch but I've seen signs like that at Bike Week!
They usually read free breast exams though.

So 160 votes on the forum out of 137.492 "residents" is hardly a representation of the true feelings of the community is it?

Even out of the 3076 currently online.... it's a tiny percentage.

Lewis

That's exactly what I said - completely unscientific and only represents the respondants of the poll. Thanks for reiterating.

Yeah no shit. And 3 out of what? How many are online in the forums now ? What's that percentage ?

Admit it, you just like saying (and seeing) boobies

I never denied it

OK, I see Cvsen, you are referring to your later post, one which I hadn't looked at yet. Playing musical threads can be so exhausting! And funny, too!

Please provide an official, unquestionable source. Not saying it didn't occur, but I've not seen this confirmed.

I haven't either. Did the Lindens approach the SG with this idea in mind? Or did the SG approach them?

You appear to be suggesting that something was given for FREE (as you've gone on about in earlier posts). Please clarify this comment.

Because it appears to have been given for free. Did the SG pay for this perk in any way?

Please provide an official, unquestionable source. Not saying it didn't occur, but I've not seen this confirmed.

Only the Lindens can confirm this. I wish they would.

The word "gave" could mean either freely or in exchange for something else of value... even if only knowing that the SG members would write about and share their experiences with members of their community and LL would gain membership through viral marketing (which goes back to my earlier analogy). One could as easily say "they provided them", no? And when I pay for my utilities, they "provide" me with those services... gas, electricity... even including trash removal (something intangible as well). Is this not true?

OK, call it provide. Did the Lindens provide this in return for anything besides the extra publicity and exposure inherent in having SG members also members of SL?

I believe that includes quite a few businesses including, for the most part, Linden Lab. Philip is both the founder and CEO of a privately-held, for-profit company with an "online community". Your point would be...? This is significant in what way...?

The man part of it is signifcant (and not terribly significant, which is why I put it in parentheses) due to the fact that a lot of people seem to think this is just girls running their own thing and being empowered as a result.

I get phone calls all the time from "non-profit" companies wanting me to let them help me in some fashion; from credit services to loan consolidation. I personally don't see why calling this out is of interest. Please explain.

My point is that giving free perks to non-profit groups is one thing. Giving free perks to a for-profit web site is another.

The use of the term "perks" is misleading imo. Please see earlier requests for clarification and perhaps also review my earlier comments on viral marketing (and the FUBU example). After which, please explain why this is of interest.

They are perks - freebies - things that others either pay to have or cannot get at all. I don't buy this excuse of viral marketing for giving one group of players things others can't get without paying for them (or at all).

Also, I'm not certain that the Linden in question wrote anything. Are you absolutely certain, such that you can state as a FACT, that a Linden - any Linden - wrote the description? I can imagine that someone at SG wrote the text, emailed it to LL, and it was then entered in the appropriate form. Is that not a possibility???

A Linden founded the group, and it's likely (and appears that) the Linden wrote the description and put it there. I think that because I think that is how it works. However, you're correct, anyone could have written that, including an SG girl or anyone at LL.

However, it is still there, as the description of a group, founded by a Linden.

Quote: Originally Posted by Cocoanut Cookie
6. None of this is good.

According to whom? I'd venture many people would disagree with this statement.

According to me, obviously. As I said in the intro, I was summing up my points. Not yours, nor necessarily anyone else's.

coco

To be honest, this is what I find most interesting from all of this to-do over the SG group:



If you had a group with an agenda - religious or otherwise - that might generate some negative response within the SL community and as a result be detrimental to that agenda, would you call attention to yourself? Or would you blend in?

I'd like to point out that the above individual is a Greeter. Someone who has been afforded some measure of status and influence within Second Life by the developer.

Please note that I'm not offering an opinion here. I'm neither attacking nor supporting. Just making an observation and posing some questions.