Who's the most influential athiest of the 20th century?

I agree, that's just stupid. There are only a dozen or so threads right now that do the same thing!

I am not a big fan of Ulrika, but even I have to say this is just singling her out for unjust persecution. We should protest by all of us starting the exact same thread she did! If they don't suspend every single one of us, that is proof that she is just being singled out.

*starts to chant* “Free Ulrika! Free Ulrika! Free Ulrika!”

Both Jauani and Ulrika set up a poll that including some of the 20th century's most notorious individuals. Here, both are guilty of fairly tasteless humor.

In his thread, Jauani labeled Ulrika as an athiest -- a label she first gave herself.

In her thread, Ulrika accused/labled Jauani of being a member of a questionable organization.

Big, big difference. The intent may have been the same, but Ms. Z. crossed the line into defamation. I give her props, however, for apologizing.

I've read a number of exchanges between the two of them. I get the impressions that they respect and even like each other and that this is all just good natured ribbing. Besides, if Jauani is offended by what Ulrika says, then Jauani should be the one to file a complaint. The resmods shouldn't just say "oh, you are abusing this person, you're banned."

If Juanie or Ulrika don't complain, then stay the hell out of it.

BTW, I think Ulrika's apology was satire aimed at the resmod, since I think she knew that Jauani was not offended in the slightest.

I could be wrong in all this, but from what I have read here in the forums I am pretty sure I'm not.

To put my comments into context I want to point out that Ulrika and I dislike each other intensely. I find many of the things she says offensive, and I am pretty sure she isn't too impressed by the things I say.

However I would never dream of trying to get her banned from the forums just because I don't like what she says. She has just as much right to voice her opinions as anyone else here, regardless of how much I don't like them.

That is what America is all about!

"I may not agree with what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it!"

Edit: Tasteless humor isn't a banning offense.

God dammit, the more I think about this the more it pisses me off! I have come to the conclusion that I need to stand by the courage of my convictions. I really am going to repost the exact same thing Ulrika did, and if that same resmod doesn't suspend me for three days then it proves the whole resmod experiment is a total failure.

And if that same resmod does suspend me for three days it will be a total rape of free speech here in the forums.

I also want to officially go on file that I hereby state that people can post/say anything they like about/to me on these forums and I don't mind. Resmods please don't feel like you need to defend my honor, I am quite capable of doing that on my own.

I invite anyone else who finds these suspensions offensive to repost the same thread as a show of solidarity.

“They can take our posting abilities away from us, but they can never take our freedom!”

Um... posts like this are idiotic, IMO. You have no "right" to post here. If LL decides they don't like your IP addy, they can ban you. If they see you driving a chevette and decide they don't like you, they can ban you. If their butt itches and they blame you, they can ban you.

Yes, yes, I know all that's true. They can ban you for any reason they want.

My point is that they shouldn't ban you for stupid things. Just because you can do it, doesn't mean that you should do it.

Kinda like, just because one can type out the words labeling someone a member of an organization that supports sex between adults and minors, doesn't mean that one should do it?

Responsibility and common sense go both ways.

It seems to me that the posts that end up resulting in disciplinary action are the ones that get AR'ed. I don't think any resmod has time to stay current on every single thread and post and we can't really expect them to. They look at the ones people complain about. For all we know, Juauni was the one who AR'd her.

It was a joke between friends!

Beats me. 99.9% of Jauani's posts are trolls. If anything it just goes to show the wisdom of "don't feed the trolls."

Yes, that seems logical to me too. However, reading Jauani's response to Ulrika leads me to believe otherwise.

I have nothing but the highest respect for Chip. However, his post just shows that people see things in different ways.

But I don't think that means they should be silenced.

Well, I agree. But they've not shown much consistency. In game, I'm a D/s Mistress, and I know of capture sims that simulate rape and kidnap. Isn't perpetuation of these actions in and of itself vulgar and hateful?

From the TOS:

In addition to abiding at all times by the Community Standards, you agree that you shall not: take any action or upload, post, e-mail or otherwise transmit content as determined by Linden Lab at its sole discretion that is harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, causes tort, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;


I find it ironic that you can simulate illegal acts like beastiality and molestion of children, and that's ok. But you type a racial slur and you can get banned? Where's the logic in that?

Thanks, Vares. There's a ton of humor and parody on the forums that depends entirely on context... parodies of other threads, inside jokes, references to threads that happened weeks or months ago. How can anyone be expected to always get the context? I give the resmods a lot of slack because they have an impossible job. We can probably all rejoice that they can't be consistent because there's a hell of a lot of us that would have frequent 3 day vactations.

perverts use SL to escape the restrictions imposed on them in RL. SL is an outlet for their deviancy and to promote their "hobby." as such they are heavily immersed in SL and are dedicated and lucrative customers to LL. they are also very lucrative to trinket sellers who often secretly revile them but openly endorse their perversions.

racists, on the other hand, are a bummer. they remind us of a reality outside of SL. they are bad for business.

You're a model of tolerance, J-wu.


Oh wait, did I say tolerance? I meant trolldom.

Now you see, these are the kinds of posts that make the forums worth reading to me.

I love a good, dry wit!

Definitely Asia Carrerra.

Zuggudizugzugzug!

Oops. Double posting. Sorry.

There are no children (in theory) or animals playing Second Life. However, there *are* people from persecuted racial groups.

Why? Did you ask to have resmods to interfere with your postings? I certainly didn't. As far as I know they are there because they wanted to be there.

But that aside, it is the system that is wrong, not the resmods themselves. They are trying to do an impossible job, as you say.

Also I don't agree with your delight in inconsistency. Inconsistency means unfairness, and IMO it is *very* wrong.

If we have to have mods then I'm glad they're members of the forum community and not people who would have an even more difficult time trying to figure out context.



Just trying to look on the bright side.

LOL back, none of the quotes you provided showed that he was an atheist at all. Which, you know, was one of your original and specious assertions that started this thread. I even added a link to a Nazi image that said something like "God is with us". We atheists don't tend to do that kinda thing.

My $1L offer for you to buy some facts still stands.

*Hums 'Try to look on the bright ... side ... of life, de-dah, de dum-de-dum-de dum*