SL Hacked! Whodunnit?

Please refrain from personally attacking those you do not agree with in this thread.

Just wondering..

Have any of those people in this thread who are announcing HATE towards whoever did this and possibly the group they are associated with ever DL'd a file from a torrent or fileshare that they knew wasnt legal? I'll wager that alot of you have. IMO maybe this should calm down for a while till LL sorts it all out. Wild speculation and resident guesses do no positive good towards this investigation and those engaging in it should probably chill.

To those who have been robbed of their hard work I'm sorry. However in this world of ours nothing is persistent as advertised and maybe this kind of thing should be expected. SL is simply not stable enough to make a living on yet and anyone who tries for any length of time is a fool.

These are just my opinion's and are not meant to spur ridicule or flame.

So, what... Two wrongs make a right?

Just in case you missed these. You'll find ample examples within them.

I do agree that you are debating logically. However, that is often times not the case with many W-Hat members. In fact, there are even more threads with examples, but I'm far too lazy to pull them up. But using W-Hat with the search tool should do the trick.

It would be great if you really are seeking to change the way W-Hat is percieved and you really are putting a stop to griefing behavior within your group. But we both know that this hasn't always been the case.

Fairness is a cognitive distortion. I would think you knew that, though.

I was just saying that alot of people in this digital world don't come forth with clean hands.

Bad logic. That isn't their "company," it's their job.
"Company" in the context of the saying equals "friends and aquaintences."
By that logic cops are criminals!

Although...

I can't control the actions of others, nor would I desire to if I were able to do so. What I -can- do is ask you to please judge individuals by their own actions, not by the actions of someone loosely (VERY loosely) connected to them.

It's only fair, and I would afford each and every one of you the same courtesy.

I said hyperbole at work today...does this mean I can go home and you can come into work for me? Yay for alts! ;P

Teddy, you're wasting your time with these people. Who cares if they hate us? I mean, look at them. I want Hiro Pendragon to hate me. Something's amiss if David Valentino doesn't hate me. Kathmandu Gilman? If he doesn't hate me then I'd like to know what I'm doing wrong!

The Lindens know who the real culprits are and I'm sure they'll get what's coming to them. If certain individuals wish to make themselves feel better by blaming W-Hat then I think it would be very community-spirited of us to let them.

Besides, it's SL Forums, so who cares? It's not like any of these people actually play the game all that much.

Who said anything about hate? While I think W-Hat's leadership in general continues to allow different forms of harassment while skirting the TOS, I don't hate them, or you.


No one's blamed W-Hat for the hacking. People have, however, criticized W-Hat for not expelling their troublemaker members a long time ago.


I don't. However, given the harassment recently going on with W-Hat and member titles, and past smack-talking-in-the-WA about forum threads, apparently some members of W-Hat do care what happens in the forums enough to bring it in world.

Haven't you learned yet Hiro? If you disagree or have an issue with someone or some group, you automatically "hate" them?

For a group of people who expect everyone else to have thick skins when it comes to their dealings ("humor" in SL, they sure seem to have some thin skin themselves.

Here is one quote that I have often found interesting...

"A chain is judged by it's weakest link."

Correct, you can't control the actions of others, and yes, you can ask everyone to judge individuals and not the group they belong to (by 'someone loosely connected I assume you mean the group)....

However, as the leader of any major group, company, organization, etc, that allows its members to publicly represent their group can tell you, no matter how much you claim that your group is _not_ responsible for its members actions, people will always hold your group, maybe not you personally, responsible. As a leader of a group, it is simply 'par for the course' that you will have to deal with the bad name your members make for your group. Like any company or group, take disciplinary action, publicly announce it if you feel its needed, and let it go.

If you were walking down a street and some guy in a Verizon jacket came along and started giving you hell, then a few of his crew got in on it, you don't know these guys, but you know who they work for, and maybe not right away, but somewhere along the line you are going to associate Verizon with these jerks who are harrassing you.. It happens, people will always associate problems to a group when its problematic members are the cause.. Regardless of how many nice members there are, a few rotten apples will spoil the bunch, and thats the way people operate, it just is, so like so many of your members(I didn't say friends..) have told other people, "Deal with it..."

Just because you say you like logic and your logic is so bad I want to show you what you are revealing about yourself here....

So no organisation from the start, no controls over membership and clear intentions to do things that might cause a banning, prepared fo it in fact.

Right, no ulterior motives at all, and gee... the first acts are violations of W-Hat rules numbers 2 and 3!



You see right here, "Linden got on the ball" tells me that you appreciated the nature of the acts being performed and that they are violations and possible baning ofenses, it's directly implied by your statement.


And you expect us to believe that why?



Well this is not a manifesto. It seems you are particularly intent on not having one at all. Possibly part of the problem? Also I dont have to point out that most of these rules seem to be violated regularly by W-Hat members as you note yourself below.




Well the really salient point of these things would be did you ban them before Lindens got upset? or after? It's easy to ban someone when they have gone off the deep end and when they are a short step away from a Linden permaban anyway.



This is just a non-answer (logicaly ) everyone is here to do these things.

What is your purpose over and above that? From your posts it seems you are suggesting that it is just a "group of friends".

But if all your friends are griefers and your all in a group together because you share the same point of view, what does that make the group? A group of griefers, griefer wanabes, greifer supporters, greifer apologists and griefer acolytes.

Probably a bad analogy but if there is a pack of dogs, and each individual dog claims they are "not with the pack" but out for their own meat, isn't that a little specious? If you are in a group of "friends" and al of them are riefers or sympathisers you are by definition a griefer group whether you think you are or not.

.

The W-Hat group was formed under the idea that a new group would distinguish people from SA who wanted to play the game and have fun from the previous group, SA Goons, which largely became a griefing group. The only thing we have in common is that we are all also members of a different website, and (usually) share a similar sense of humor. The end. There's really no organization beyond that, we don't really do things as a group, there is no pack to speak of. I don't know how else to explain it to you, it's really that simple.

So.. you are asking the good people of SL to disreguard the troubled history of w-hat, forget the griefing they have experienced from it's members, stop judging the group as a whole on the actions of current and former members and simply focus on the individuals of the group? We should embrace those who are of a like mind and endorse the actions of Something Awful who's purpose is to hurl derrision and ridicule upon all who they deem as "not cool" who perpatrate there own brand of censorship through ridicule. That is a lot to ask.

The fact someone is a member usually means they agree with the reputation and agenda of that group. I find it hilarious, I really do. It's like hearing David Duke saying don't judge me because I am a former Grand Dragon of a certian famous hate group, judge me as an individual and on my own merits, not on the group I am associated with. Yeah, right.

You don't wanna be painted with the same brush, I would suggest not being a member. This, of course, is just my opinion.

I think of W-Hat as pretty... well, not as positively-oriented as they could be, but a badly-needed source of random cool stuff in Second Life; I wouldn't want to live in Baku any more than I'd want to live in Taco, but I value both for different reasons.

That said, I also think people are pretty quick to throw the "griefer" label, too. The "I'm falling for you" thing that got thrown up as an example some time ago, in a thread far, far away may be tasteless, but it doesn't actually *hurt* anyone. Ditto the "Ctrl-Q for free money" gag... that's a stupid practical joke, but ultimately unharmful... and you'll only fall for it once.

It's a big group, and given their common origin (members of the Something Awful forums) the only common thread you'll find *is* an off-kilter sense of humor. Some take it to mean and selfish extremes... and some aren't. W-Hat is a pretty damn big group by Sl standards, too - people dragging out that "you are the company you keep" must rag on people like anti-Bush Republicans, too, or the non-gun-nut NRA members...

Ignore this and moveon please...

May I must add this is not gonna look good if new members or people from other worlds get ahold of this info.

Yes, like There There There, Therey There There.

There there?

There.

LF

If? you mean when.

jebus! I got out for a mahi tia and this is what I come back to?!?

seriously...blame Nolan Nash! it's all him.

Teddy, if they are determined to blame everyone in a group for what a few members do, I say let them. I'm trying to think of what difference it makes at the end of the day, and I haven't been able to come up with any yet.

Well yes but also IMVU or such.