life and death

Huh? You were speaking to me, personally. I'm not sure a) where you are getting that I'm the only one who didn't get it and b) why, instead of explaining yourself straight off, you decided to attack.

How about answering some of the questions posed, or at least addressing some of the points made, rather than metaphorically sticking your tongue out and nyah nyah nyah-ing?
Just a thought.
Your proposal is a distinct possibility? Really? Given the pretty much complete disagreement to it, I don't see where you would get that impression...
Add to that, how does a couple of people saying that they saw the teen grid make that a distinct possibility?

It's not the possibility of change that we're disagreeing with! I explained, many of us have explained why we disagree with this proposal. It has nothing to do with change. It has to do with the fact that that is not how we want to play. Your straw man of the teen grid has nothing to do with your proposal to allow killing in SL.

Now, if you were to restate your objective clearly, with the modifications you allude to in your more recent posts, there might not be so much confusion... even if it is just me that doesn't understand you.

If part of the idea is to allow killing anywhere in order to deal with greifers.

That is a flawed Idea.

So you don't understand either? I thought it was just me! *grin*

Well I understand - too well.

Heres a little thought experiment of what will happen with unrestricted kill zones in Second Life.

Given the facts that-
Currently Bots are unregulated.
Bots can do things faster than humans.
Players can run multiple bots.
Killing can happen anywhere.


Results -
Bots will kill every living resident on the grid. They simply will scour all places they have access to and destroy any people who pop up in scan range. They will be able to kill 24/7. Im sure someone will keep score.

People will elect to stay dead rather than pay USD to reserect themselves to be killed later.

Plus side - The only greifers alive will be the Kill bots.
Minus side - The only ones alive will be the Kill bots, who I imagine will start to use the grid as a private warzone, may the best- most organized Kill Bot Owner Win.

Alternatively Kill Bots could be outlawed somehow. Then as far as kill bots are concerned, wed only be dealing with a rare rogue bot attack.

So ..

Given the facts that:
Killing can happen anywhere
Some people will love the idea of killing other avatars for fun
People who are organized kill better than non combatants and lone wolves.

Results:
Gangs of armed thugs will roam the grid looking for victims.
Eventually everyone they can get to will be dead.

Plus Side - Some players will be alive. As long as they are members of a kill gang
Minus Side - Non gang memebers will be dead and give up on reserecting.

The Grid will become a warzone for the kill gangs to shoot at each other.


This idea would be a lot like Ultima Online when gangs of Murderers would roam the world looking for victims. They eventually had to make a "Good (non PVP)" Side of the shard to allow people to live in peace.

Why do you fear change so much, Colette?

Why do you fear change?

LOl im safe hun - didnt you read the other thread? Im a troll RAWWRRR

oh forgot the mean face rawwwwwr!

Hmm Killbots would be good if they could be seton Landbots & Copybots

So here is mine. If I had to pay one red cent for the privilege of living again after some fool who likes playing with guns, shoots me in SL, then I'll leave SL in a heartbeat. And just so you know where I come from, I have played EQ, World of Warcraft, City of Heroes/Villians and am now in the beta for Lord of the Rings Online. Those games I pay to kill or be killed, and in them I have to eat and learn professions. SL I do not. And what about the corporations that are looking into having an SL presence or are already here? Do you really think they'll stay with the possibility of some idiot disrupting their business? We all know that restrictions do not always stop all griefers. If you want a game where we have to eat, die, be rezzed and so on, play one of those or create a sim with them. Or do as someone else has, make a game or HUD you can wear for that. But don't impose it on everyone. SL was not intended for those purposes. And I do agree though that someday we will see kids on the entire grid. If this becomes the new way of the web, it won't be helped. The best we'll do then, is protect them as well as we can, which is really all we can do in real life anyway.

Mickey,
You don't get it, thats what i said. You have a very petty way of thinking, here let me show you what i mean. You want to argue semantics, as to whether or not the possibility of death is distinct (as i believe), or remote (what you seem to believe). The point is that it is a possibility whether distinct or remote IT IS A POSSIBILITY, WHAT DON'T YOU GET.

And it seems that once you have it in your mind that something is'nt possible, there is just no way its going to happen(sorry, shit does'nt happen according to how you or anyone else in here sees things, including myself). It sounded like you were eluding to the fact that since it was generally agreed upon(in this forum) that nobody wanted to die in SL that the decision was some how finalized, and therefore not possible. Do you have a direct line into the business strategy of LL's? If not, you don't have a fucking clue as to whats possible or whats on the horizon for SL(my examples included), now do you?

Also, i said people did not want to change in part because they would have to change their quality of life(everything they like to do as an individual in SL or RL). To which, you try to dismiss the quality of life statement as if they don't correlate or it confuses you in some way. Are you missing my point again. Let me give you a few examples of excuses that were given for not allowing death in SL. 1) i want to sit at the bar and drink in peace. 2) i just want to hang out and play house as do most residents. 3) or your vague favorite; that's not how i want to play. I..I..I, THESE ARE QUALITY OF LIFE OR WAY OF LIFE ISSUES, DO YOU NOT KNOW THAT. Whether you don't want to be killed, or you don't want to be around kids in SL are changes in your quality of life(style) or way of life(style) that one may be trying to avoid. In other words when you decide to figure out exactly what the reasons are behind the response(i don't want to play the game that way, why? then how do you?), chances are the excuses you come up with will have to do with the potential change in your quality of life in SL.

I gave an idea of life and death, then i gave you the possiblities of what can happen due to life and death (coming back to life and killing the greifer that killed you. One of the examples of what could be done). That was followed by the myriad of industries that can be started because of life and death. I don't get what is confusing you, and yes you are the only one. No one else said i dont get it, this is all confusing to me, you don't make sense. This consistently comes from you, and no one else. I gave you an outlined version of an idea(with many different scenarios), and it seems that you want to critique the idea as if the idea is complete and i am ready to design it as a video game. What the fuck is your problem? I earned my masters degree from NYU, and i have had my ideas critiqued (probably by more qualified, who talked what they knew) already. At best, all i wanted from you (a total stranger) was for you to add to the idea. However, what i recieved was sooo much less.

It was you who wrote a couple of threads stating the same thing (that i did'nt make sense to you), AND TALKING LOUD, i'm starting to think it's personal. In fact, it was you who said "this holds absolutely no interest for you", so why did you respond? I don't need to hear from you.

Ah.. so now it is already so far that when don't like something, you fear it? Hmmm. I would call that a rather short sighted point of view.

Morwen.

First Off: If you are not going to take criticism, don't put your ideas out for public discussion. (People criticized Orville Wright for years, they said he would never get Wilbur off the ground)

Second: You seem to believe that your idea IS the only way to go, and anyone who doesn't like it is either harboring a personal grudge against you, is afraid of something or is just plain stupid. There is nothing wrong with change. But change for change sake is.

Thirdly: People are giving you REASONS why they don't like this. They are not making EXCUSES. If you don't know the difference, I'd ask NYU for my money back if I were you.

Lastly: You have an idea. Good. You put it out as a General Feature that would affect all users of SL, in ways a lot of them do not want, and some have voiced that opinion, AS YOU REQUESTED. That doesn't mean you can't continue your idiea and possibly even implementing it on a Private area for those that want to enagae in it. Using your logic, every Special interest here would be mandatory. We would all be Furry, Gay,Ageplaying Gamblers into BDSM. (If the Goreans read this we would all be in trouble)
So get off your Soapbox, (I'll get off mine in a second) and out of your Mother's basement.
Continue to develop your ideas, be happy if they are embraced, don't whine if they are not.

Luckily for us IF The providers thought this was a good idea, by the time they'd get it implemented we'd be all be RL Dead anyway.

OK...enough. I can buy Lindens again, it'my Birthday, and I am going Shopping.

Mickey was sarcastically refering to what Jamil had said to her. What you have quoted was a satirical reference, not how she feels about this subject.



****************
Of course you might have noticed that but just in an effort to keep things straight And I just woke up.

Yes, Mickey is a Fellow Traveller on this subject.

Awesome! Yet another attack, ignoring my points! And this one profanity laced! Even better! Let's go through this, shall we?

There is a rather large difference between a DISTINCT possibility (by the way, the caps were for emphasis as typing out the bold tag takes too long for me) and a possibility. It's not playing semantics to point that out. You said that your life and death proposal and the teen grid being brought in to the adult weredistinct possibilities. They just aren't.
[/QUOTE] And it seems that once you have it in your mind that something is'nt possible, there is just no way its going to happen[/QUOTE]Um. Isn't that the very definition of "not possible"?
AlludingLovely! First you put words into my mouth, then extrapolate it to the Nth degree until you've worked yourself into a frenzy of attacking and profanity. Well done.


No, I didn't. I was specifically referring to your obtuse writing in that one specific post, not to the concept in general, which I DO understand and posted about on the first page. Who was it that told me to read the whole thread again? Oh, yeah. It was you.

No. Again, I commented on it on the first page. My "problem" is that you moved the goalposts in a later post, changing your stance without saying that you had, assuming that we would understand out of thin air that you had done so. Your original proposal was that it be gridwide, then you said that it would be optional, with nothing in between. When I commented on this, you leapt for the throat and attacked me. That's my "problem".

Wow! Now you're making assumptions about my qualifications! Well done!
I'm just curious. Do these critics of yours play Second Life at NYU? If not, how would they be better qualified to comment on a poorly thought out proposal for an entertainment such as this? How DOES one get qualified, or at least "more qualified" to comment on SL? Just curious.
Um. No. I DID add to the idea, as I have said before, on the first page. Didn't you read it?
What you recieved and are reacting to was a response to a much later post.

Again, the capitols are for emphasis. As for the "threads" I wrote, please re-read them. I said that I didn't understand what you were saying in that post, in the section quoted. Is using bold better than caps?

So, wait. You only want to hear from people that agree with you? That think that being able to just wander around and kill willy nilly is a good idea?
You don't want to hear opposing views?
Well, that's just bullshit.
You don't think I have a right to speak up about something that, if no-one speaks out against it, will drastically change the way I play an entertainment that I enjoy?
To answer your question (something I've noticed you tend to avoid doing), THIS is why I responded. I don't want this to happen. I strongly disagree with your original proposal and am disheartened by your seemingly complete inability to respond to any suggestions made.
Why haven't you commented, either supporting or not supporting, on the suggestion that perhaps this should be an option, not a grid wide thing. You are the one that suggested it, it's your responsibility to make sure the proposal is refined and defined.
All you've really done is attack anyone that disagrees with you, which is yet another sign that this proposal is a bad idea. If, by some bizarre chance, this does go through, is that how you're going to behave in SL? By attacking and killing everyone that disagrees with you?
As for making this personal, I believe it was you who attacked me first, not the other way around. I'm just defending myself and putting to rest any other nonsense you throw out.

Please re-read all the posts. Please answer questions. Please stop attacking.

Morwen, why do you fear change AND the short sighted?
Why do you fear it? Tell me.

I fear being short changed...........

I'm shortsighted, but I wear glasses.

Which is worse? Short sighted or short tempered?

Probably short sheeted is worst of all.......

Being short handed is pretty bad, too...

Short Lived is probably the worst...which brings us back to the original topic of this thread.

YAY! You brought us back to topic! Impressive lady, you!

We can do this until the cows come home(old saying), so we'll agree to disagree.

Agreed.