The Fanboi Playbook: what are your best strategies to counter?

Once again Ponsonby, you show just how little you know about subjects you think you know anything about. You do not know what you are talking about. You obviously don't know the history or the law that was declared unconstitutional last month by the Supreme Court of the United States.........you obviously do not know what you are taking about when you tell people that because of that throwing out of a law declared unconstitutional it is somehow restricting free speech (a law which was less than 10 years old). You do not understand how the laws of this country are written, enacted, enforced or challenged. You do not know the purpose of the Constitution of this country, it's base premise, how it's designed, how it's basic rights are to protected, how those rights are to be amended.....you know nothing. And you're stupid enough to argue your bullshit endlessly. You are twisting "laws" to suit your personal views of how everything "should" be.........according to Ponsonby Low.

You equate policies and rules developed and enforced by a privately owned company with policies and rules (laws) of a publicly controlled government. You are showing your ignorance......actually, stupidity since you continue doing so without getting your facts straight. Just like there is a way to communicate with Linden Lab, the information is available to you. Be smart.........learn your subject before you go off on what's right and what's wrong.

I'm sort of glad you brought that other little Ponsonbly Low I'm so intelligent thread up.........I wanted to but there is really no relevance to the subject of this thread. So didn't. It's going to be interesting to see how you wiggle everything around to tie the two subjects together. Too bad the clock is running.............I imagine this will take a little more than the approximately 36 hours (max) we have left here.

Good lord Peggy, I participated in that thread you quoted and, while I think Pons was dead flat wrong (as was the original law), I didn't see her throwing around ad hom attacks on people who disagreed with her. Instead, you start throwing around phrases like "you're stupid enough", "ignorance" and "stupidity". It's obviously become personal. You might want to step away from the keyboard for a bit.

Wow Peggy. I did sort of have a grudging admiration of you. I was enjoying your posts in SLA but after that gloating and goading I don't think I will look at them the same.

I didn't link back to that thread.

But, yes I probably should step back a little. But, in my weak defence, I was not the one who launched either of the two threads that have now been tied together. I was ready to walk away until Ponsonby's latest...........he knew how passionate that topic was to me. I think he was expecting my reaction. Unfortunately I fell for it.

I'm harmless.........mostly.

Well isn't that special!!

I think Peggy just did a little "superior dance" of her own!

Time for a bit of a summary.

For those of us who want to give the Blogs every chance, there are probably three possible responses if we should happen to post something on the order of:


"I believe that a venue for free and open discussion, as adults, adhering to the TOS, would benefit LL in several ways.

For one, retention of new registrants can only be enhanced by quick access to answers (given SL's steep learning curve), and a functional forum that people enjoy using, and use frequently, is the best route to this result.

For another, people who are passionate about SL are the ones most likely to spend money there. And the existence of the community provided by a functional forum is an essential part of nurturing such passion."



............................the three possibilities, I think, are:

1) LL will have agreed that a free and open discussion forum makes sense and will benefit the company, so the statement above will be part of an ongoing conversation with others who care about the topic; or

2) LL will have decided that tightly controlled conversation ONLY is in its best interest, and so a moderator will delete such remarks on sight; or

3) LL will have decided on the tight control over conversation, but will be relying on 'peer pressure' to try to intimidate people from posting such things.



The purpose of this thread has been to let those who want to give the Blogs every chance, think ahead about what we might encounter.

I believe that the 'peer pressure' responses to the hypothetical post above are likely to fall among the following bad argumentation examples. Discussion of how these arguments fall short of logic can be found in this thread, or in cases not discussed in the thread, I include a few words of rebuttal:

1) "the fact that LL closed the free-discussion forum proves that free-discussion forums have no cash value to LL"

2) "you fail to understand business"-type of accusations, including:
a) "LL is a business, not a charity!"

b) "LL can't pay for everything!" [True. But since free-discussion would cost less in moderator pay, this argument is particularly poor.]

c) "You can't discuss this unless you present a full set of statistics first"


3) "you are a bad/wrong/sick person if you want to discuss this", including:

a) Anyone who would want to discuss this is a person who complains/whines about EVERYTHING

b) Anyone who would want to discuss this can't cope with change

c) Anyone who would want to discuss this is a person of poor character (including: a person who labels others, a person who fails to make a battle plan, a person who kicks puppies...what have you)

d) Anyone who would want to discuss this is a troublemaker who has plotted with friends


In conclusion: I hope and intend to be able to speak my mind, in a civil and considerate fashion. I know several of you have the same hope for yourselves. Good luck to us all!

In case the place is closed down when I come back to the computer, I wanted to highlight this.

As many have noted, this forum is remarkable for its low level of horrible behavior in comparison with many other forums/message boards.

All due respect to Millie, who from what I can see has been both responsive and fair.

But in recent months, there has NOT been a group of full-time moderators checking and warning and locking and deleting...yet the overall tone of the place is FAR more civil than is the case with most boards that permit (as this one has by default) general discussion.

Far, far more.

And that says a lot about the individuals here and about what happens when they're treated as adults. That is: they behave as adults.

That is a phenomenon worth noting.

I have nothing to add.

This is just a bunch of BS. You're using categories again. Just doesn't work that way. Really going to limit yourself. People just don't fall into categories like that.

It's just a frickin' blog. You don't have to analyze every poster and do your armchair psychoanalysis just to write a thought there. Holy geez. You just write your opinion. That's it.

So...on the "civil and considerate" fashion....you're going to try a new style over there?