September 24, 2014

Stalkers and bullies and trolls, oh my!

Moaner said:
One of the worst kinds of stalkers in SL and RL is the vengeful stalker; this person convinces themselves that you are their enemy (even if you've never interacted with them, or had more than the misfortune of having exchanged a few words with them), simply because of your opinions.
I don't think of you as my enemy, Moaner, just as a fraud whose stupidity should be exposed for what it is. The problem is that you choose to just block everyone who has an opinion that differs from your own (disagrees with you). As I said elsewhere, that's just lazy. And now you've gone further and tried to silence me. Well, that just won't do.
And they start stalking you, both on LL's own systems and outside of them (Twitter, blogs, forums, etc).
By "stalking" you mean... reading. Is that right? Then I would say that you are guilty of the same.
  • ~9/16 - My Twitter account is suspended. [Gee, who could possibly have reported me?]
  • 9/16 - I register a Plurk account.
  • 9/21 - I'm blocked on Plurk and plurk about it.
  • 9/21 - Your Plurk profile is set to private.
  • 9/22 - I plurk about it (a plurk that you liked) and mention my presence on ASN.
  • ~9/23 - Your post on ASN (now deleted) that refers to your "personal stalker" who's "announced he's come" to ASN "to continue his harassment - but under a different name this time" (see below) appears.
So... who's "stalking" who? If you are/were not "stalking" me, you:

a) wouldn't be reading my Twitter timeline so that you could become so very offended that you had to report me; and
b) would never even see my Plurk timeline so that you could become so very offended that you would feel the need to seek out pity from your fellow ASN users.

Some of these persons organise in groups whose sole existence is to troll, stalk and bully others.
I belong to many "groups", both formal and informal, none of "whose sole existence is to troll, stalk and bully others." Perhaps you'd care to elaborate and maybe even offer some evidence instead of just flapping your gums.
They also claim that what they do is covered by "freedom of speech".
Freedom of speech is the right to communicate one's opinions and ideas to anyone who is willing to receive them.

Nobody is forcing you to read (receive) my Twitter, Plurk, blog, etc.

The following post appeared on or about 9/23 and has since been deleted (one assumes by the author). Original link:

I'm with you, Lanai. I have my personal stalker, and now he's announced he's come here as well to continue his harassment - but under a different name this time.
See above RE your very own "stalking", Moaner.
He has dedicated his plurk and blog...
No. You're just the latest in a short line of complete morons who've merited such treatment (I only now just realized that most of them happen to be men who play women in SL, and I suspect that you are no exception). Just ask some of your friends about Sus.
... to posting libelous and stalker-ish stuff directed at me.
The following definitions can be found at this link (I know you're quite familiar with the site):

Libel is defined as defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures.

Defamation—also calumny, vilification, and traducement—is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual, business, product, group, government, religion, or nation.

Crucial to the second definition is the word FALSE.

I challenge you to point to one single instance where I have made a false statement about you, or about anyone else for that matter.

It's been going on for two years now.
Your first appearance on my blog was in February of 2013. The Tweets in that post are from December of 2012. Prior to that, I didn't even know of your miserable existence.
In fact, yesterday I decided to remove a friend from here, because I saw that she lied when she said (in public) she had ditched a group of friends of hers whose SL was all about drama.
In other words, someone who disagreed with you.

August 22, 2014

If only...

Lucinda Bulloch said:

Why did you make most of my products including the main one adult so taking them from general view and why did you make my dresses adult, how is a dress adult, i have now closed and intend to leave sl for good once i have copied all my script to my hard drive. for 7 years i have put up with abuse but still created but this is the final straw i can not fight these anti competition practices that you see as normal any more.

So long, farewell, Auf wiedersehen, good night.


ETA: That was a comment, now gone, that Lucinda left on a KB article. Off-topic, so of course it deserved to be RICed and I was happy to comply.

August 03, 2014

I blog merely to express my own thoughts.
 'scuse me while I roll on the floor, laughing my ass off (ROFLMAO).

I feel obliged to do some homework before I write about something: Ask about it, read about it, cross-check references, try to find information that's as accurate/helpful as possible.
Yeah, we noticed.

Did the author of the Business Insider article do her homework? Did she try to find someone to help her get to grips with the viewer, optimise her graphics settings, point her to places, communities etc, that are representative of that is done *now* within SL? From what I read, it doesn't look like it. So, if a non-professional, admittedly amateur blogger like me is expected to do her homework and be as accurate and concise as possible in what she writes, why wouldn't a journalist be expected to live up to similar or higher standards?
 Here. Pass this link along to her:

May 14, 2014


Mona wrote:
If you want timely, well-written and detailed coverage of Second Life and its clones, Inara’s got you covered far better than any other such blogger I know. Her blog is the closest you can get to having a well-sourced, documented and written news resource, and, unlike some other blogs I know, she neither posts half-arsed or intentionally flawed posts to stir stuff up and increase page views, nor does she repost other people’s work.
You've got that covered.

May 08, 2014

Good to see you're an equal opportunity plagiarist...

... and don't just copy shtuff that your "mistress" writes.

Wikipedia: Satan is the first major character introduced in the poem. Formerly called Lucifer, he was the most beautiful of all angels in Heaven, and is tragic figure who describes himself with the now-famous quote "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven."[7] He is introduced to Hell after he leads a failed rebellion to wrestle control of Heaven from God. Satan's desire to rebel against his creator stems from his unwillingness to be subjugated by God and his Son, claiming that angels are "self-begot, self-raised",[8] and thereby denying God's authority over them as their creator.

Mona: Satan, the first major character that the poem introduces to the reader, was the most beautiful of all Heaven’s angels and is portrayed as a tragic figure who describes himself with the famous line “Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.” His failed rebellion against God for control of Heaven, stemming from his unwillingness to be a subordinate to God and his Son, claiming that angels are “self-begot, self-raised” and thus God is not entitled to rule over them as their creator.

Wikipedia: Satan is deeply arrogant, albeit powerful and charismatic. Satan's persuasive powers are evident throughout the book; not only is he cunning and deceptive, but he is also able to rally the angels to continue in the rebellion after their agonising defeat in the Angelic War. He argues that God rules as a tyrant and that all the angels ought to rule as gods.[9]

Mona: Milton portrays Satan as a very arrogant, but also powerful and charismatic character, with a formidable ability to persuade others to do his bidding. Besides his (true to the religious description) cunning and deceptive character, he is able to persuade the angels that followed him to continue their rebellion against God, despite their defeat in the Angelic War. According to Satan, God is a tyrannic ruler and angels ought to rule as gods.

Wikipedia: Satan is comparable in many ways to the tragic heroes of classic Greek literature, but Satan's hubris far surpasses those of previous tragedies. Though at times he plays the narrative role of an anti-hero, he is still commonly understood to be the antagonist of the epic. However, the true nature of his role in the poem has been the subject of much notoriety and scholarly debate. While some scholars, like the critic and writer C. S. Lewis, interpret the poem as a genuine Christian morality tale, other critics, like William Empson, view it as a more ambiguous work, with Milton's complex characterisation of Satan playing a large part in that perceived ambiguity.[10]

Mona: There are parallels that can be drawn between Milton’s Satan and the tragic heroes of ancient Greek drama, but Satan’s hubris makes the behaviours of Greek tragic heroes that trigger the dramatic events pale in comparison. On some occasions in the poem, he seems to play the narrative role of the anti-hero, but it is always clear, at least to me, that he is really the narration’s antagonist. Regardless of this, though, his role has been discussed quite vigorously. For instance, C.S. Lewis sees Paradise Lost as a genuine Christian morality tale, while William Empson and other critics see an ambiguity in Milton’s complex characterisation of Satan.