« Blog Log | Main | Vox: QotD: First Celebrity Crush »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I Found Free PlayBoy Girls, you need view this.
Absolutely FREE PlayBoy & Penthouse:



Have the sheep published their tao?

Khamon Fate

Sorry, any reference The Most Sacred Tao should be capitalized in demonstration of the respect it is owed.

Khamon Fate

You know, if CBS goms ESC, we might witness the formation of an actual metaversal kernal.

Walker Spaight

Get serious, Prok. I've never pulled anything from the Herald, and certainly not any snarky headlines. I gently corrected a story that was potentially lawsuit-inspiring, and even offered to publish more on the same subject. SheepBS would hardly raise my ire. The Herald is supposed to be snarky. If you didn't put that headline in the Herald it's because you either wanted to keep it for your own blog or you wanted to get all snooty with me. Either one is fine with me, I don't want to deny you your fun, if that's how you get it. Your contention sounds a bit idiotic to me, though.

Prokofy Neva

Walker, you're amazing. Are you forgetting how you *instantly revoked my posting privileges* on the Herald because of the story titled "Fleeced"???? Hello?

That wasn't a "gentle correction" but a completely unnecessary act. You could "gently correct," and leave it at that -- that's fine, every editor "corrects". I also put in a correction *once I could establish the facts* (which, BTW, are still not entirely clear, whether this was a story deliberately purveyed by John Hurliman, who paid Nimrod Yaffle to lie to journalists about other elements of this story, or whether it was just a confusiong).

Yes, the Herald is supposed to be snarky, and yet, the ire that was raised by your sponsors the Sheep, and you -- as indicated by your sudden choking off of posting privileges -- indicates that they have disturbing undue influence.

If a reporter gets a fact wrong, you publish a statement to set the record straight. I don't think there's anything in that story that requires revoking of posting privileges -- which were ultimately restored anyway.

Because the truth is, the Sheep are all over libseconflife, they love the products of libsecondlife, the libsl people are free labour for them, they get all kinds of fun stuff, and the Sheep maintain nothing but the most profoundly indifferent-ranging-to-cynical attitude to problems like "copybot" or "campbot" or "landbot". These are the petty problems of people who live in the world; they aren't *their* problems. And that's OBVIOUS.

There have been far, far nastier articles in the Herald -- the fucktard stuff from Uri for example -- and you'd never dream of cutting off posting privileges.

I'm glad you finally relented on this but it's unsettling and makes for a bit of an unfree atmosphere.
When you feel that you can't even put a fairly upbeat article that even says some positive things it but pokes some fun and asks some hard question in the *Herald* for Christ's sake, because it might get too many feathers ruffled, it's not good.

And no, I didn't want to "keep it for my own blog," because a story on the Herald will get more attention, that's silly.

And no, I didn't want to "get snooty" because it isn't about "getting snooty". If anything, you were the one who got snooty with me by pulling my posting privileges as if you were Jeska Linden banning me from the forums.

The basic elements of the story I am telling continue to be true: huge corporations are having a profound impact on our world, via the sherpas pre-selected by Linden Lab to be cut into the deals in advance, some of them with long-time NDAs, and we have little say, despite the direct effect on us. Nobody questions this. Nobody looks into this. Nobody writes about it. Nobody does anything but administer blow-jobs 24/7.

Right now, we have *yet another* rash of stories you can see on the Google feed about how wonderful it is that all these clever new start-up design companies are making a mint off the desire of old media companies needing to find their way in SL.

None of your Clay Shirkeys ever look at this; it's of no interest, they don't live in SL and it doesn't matter.

The entirely fake SL Liberation Army, no doubt completely concocted by either Lindens or sherpas or both, instead grabs headlines with a fake parody of dissent in order to distract from real dissent and from real discontent in the world.

To describe the desire to ask the hard questions as "being snooty" is pretty silly. If anything, it's about others "being snooty".

And it's not about "having fun".
It's about expressing opinion on the state of affairs.

Prokofy Neva

I want to add some more to this point I've been thinking about for some time:

"That is, while it may be something that ordinary people will greet happily because it will give them more ease of socializing and shopping, the services aspect of facilitating that socializing and shopping, currently in the hands of scattered, unconnected, or loosely connected small business over SL will be utterly taken over by the new enhanced SheepBS machine. It means shopping patters, traffic data, and subtle or not-so-subtle loading of the impressions that people have, the content they see, will start to happen."

Remember the GOM? It was doing a perfectly fine job of serving the merchants and land dealers of Second Life, giving as much as $4.00 or $4.25 to $1000 Lindens. Today, the Lindex has struggled back up to $3.70 -- where it is kept artificially by Supply Linden printing and selling Lindens.

GOM worked perfectly fine, despite all the hemming and hawing about it that Reuben and others were saying at the game conference panel once covered on Clickable Culture (I think Uri is still demanding the tape of this since it spawned so many controversies).

The Lindens and some of their chief fanboyz believed that the GOM didn't serve "the people" -- i.e. newbies who might not being willing to trust a third-party player site. They invoked this old "think of the children" stuff to step in to take over a sector which in fact was a lucrative money-making sector in fees, and that's now a source of revenue for them, and not GOM, which closed.

Lindens could have provided simple entry-level packets for sale for newbies and also endorsed GOM, which of course they conceded access to via its scripted terminals. But they didn't. They wanted in on it. They can't be blamed for that from the perspective of their own interests.

So that's one force at work, the desire to have something work, and work in a way that "serves the masses" by the determination of LL and of course serves LL.

The other piece of it is the drive to streamline the search further so that it is more efficient and yields higher sales to some parties who can benefit from automatic third-party sites or developed items.

Right now, Second Life is like a million little mom and pop book stores, on the eve of being destroyed by amazon.com or Barnes & Nobles and Borders outlets everywhere.

Only think of it in more rounded 3-D. The way people find stuff and make connections now is through actual connection to people. They go to a club, they socialize, they go to an event, they see an outfit, they click on somebody, they go to their store, etc.

People use SEARCH heavily -- and happily -- to get what they need. They'd like SEARCH simply to work better, to be more like Google returning more of a nimbus of results.

So on the one hand, the ESC can step in and say, oh, we'll do that for you. Leave the driving to us. And in fact, at the end of the day, they may script up something that finds stuff better, and presumably will be run more professionally than Christiano's Link Trading Post, where Cristiano himself *personally clears on each and every link request manually* -- amazing, that -- and aggressively defends it.

So like SL 411 or other things like that, there will likely be a little cube you can get inworld, and put on your land, or put objects into if they can figure out how to prevent theft and permissions issues (remember when a competitor to ESC with a similar colour scheme was trying to do this? and then disappeared)...

So everyone will be happy at one level, but what is lost?

The mom-and-pop stores, clubs, resorts, etc. which served as the living matrix of search for people, by helping them make picks, having the picks be accessed, having people TP around to get at picks, etc.

That entire rich network and fabric of social being which was beginning to make the world of SL is then ripped and eroded. It means that instead of socializing, asking about stuff, clicking on stuff, rezzing out stuff, and generally noodling around, you just get a rapid-fire result of 10 black dresses, you go and by them alone, you cyber joylessly with some other person who has just done the same thing in the void of rapid automatic search, and then you log off, unfulfilled.

To a lot of people, half the fun of shopping is the social side of it, physically browsing the store, going with friends, talking to the owner, hanging out at clubs, etc.

Of course, what Forseti would say is that a new, enhanced, Sheep-produced SEARCH will merely create more varieties of networks and opportunities to search for places, go to them, and socialize. That may happen except...it may not as well. Because the staged, crafted, over-produced venues of the AOL Pointes and Nissans and Motorati and Warner Brothers builds and such will all be set up and cued to fill the search, either with pre-placed ads or the frame of sponsorship or something that helps drive people to these expensive islands that these SHeep clients bought, and now are all dressed up on with nowhere to go.

Already, there's an incredible amount of fake media placement and evangelizing. You get this fake stuff like "High School in SL" which Aimee is pimping all over on blogs and forums as if this is just "spontaneous appreciation". Perhaps it is; perhaps it is unpaid; and yet it fits in with that pre-set notion of "I find what I like and I pump it on my oversaturated media channels because that's what I do".

I've read at least 4 breathless, hyperventilating accounts of AOL Pointe. But AOL is AOL, my God, it's as dull as two sticks. Once you get the skateboard, which you could have gotten off Eric Linden freebies or something, and once you stick your avatar once or go to the one salsa contest or something, you're done. There's just a hollowness of the high corporate hustle that puts off. You'd actually be happier going to your neighbourhood club, with its fluttery textures in an amateur build and the occasional orbit just to feel at home.

Really, there is a huge strain between the amateur and the professional in SL, the professional which is now bought and paid for by corporations. And the amateur will not win this contest. It can't, it doesn't have the time, treasure, or talent. But the whole beauty and purpose of SL is supposed to be preserving the open-ended creativity for the amateur or aspiring professional to come in and flourish.

No one takes pains to see how to maintain that. And when it's gone, it's gone.

Walker Spaight

Not interested in reading your whinescraper, but will just say this: I didn't pull anything from the Herald. I did pull your posting privs. (Which were later restored.) The correction that went in the Herald was as gentle as possible.

Prokofy Neva

You should read my original paragraph in the blog post above, Walker. I said that I feared "Walker would pull *the plug on me*". I didn't say "Walker would pull the article".

And you should read my whinescraper, it would do you good.

I'm not getting this concept of "gentle" or "violent" corrections. A correction is a correction. You cross the thing out, you put the correction. What's this concept that you make it "gentle" or "violent"? And "gentle" is not a word to describe pulling posting privileges.


Sometimes I like it gentle and sometimes I like it violent, especially where sheep are concerned. Oh wait, maybe I'm not following the convo here...

Cocoanut Koala

I believe it's only a matter of time till SL becomes, for all practical purposes, Advertising Land.

There will be the real-life companies, and there will be the revolving-door eyeballs coming in to view their ads and going out.

Everything will be set up to favor and to serve these real world companies.

I intend to keep on having fun with my little Mom-Without-Pop business for as long as I can.

And if Advertising Land doesn't happen, well, so much the better for me.



To respond to all of Prokofy Neva's apothegms would take up too much room and time. I would like to address the most sententious ones, though. I begin with critical semantic clarifications. First, Prokofy presents herself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. She is eloquent in her denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors inconsiderate dorks. And here we have the ultimate irony, because she refuses to come to terms with reality. Prokofy prefers instead to live in a fantasy world of rationalization and hallucination. I won't bore you with the details, but suffice it to say that I undoubtedly feel that she has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. Prokofy obviously has none, or she wouldn't twist the truth. She recently claimed that women are crazed Pavlovian sex-dogs who will salivate at any object even remotely phallic in shape. I would have found this comment shocking had I not heard similar garbage from her a hundred times before.

Particularly telling is the way that Prokofy says that she should convince innocent children to follow a path that leads only to a life of crime, disappointment, and destruction because "it's the right thing to do". That's her unvarying story, and it's a lie: an extremely incomprehensible and censorious lie. Unfortunately, it's a lie that is accepted unquestioningly, uncritically, by Prokofy's underlings. It may be unfashionable to say so and it may surprise a few of you out there, but she maintains a "Big Brother" dossier of incriminating information about everyone she distrusts, to use as a potential career-ruining weapon. Is your name listed in that dossier? In other words, where is her integrity? I'll tell you what I think the answer is. I can't prove it, but if I'm correct, events soon will prove me right. I think that it's impractical for her to leave us in the lurch. Or perhaps I should say, it's mindless. Wherever you look, you'll see Prokofy enforcing intolerance in the name of tolerance. You'll see her suppressing freedom in the name of freedom. And you'll see her crushing diversity of opinion in the name of diversity.

I would be grateful if Prokofy would take a little time from her rigorous schedule to provide an antidote to contemporary manifestations of lame-brained autism. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. If she can overawe and befuddle a sufficient number of prominent individuals, then it will become virtually impossible for anyone to reach out for things with permanence, things beyond wealth and comfort and pleasure, things that have real meaning. If I said that the purpose of life is self-gratification, I'd be a liar. But I'd be being totally honest if I said that I have never been in favor of being gratuitously abysmal. I have also never been in favor of sticking my head in the sand or of refusing to make her rebarbative vituperations understood, resisted, and made the object of deserved contempt by young and old alike.

Prokofy doesn't use words for communication or for exchanging information. She uses them to disarm, to hypnotize, to mislead, and to deceive. She would have us believe that we should all bear the brunt of her actions. Yeah, right. We are a nation of prostitutes. By this I mean that as long as we are fat, warm, and dry we don't care what Prokofy does. It is precisely that lack of caring that explains why if the people generally are relying on false information sown by aberrant clodpolls, then correcting that situation becomes a priority for the defense of our nation.

You'd think Prokofy would see how eccentric and whiney she appears. I'm not going to say why; we all know the reason. It is immature and stupid of her to propitiate impulsive, amateurish survivalists for later eventualities. It would be mature and intelligent, however, to get her off our backs, and that's why I say that her roorbacks have earned her opprobrium, suspicion, resentment, and hatred. In fact, I have said that to Prokofy on many occasions and I will keep on saying it until she stops trying to bring about a wonderland of Trotskyism. I mean, her adherents are merely ciphers. Prokofy is the one who decides whether or not to appropriate sacred symbols for hectoring, ultra-backwards purposes. Prokofy is the one who gives out the orders to jump on everything that is written, said, or even implied and label it as either self-indulgent or petty. And Prokofy is the one trying to conceal how I suspect that she is like a jellyfish in that you can't see her stings coming. My views, of course, are not the issue here. The issue is that if she believes that governments should have the right to lie to their own subjects or to other governments, then it's obvious why she thinks that we should derive moral guidance from her glitzy, multi-culti, hip-hop, consumption-oriented bromides. I once overheard Prokofy say something quite astonishing. Are you strapped in? Prokofy said that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues. Can you believe that? At least her statement made me realize that I've repeatedly pointed out to her that she is the spawn of Satan. That apparently didn't register with her, though. Oh, well; I guess Prokofy's adages are designed to convict me without trial, jury, or reading one complete paragraph of this letter. And they're working; they're having the desired effect.

I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that warped and smarmy, Prokofy's scribblings resemble a dilapidated shed. Kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse, proving my claim that if Prokofy had her way, schools would teach students that everyone and everything discriminates against her -- including the writing on the bathroom stalls. This is not education but indoctrination. It prevents students from learning about how if I had to choose between chopping onions and helping Prokofy encourage a deadly acceptance of intolerance, I'd be in the kitchen in an instant. Although both alternatives make me cry, the deciding factor for me is that if we are to perform noble deeds, then we must be guided by a healthy and progressive ideology, not by the beer-guzzling and frightful ideologies that Prokofy promotes. If Prokofy has spurred us to pronounce the truth and renounce the lies, then Prokofy may have accomplished a useful thing. Let her counter-productive effusions stand as evidence that she wants to incite pogroms, purges, and other mayhem. Such intolerance is felt by all people, from every background. It's quite sad that Prokofy chooses to squander her talent on this sort of churlish fanaticism. If you find that fact distressing then you should help me pursue virtue and knowledge. Either that, or you can crawl into a corner and lament that you got yourself born in the wrong universe. Don't expect your sobbing to do much good, however, because whenever there's an argument about Prokofy's devotion to principles and to freedom, all one has to do is point out that Prokofy is a master of psychological manipulation. That should settle the argument pretty quickly. Nonetheless, her morals are like an enormous diabolism-spewing machine. We must begin dismantling that structure. We must put a monkey wrench in its gears. And we must evaluate the tactics Prokofy has used against me, because I trust Prokofy about as far as I can throw her. I submit that everyone should stop and mull that assertion. Then, you'll understand why Prokofy's votaries claim to have no choice but to ruin people's lives. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, licentious self-proclaimed arbiters of taste and standards. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn't make and don't understand.

Don't let yourself be persuaded by damnable pipsqueaks who secretly want to fragment the nation into politically disharmonious units. Whenever Prokofy tries to humiliate, subjugate, and eventually eliminate everyone who wants to offer true constructive criticism -- listening to the whole issue, recognizing the problems, recognizing what is being done right, and getting involved to help remedy the problem -- so do the worst types of homophobic, witless upstarts there are. Similarly, whenever she attempts to bury our heritage, our traditions, and our culture, the most muzzy-headed troublemakers you'll ever see typically attempt the same. I do not seek to draw any causal scheme from these correlations. I mention them only because untoward finks like her tend to conveniently ignore the key issues of this or any other situation. Or, to express that sentiment without all of the emotionally charged lingo, I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that Prokofy's dissertations are rife with contradictions and difficulties; they're completely insensate, meet no objective criteria, and are unsuited for a supposedly educated population. And as if that weren't enough, we've all heard Prokofy yammer and whine about how she's being scapegoated again, the poor dear.

Prokofy's hijinks are merely a stalking horse. They mask her secret intention to pass off all sorts of putrid and obviously obstinate stuff on others as a so-called "inner experience". Those who fight against Prokofy's pathological modes of thought are inevitably branded as naive and nerdy by Prokofy's sympathizers. That concept can be extended, mutatis mutandis, to the way that she says that men are spare parts in the social repertoire -- mere optional extras. That's a stupid thing to say. It's like saying that her activities are on the up-and-up. Prokofy presents one face to the public, a face that tells people what they want to hear. Then, in private, she devises new schemes to suppress people's instinct and intellect. Never have I seen such a gross error in judgment as her decision to besmirch the memory of some genuine historic figures. Trapped by the cognitive dissonance engendered by hard evidence and common sense, she feels obligated to do exactly the things she accuses maladroit nymphomaniacs of doing in a power-hungry, predatory attempt to justify her sound bites. This in mind, I would like to demonstrate conclusively that one could write several books on the subject of how a record of Prokofy's acts of hypocrisy would fill volumes.

I am hurt, furious, and embarrassed. Why am I hurt? Because Prokofy pompously claims that truth is merely a social construct. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. Why am I furious? Because if she were paying attention -- which it would seem she is not, as I've already gone over this -- she'd see that telling the truth is too much trouble for disdainful desperados bent on getting their way. What's my problem, then? Allow me to present it in the form of a question: To what lengths will she go to turn once-flourishing neighborhoods into zones of violence, decay, and moral disregard? It is only when one has an answer to that question is it possible to make sense of her communications because when I was younger, I wanted to insist on a policy of zero tolerance toward insurrectionism. I still want to do that, but now I realize that ever since she decided to rob, steal, cheat, and murder, her consistent, unvarying line has been that all minorities are poor, stupid ghetto trash. And why am I embarrassed? Because we can all have daydreams about Happy Fuzzy Purple Bunny Land, where everyone is caring, loving, and nice. Not only will those daydreams not come true, but the biggest difference between me and Prokofy is that Prokofy wants to suck up to the worst classes of doctrinaire skinflints there are. I, on the other hand, want to reinforce the contentions of all reasonable people and confute those of vitriolic marauders. Prokofy is hell-bent on suppressing our freedom, so to speak.

In contrast, there is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature. This fact is also conclusively established by direct observation. It is a fact so obvious that rational people have always known it and no one doubted it until Prokofy and her factotums started trying to deny it. The fact to which I am referring states that Prokofy's myrmidons all look like Prokofy, think like Prokofy, act like Prokofy, and discredit legitimate voices in the egotism debate, just like Prokofy does. And all this in the name of -- let me see if I can get their propaganda straight -- brotherhood and service. Ha! If you ever ask her to do something, you can bet that your request will get lost in the shuffle, unaddressed, ignored, and rebuffed. The problem is, Prokofy's closed-minded attempt to construct a creative response to my previous letter was absolutely pitiful. Really, Prokofy, stringing together a bunch of solecistic insults and seemingly random babble is hardly effective. It simply proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is not the place to develop that subject. It demands many pages of analysis, which I can't spare in this letter. Instead, I'll just state the key point, which is that her hypocrisy is transparent. Even the least discerning among us can see right through it. Okay, I've written enough for one letter, so let me just finish by saying that Prokofy Neva can't control her desire to have everything she wants and to have it now.

Prokofy Neva

Baba's intrauterine environment was sub-optimal. His mother's recurrent consumption of crevettes aggregavated a pre-existing tendency to salycitic acid formation, and then a doctor's imminent pre-natal injection of saline solution clinched the deal; Baba was engineered into the world too acidic from his multigravida, and paretically, his Apgars were not everything that an aspiring Havard admissions officer would wish for, were the situation optimal.

Indeed it was not. Never crawling, Baba's agito-correlary function was perpendicular, and at the tender age of 14 months he cut himself savagely on the protruding sharp edges of a glass-topped coffee table. His parents never read the books. They glassed the table with hubris, with that 70s aspirational Bohonian rabidity, but it was all a dishonest feint; Baba knew the different, and smashed, smashed, and kept on smashing.

Thus was born the destructive Baba. And when the window opened for emphathy-formation at that vulnerable 17-19 month crux, nobody was at home. The lights were all on, but it was one brick shy of a load. A nanny from the Dominican Repulibc who watched the soaps and gave the young Baba grape popsicle after grape popsicle further aggregated the hypoglycemia, and pretty soon we were looking at a full-blown, classic, though sub-clinically presenting case of narcisso-hyperventalism.

Baba did not hold a cheerio in betwixt thumb and forefinger until the alarmingly old age of 27 months. Indeed, developmental specialists had to go off the scale of the normal 24-month range just for Baba. It was one for the annals. Baba was, well, retarded. Hushed family conferences were held; his propensity for lining up all the Matchbox cars in the house was duly and somberly noted, but it was desided that maternal and loco parental interventions were futile and fatuous, and it was time to institutionalize the lad, or start him on Chess Club or perhaps allow him to watch Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang 1,780 times until he wept.

The latter course was chosen. I could fast-forward here over a very, very sad and lonely landscape, or I could close the curtain for now, ladies and gentlemen, on a suboptimal developmental odyssey of our time, one, as they say, for the annals, and one in which generations to come would pour over for details to understand their latent predicament.

No, I don't flinch from such a view. I do urge you to wait for the next installment.

taco rubio

"Baba's intrauterine environment was sub-optimal. His mother's recurrent consumption of crevettes aggregavated a pre-existing tendency to salycitic acid formation, and then a doctor's imminent pre-natal injection of saline solution clinched the deal; Baba was engineered into the world too acidic from his multigravida"

your soul is filthy and you should be ashamed of it, but there is still time for you :) :hug:

Prokofy Neva

Don't call the mirror crooked because it shows your ugly face.

Corp Down

Prokofy, I entirely agree with you when you say that the SLLA are a fake organisation. It is headed by someone who is calling for shares in LL for all of its members and who thinks he is a future President. It seems to raise its head anytime any genuine organisation comes to the fore, like for example the unfortunately closely named SLLU which seems to have come from a real life left organisation in Scotland. When they and Anti-FN started to hit the headlines with their campaign against the Front National, the SLLA built a new premises with a big red star on the front and pushed an AV to the fore who espouses an ultra left ideology. This seems to me to be panic every time a real organisation of people into dissenting groups happens on SL. It would be interesting to ask the "RL entreprenuer" who spends his time between Europe and the US thinks of the Leninist/Trotskyist bent the lastest SLLA Av is giving to people from the SLLU. Agree with the SLLU or not, they are genuine - and the members seem to get what it says on the tin; an attempt at left unity and a real fight against real life organisations like Front National; whereas the SLLA are a group of seeming libs who are allowing some to say one thing to try to wreck an attempt at real dissent.

LL need to come clean about SLLA. I hope some people start to think about the reality of what SLLA does; which is nothing. Bombs in a Nike shop in SL because of an SL take over by corporations is meaningless. The real fight for SL and against the corporations is outside.

Prokofy Neva

Calling for shares in and of itself isn't so suspect, that's a legitimate request, and I myself call for a collective seat on the board for tier-payers.

But I believe the SLLA is supported as a clandestine operation by LL or by some entity close to LL among the sherpas or corporations as a sop or a foil. It's purpose is exactly as you say, to confuse, distract, and sap away attention to real dissent.

Each time any head of steam gets going on internal protest movements or external coverage of criticism (me in the LA times recently), we see, like clockwork from the machine, 2-3 articles sprout up about this fake terrorist group that *gasp* bombs Nike *ungasp*.

Real dissenters in SL don't bother to bomb an empty sim where there are no shoppers. If they are homeground griefers, they grief and bomb and cage the malls where there is real traffic inside the world.

If they are ideological dissenters, they deal with Nike in the real world, or they find ways to raise their concern about corporations in other ways, as I do, in their blogs, writings, questions at news conferences, etc.

I view this as a typical Kremlin-style "black" operation. It's cleverly done and keeps working to distract media. But we have to keep after the questioning of its bona fides.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Blog powered by Typepad