1  2  |   Order by index

Feb 27, 2003, 3:25pm

[View Quote] How do you buy a world? How do you get an OP? Oh wait, how do you get all those
nicely designed objects that are part of sets that are for sale on sites like
Filmkr's? Oh wait, MONEY! Gee, I didn't think it was that hidden.

Even if you have all those people working together to buy it, that money came from
some place. Oh wait, it's still money. Point me to an abundance of Gor worlds that
don't have their own objects (or didn't buy objects from sets) and don't own their
own world (hang out in a free world), and don't have an OP that wasn't bought (IE, AW
or Ananas' OP).

I didn't say "rolling in the dough," nor did I imply they're super rich. I just said
they had money, and they've used it. I would hold this stance even if it wasn't a
Gor world that was nominated for something they bought with money.

--Bowen--

Feb 27, 2003, 3:50pm

So now you're saying that someone shouldn't be eligible for a CY unless
they made everything themselves? You, of course, realize that you're
pretty much excluding almost *everyone* with that statement, especially
builders in the public building worlds, since they didn't make any of
the objects they used either, right? So much for making the CY awards
community-oriented. :P

I challenge you to find a world where *all* the objects and avatars were
made by the owner(s), without a single purchase or donation. I can
almost guarantee you that any such worlds that you do find will be in
the vast minority.

At any rate, I don't know why you had to bring the money issue into
this, since it doesn't matter how much money you have. If you can't use
your purchases well, then all you did was waste your money. And besides,
if an avatar or object gets nominated, the CY Committee is smart enough
to track down the original creator of said avatar/object and award the
Award to them. Sounds to me like you're just looking for excuses. :P

[View Quote] --
Goober King
All about the money
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

Feb 27, 2003, 4:36pm

My favorite signature is CY's are CommunitY.
Thinking about changing it to CY's are ControversY:)

Feb 27, 2003, 5:26pm

Well, as for me, (and for this post I am not even considering content that
offends some people...I hope THAT doesn't offend anyone) the only reason I
think age categories are logical is because....let's say for a minute that
the CY voting was 100% fair and accurate and that everyone who voted for one
particular CY subject, (for example best av or whatever) actually went to
see every single possible av that could be voted on. Of course this is the
way it should be, too, if it is to be a fair and accurate vote. If you just
vote for your friend's av because you want him to win....this is hardly a
fair and impartial vote and that av didn't get the vote because it was the
best av. That IS when it becomes a popularity contest.

Now....let's say there is one category for these avs that includes Gor
worlds and all the other worlds lumped together...... Now....let's say you
are 17 years old and you want to vote in the CY's and you want to vote
fairly and according to which av is actually the best all around. Let's say
you are 17 and are so honest that you would not go into a world that says
you cannot enter unless you are 18. Technically then, you can only see some
of the avs that are nominated, but not all of them. How can you fairly and
accurately vote for what you think is the best av?

Let's say 50% of the voters are on the same situation as you are. Then let's
say that there are 10 avs nominated but only one category, 5 happen to be in
Gor worlds......how can the vote be fair and accurate? The 5 avs in general
worlds can be viewed and voted on by 100% of the voters but the 5 avs in Gor
worlds can only be viewed and voted on by 50% of the voters.

Now assuming a real vote is wanted-fair and accurate and based only on the
merit of the subject and not on the popularity of the person who's subject
was nominated, how can they all be lumped together?

If they were divided, 100% of voters could see 100% of avs because the Gor
avs would be a separate category only viewed-and voted on-by those who could
legally visit.

I just can't get beyond thinking it is only logical to separate them. Unless
of course, it isn't a real contest based on real merit but a "it doesn't
really matter, half-assed is good enough" type thing. I don't think the CY
people want that because I see them listening to suggestions.

And of course, those that didn't need visiting a world wouldn't need
separating, and there is the very good suggestion of bringing the subjects
to one place which it would take care of it all together. Like the Miss
Universe pageant I guess. Can you imagine every voter going to each of the
countries represented to see the girl on her private stage?

[View Quote]

Feb 27, 2003, 6:10pm

[View Quote] Right, whatever you want to believe.

--Bowen--

Feb 28, 2003, 1:58am

Awwww... :)

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 28, 2003, 1:59am

You realize no Goreans are chiming in? It's because Goober's right. :)
The facts defend them in this case.

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 28, 2003, 2:02am

[View Quote] Whatever you say... may I recommend some knee-pads?

--Bowen--

Feb 28, 2003, 2:08am

Well, it is logical. But it doesn't solve the problem. Take jacob here,
for example. He's rumored to be 6! Of course, it's impossible to tell,
since he just as likely has a bad concept of english grammar. But let's use
the age as an example in any case. Now, knowing Jacob as I do (he and one
of his friends hang around SW City sometimes) he's just going to click on
any little ol' sign he comes across, regardless of whether it's in an
R-rated or X-rated category or not. Why? He's a little kid. He can't
grasp these kinds of things.

You're assuming kids are going to stay away from X-rated worlds just because
they are labelled as such. Well that doesn't always happen. Teenagers are
especially notorious for ignoring these kinds of things. Parents need to
watch what their kids are doing, yes, but the problem should be attacked
from both sides. Society should be doing just as much to look out for
children as parents, otherwise we'd have porn channels on our basic cable.
I've said that before, and that is why I'm confortable with the Cy Awards'
new stance on this subject.

Btw... thanks for letting me use your name as an example, Jacob! :)

Chris


[View Quote]

Feb 28, 2003, 2:17am

All we're saying is that your arguement is supposition. Not saying anything
more, anything less. We're not saying they're "right".

Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 28, 2003, 2:32am

We DO have ( were I am) porn channels on basic cable...... but the cable
decoder has a parental "lock" to enable parents to screen out that and any
other channels they want kept from their child. Morale of my story? It IS
up to the parents to decide where and how and when their children are
subjected to such things. If they are very liberal minded, or lazy....who
are you to second guess their judgement and impose your morals on their
children? Some parents would consider Nation Geographic channel to contain
questionable material and block it via the parental control...... but if
they told me I couldn't allow my child to watch that channel I would be
MIGHTILY annoyed. I am not saying that children should be allowed to view R
rated material, I am saying its not up to any one else but the parents to
decide where to draw the line.


Some one has suggested that R rated worlds have their own category and i
agree. If little Johnny's parents want to let him have the complete freedom
to peruse such worlds in his attempts to have a complete vote, then that is
up to them.

----- Original Message -----
From: "sw chris" <chrisw10 at skywalkeronline.net>
Newsgroups: general.discussion
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: Cy Awards Rules Page


Well, it is logical. But it doesn't solve the problem. Take jacob here,
for example. He's rumored to be 6! Of course, it's impossible to tell,
since he just as likely has a bad concept of english grammar. But let's use
the age as an example in any case. Now, knowing Jacob as I do (he and one
of his friends hang around SW City sometimes) he's just going to click on
any little ol' sign he comes across, regardless of whether it's in an
R-rated or X-rated category or not. Why? He's a little kid. He can't
grasp these kinds of things.

You're assuming kids are going to stay away from X-rated worlds just because
they are labelled as such. Well that doesn't always happen. Teenagers are
especially notorious for ignoring these kinds of things. Parents need to
watch what their kids are doing, yes, but the problem should be attacked
from both sides. Society should be doing just as much to look out for
children as parents, otherwise we'd have porn channels on our basic cable.
I've said that before, and that is why I'm confortable with the Cy Awards'
new stance on this subject.

Btw... thanks for letting me use your name as an example, Jacob! :)

Chris

Feb 28, 2003, 3:10am

Oops, I missed the last paragraph in the Cy Awards' new policy. (it was my
economy priced speed-reading course, skip every other paragraph and every
other thread) That would seem to solve that issue then. But, when I spoke of
being fair and impartial I meant the voters who would or could not go beyond
their own rating to view nominations. I wasn't assuming any such thing about
teen-agers and the ones who wouldn't follow those rules didn't pertain to my
point because they already could view all nominations.

I guess if I had or frequented a Gor world, since there are so many of them
with similar specific interests, I sure would be starting my own awards
thing...seems to make more sense anyway.

As far as the parent/society issue, I agree 100% as I stated in a post
earlier under this same heading. On the other hand as Kellee states it sure
is no one else's place to decide the morality issues within a normally and
legally functioning family. Too bad there has to be more to it than that. I
was talking more (in the "village" theme) about supporting and being extra
eyes and hands when parents can't always be there. Good parents should
appreciate this and not feel threatened. But in the extreme, I would also
intervene if the guy next door decided it was in his infant's best sleep
interests to have 2 shots of vodka each night before his bedtime or that the
infant could wait in the car outside of the bar while he did his own shots.
Believe me, it happens.

[View Quote]

Feb 28, 2003, 3:30am

Hey now....... I havent been "Little Johnny" for QUITE some time ;O)


[View Quote] > Some one has suggested that R rated worlds have their own category and i
> agree. If little Johnny's parents want to let him have the complete freedom
> to peruse such worlds in his attempts to have a complete vote, then that is
> up to them.
>

Feb 28, 2003, 6:57pm

My comparison was to X rated worlds only. Not R rated. X is where the line
should be drawn. Here in the US we don't have set top boxes or V-chips on a
lot of television systems we own. It depends on what cable system you
subscribe to, but in my case there's no way to control the content. Just
like there is no way to control the content in Active Worlds at this moment.
Until such parental control code is implemented, the CY's stance on this
issue is fine.

SW Chris

[View Quote]

Feb 28, 2003, 7:00pm

Just as the "guy next door" example, X rated content is still taboo in
modern society. Therefore it needs to be regulated. R rated content is not
taboo. So that shouldn't be regulated.

Chris

[View Quote]

1  2  |   Order by index