The Rape Of SM

Is SM standing for SaveMe or for Solo Mornington? Which pixel is hurt, raped and harassed here most? Is it the loud artist who will use every weapon to get things her way or is it the self acclaimed dictator who floats in self-pity that not the whole world sees how good he is in arranging everything for the stupid and the dumb?

Is Solo Mornington harassed in this movie where he speaks out how much he is missing SaveMe if she is not around?

Are the pixels of Solo Mornington hurt in this movie with an almost exploding bomb on his genitals and dynamite stuck in his ass, while SaveMe is shaking her booty above him?

Are 5 SaveMe Oh’s making fun of the LEA committee, represented by Solo Mornington, Dan Coyote and Betty Omo or does she make fun of herself in the LEA Idols show? And is it mean of SaveMe Oh to ask so explicit what the price of freedom is?

Is Solo Mornington raped by the troll SaveMe Oh or is the Dictator Solo Mornington raping the rights of an independent artist and can this been shown in pics like this?


Are all the actions of SaveMe Oh in LEA a direct attack on the poor dictator Solo Mornington who knows so well what is good for the people or is the dictator Solo Mornington abuse his self acclaimed rights to divide and conquer.


Let’s end with the wise words of Edward Folger who brings back the debate to the essence:

Solo, we are talking about a virtual sandbox devoted to creativity where nothing remains longer than a week and anything can be derendered by other users who find it annoying and any avatar can be muted if one needs to concentrate on working. The only issue is your power to ban someone and keep them out indefinitely, for your own personal reasons. Creativity is being stifled by your personal bugaboos.

44 thoughts on “The Rape Of SM

  1. Is a group attack on one insignificant person art? It feels to me more like a perverse kind of fun.

    Maybe you are using this Solo guy to get a message through to Lindens but the Lindens aren’t going to get that message if your attack is personally directed at one person.

    The Pink Penis Tutu group was making a statement directed not at one person, but at witch hunting in general – we aimed our statement at all the art groups that together tried to start a witch hunt against one person. It was art with a manifesto – to make fun and to have fun – and to fight for freedom of speech.

    I don’t know this Solo guy from a bar of soap, but he is not Putin who never has to look his subjects in the eye. He is just an avatar like me and you. The only difference is that he has an eject button. To me it seems like you’re spending months and months picking on one insignificant bureaucrat because you’re angry with the government. One avatar is no match up against 5, 6 or 7 avatars pulling his character apart. How is this supposed to bring some form of awakening to SL?

    I guess I’m still against witch hunting.

  2. I agree that witch-hunting is often a personalized demonization that backfires, and Ive definitely been on the end of that! I think the bigger picture is that LL has colluded with specific residents (and one specific one in particular). Now that LL has basically removed all community partnership-type programs, LEA is the only one left that, so its an anomaly at this point.

    Speaking as someone who has also worked with LL in slightly similar positions, I can understand how one gets into that situation, but I can say this: when I was doing it I insisted on full transparency, on constantly including new voices, on empowering residents and communities, to benefit both SL residents and LL itself. I considered it not ‘power’ but a matter of ‘responsibility’.

    I can’t speak for SaveMe, but I would guess that this is much about one person’s utter inability to be responsible in a position where that’s needed. Yes, it’s really about LL and what is best for the arts communities and SL, but let’s be honest: trying to talk to the corporation has its ‘unique frustrations’…….it’s far more accessible to talk to the residents who have the responsibility to make a difference on the resident’s-end. In other words, will LL listen to an awakening? History has shown that’s not as likely as (perhaps) some residents listening to their neighbours.

    Ive been up close to this and seen firsthand which aspects of the LEA’s reputation of elitism are true and are not true. Parts are very true. The awakening should encompass major LEA reforms, and sadly, that must include some staff adjustments, as this is quite a ‘people driven’ business’.

    • Maybe, but by the same token, if a big nut messes up he will fire (or sacrifice) some insignificant worker for all to see as a means of image correction. The same applies conversely.

      Besides, harrassing one person months on end cos of the evils of a more powerful group above him just makes no sense to me. I’ve been involved in stuff like this in RL, where people were given extra powers to perform some puppet-like leadership role in the favour of the company they’re representing and I agree that these people are betraying the masses, but I wouldn’t say that the solution is to bully that person on a personal level, partly because it distracts from the real problem and mainly because it gets very boring.

      • Removing puppet-like idiots is not to cheer up your boring days but to make the art sims available for the ones it is ment to be, the artists! And if this idiot get his kicks out of being in the way, it be so. I understand you don’t get a kick out of it and that makes you already a much healtier and sane person than Solo Mornington.

      • As stupid as him they don’t make them a lot. Although I hope you have not yourself in mind to replace him?

  3. “[Is SM] the self acclaimed dictator who floats in self-pity that not the whole world sees how good he is in arranging everything for the stupid and the dumb?”

    Don’t be so hard on yourself, SaveMe.

    Anyway: Edward Folger cited by SaveMe says: “The only issue is your power to ban someone and keep them out indefinitely, for your own personal reasons. Creativity is being stifled by your personal bugaboos.”

    See, Edward, this is what gets me about this whole thing… You clearly do not know why SMO was banned.

    SaveMe is abusive to people in the sandbox. She does abusive things to other people, people who aren’t me, and who aren’t LEA committee member. She is abusive to ARTISTS trying to MAKE ART. She is horrible to people who are in the midst of their creative process, not just its output at an exhibition.

    And so, because she’s abusive, she got banned. And she can appeal her ban.

    And that happened because the LEA is PROTECTIVE OF ARTISTS WHO ARE TRYING TO MAKE ART.

    But don’t let reality get in the way of your hateful fantasy narrative, Edward. It’s much more fun for you to hate some guy for no reason. You got it exactly backwards: SaveMe Oh is the one stifling creativity in the sandbox, and the LEA is the organization trying to fix that.

    I still support the decision to ban SaveMe Oh, and you would, too, if you valued art in SL.

    • Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit – but maybe we should approach a definition of ART. As far as I know, (and btw, I was raised in a fascist regime), art is expression and the artist is the voice of whatever needs to be said, so, when what has to be said is not in line with what those in power want to hear then art becomes oppressed through censorship. In the case of LEA, what is the issue? What kind of ART is and is not ART according to LEA?

      • Look at what LEA has devoted resources toward in order to find an answer, Sca.

        In the last land grant round, we had a sim devoted to an exploration of mail art, a pirate village sim featuring Aley and mcarp, who are primarily known as builders (you probably have Aley’s stuff in your inventory right now), 100m-tall mechanical seahorses (a personal favorite of mine), Eupa’s dada, an SL-art newbie orientation sim (which got a re-up… it’s at LEA21 but currently being rebuilt), sound-based art by Artee, Tyrhel’s particle sculptures and performances, a retrospective of Caerleon artists set up by Pixels Sideways… And then when it was all done we had a 20-sim collaborative art jam called The Cube Project.

        Does that slake your thirst to trash-talk LEA’s artistic diversity? All of these projects (and more) arose out of artists applying for a sim, and then being voted on by the committee. We have so far had somewhere like 50 different large-scale projects, some by the same artist or group, but mostly unique. And that doesn’t count the current batch.

        In addition, for about a year, LEA has hosted a one month full-sim build curated by the UWA. So that’s another dozen or so artists getting a full sim for a month.

        We’ve moved SL art to the featured destination page on many occasions. We’ve had SL art as the message-of-the-day. We’ve inspired people to post 970 photos to the LEA flickr group:

        But Gina says we’re elitist scum, so therefore it’s all meaningless.

        I mean, if you want to say that these artists who we’ve supported aren’t making REAL art then go right ahead… You’re welcome to your own opinion. If you want to say that somehow giving 60 artists a chance to own a sim for a while is anti-art, then again… You’re welcome to your opinion, no matter how misguided.

        But if you want to say that we’re elitist because we banned SaveMe Oh, then you really need your head examined.

    During my 6 month tenure on the LEA Board I was amused and shocked by something that might amuse and shock most artists (so you have a right to know): topics such as ‘What is real art’? would hit the table fairly often. I felt like I was being transported back 100 years. There were members on that board who were actually debating the credibility of photography as an art medium…….(!)
    I cannot explain how surreal it was to see some members discussing the validity of certain art forms, and certain art-related phenomena, when they were far outside their purpose to do so.

    The elitist rumours are true. The arts community is NOT well served by this setup. (part of this is due to the lack of transparency. Some board members were highly opposed to ANY form of transparency to the public. The rumours abt a shadow organisation? True.)

    I dont know I’d call it a fascist regime at all, but it certianly was a clueless regime.

    And when the story comes out how certain ‘key members’ of the LEA literally blocked the voices of other members to prevent LEA saving a certain very large SL community event (that story will truly anger residents) a case of overly judgmental beauracrats will emerge for all to see.

    While the majority of the board definitely had more sophistication than that, it was the slim minority that were an embarassment and caused all of the problems. While two of that original trinity have left the board, one remains.

    Until the LEA reinvents itself, their spokesperson has zero credibility as far as Im concerned. And that zero credibility covers references to such topics such as the judgement of art, of artists, or any evaluations of the SL arts community. Until the agency is reborn with a properly transparent and inclusive mindset, and is staffed by real leaders, SaveMe and others will always have something very big to complain about.

    • OK, so here’s what you do:

      You form the SaveMe Endowment for the Arts.

      You buy 30 sims.

      You do whatever you want with them.

      You get Gina to organize it and promote it.

      Then you discover that you’re a bunch of elitist assholes, too, because you had to exclude someone at some point, or you had to ban someone who was being abusive.

      Or, alternately, you could talk to the LEA about your project. We’re remarkably open to discuss just about anything. And I’m not the only conduit, if you find me totally unbearable. Talk to any of the committee members. For instance, Rose is currently building lovely stuff on an LEA sim, without any contact with me.

      As to discussions of whether art is ‘worthy’ or whatever: Gina is confused. There are only so many resources, and thus only so many projects. Any organization has to make collective decisions, but not everyone involved agrees with Gina. So therefore clearly we’re all elitists for not instantly agreeing with her view.

      • Solo did you buy the lea sims, or are you a self appointed ( not chosen ) member of the Lea committee who has permission of Linden Lab to MANAGE the sims?

      • Rose: The LEA sims are generously given by Linden Lab. They offered the sims, we own them. The three LEA estates are each owned by a different committee member, through a contract with Linden Lab: Me, JayJay Zifanwe, and LaPiscean Liberty. JJ and I each ‘own’ 10, and LaP ‘owns’ 9. All committee members are also estate managers on all estates.

        The 10 that I ‘own’ are half of the land grant sims that we hand out for 6-month grants. JJ ‘owns’ the other half. LaP has the ‘core’ sims.

        The LEA regions aren’t managed by me, though I often end up doing the work. They’re managed by collective decision on policy and project, and then a subcommittee will typically manage sims as needed. So for instance, PatriciaAnne Daviau and I manage LEA5, because we’re the sandbox subcommittee, and that’s the sandbox sim. The sandbox project originated with the committee before I was even involved at the LEA.

        This system comes about so that there’s a diversity of ownership, to help prevent exactly the sort of problem you’re talking about, Rose.

        But clearly I’m a self-appointed czar who is there to just make sure your day is horrible. It couldn’t possibly be any other way, at all.

      • I’m confused Solo.

        Are you really the OWNER?
        Or is it a formality: that the sims are put in your name, to give you control over the owner tools and that the LEA committee in general is the owner of the sims with a contract with the lindens in which is described what the purpose of the sims are and how to manage them?

        And if you are the owner can you decide to do with the sims what you want, or are there restrictions.
        Like can you sell them, can you decided not to make them art sims.
        I presume you did not buy the sims, like I bought mine?

        Where can I find information about your owner-ship and what it means?

        Being an estate manager does not mean much. It is more a position which give you a little bit more control, like changing the environment settings and handle the ban list. The owner can always the delete this list.

        Do the other members of the committee agree with the description you just gave about you owning the sim?

        Waiting for you respond
        ty Rose

      • Next time when you are for a second estate manager you know what you have to do with the banlist, don’t you honey?

  5. I am not confused. I lived through the LEA board and the elitist attitude and political maneuvers personally. I saw the abuse of power. I witnessed the closemindedness by a minority of board members and the convos abt ‘what is real art’………I was there.

    I don’t need to buy 30 sims (you certainly didnt buy 30 sims, solo) and I myself have even managed sims donated by LL for other projects (unrelated to LEA) so I know of what I speak 100%. I even manage an LL sandbox now, as it happens, so I know the trials.

    Don’t belittle my expertise or experience. Ive seen LL projects well run by residents and those that are poorly run. When I arrived at LEA, management was a disaster. And its not about resources. There was no land shortage. LEA has more than enough land to do just abt anything. They literally were squandering the land when i arrived., Entire sims unused and underused. (I havent been there in months so I hope thats improved).

    I find it very very interesting that I was able to ‘work with’ SaveMe Oh (that lovely rebellious artist) in a positive manner and somehow, amazingly, drama and banning didnt arise. I wonder why? Could it be I know a thing or two abt leadership and positive communication that solo does not? Hmmm….

    Now there are 3 land ‘owners’ at LEA, it seems (as solo writes), which is something of an improvement. When I was there, the entire LEA land was ‘owned’ by exactly two: solo and a bitter, curmudgeony man named DanCoyote Antonelli (DC has since been removed from the organisation). So it is true that, back then, solo had a very ‘unique’ relationship with LL. Viale Linden could play favourites with solo, and he did.
    I would have always wished solo the best of luck in that arrangement if he hadnt turned out to be such a uncooperative and manipulative man.
    Now Viale is gone.
    Eventually they all go, don’t they?

    • Yes, I understand your explanation Ginette.
      I also have been granted 4 sims once for a project for a few months and I was made owner. But this Owner ship was just a formality, I did not really own them, I was allowed to use them for the project without paying tier.

      But Solo speaks so loud of being the owner, that I wonder if this might be a different construction or that Solo himself is a bit confused or misunderstood.

      I can’t imagine he is paying tier for example.

  6. People tend to think that everyone else’s job is easy but the easiest thing of all is to criticize.

    If the real issue is freedom of speech in art then I imagine a solution could be a Salon des Refusés at LEA where rejected works can be celebrated.

    A Salon des Refusés would establish a clearer sense of what we are actually talking about, and it would provide the space for art that is not art in the eyes of LEA to grow and flourish if indeed it exists and needs space. A Salon des Refusés would openly provide the transparency for all to see what exactly this policy is by giving face to what has been “rejected”. If that starts to attract more attention by looking more interesting than what LEA has curated as “normal” art then LEA will have to change their definition of art.

    Censorship is often a way of staying in power through forcing out whatever (or whoever) is threatening. *If* LEA feels threatened that their curating might be outdated then maybe looking that fear in the eyes could be a good challenge.

      • Okay. I thought you staged a protest on a regular LEA sim. Wouldn’t it be different if LEA gave a SIM especially for rejected work? Turning the situation around so that instead of it being about people and their art being banned and made invisible, it is rather about everyone being allowed to come and see who and what LEA rejected if they want to. Seems like it could be an interesting experiment no?

      • If I understand Ginette correctly you aren’t the only rejected art work. If the real aim is to promote art that pushes boundaries then this seems to me like a possible way to achieve that.

      • The Salon des Refuses idea is a good one, and would show more inclusiveness.
        To be very clear, I am not saying that the LEA was ever in the habit of ‘rejecting’ art for any elitist reasons (any form of screening for a curated show assumes rejection is just going to happen…can’t help that!)……I am talking a ‘bigger picture issue’…..

        1. Some board members would have a very specific definition of ‘what is art’ and this attitude (while its fine to debate) led to policy or implementation that was very elitist and non-inclusive. Also, very archaic. As I mentioned once, the fact the topic of ‘Is Photography Art?’ was ever on their table tells you something.

        2. Whenever i tried to suggest programs or initiatives that were more inclusive to more residents, my ideas were shot down….fast.
        This shooting down of ideas permeated the board but was really a hallmark of the then-trinity that sat there like old-timers and literally stopped voices from being heard. It’s not a question of no one agreeing with my ideas….I dont care about that…….its about a minority that shuts down the voices of the majority so the ideas dont even get presented properly…..and general closemindedness to new ideas or concepts.

        (yes, I have big examples, but here is a small one: I recall trying to propose the LEA start a sim that was like a town for small galleries (for those artists who didnt want to create a giant full-sim installation) and perhaps have monthly open gallery nights to promote the arts to the population better within this ‘gallery district’, as well as attract more artists, especially newer ones. That idea was shouted down faster than I could present it. See the issue?

        3. I KNOW the job isnt easy. Being responsible for the 30 sims should carry with it a level of accountability, though, and the LEA had zero transparency when I was there. Zero accountability. I wouldnt dream of criticizing the many people who do great work there, and who work so hard. The system is corrupt though, and needs to be cleansed, because there really is room for everyone. and until LEA reforms and makes that reform public, it’s still a corrupted agency.

  7. Sca: “*If* LEA feels threatened that their curating might be outdated then maybe looking that fear in the eyes could be a good challenge.”

    That’s funny. You want a sim? Send me an IM telling me what you’d need for this salon des réfusés and offer to curate it. I will ask the committee about it.

    Booga booga! The LEA is so evil and shortsighted!

    BTW: SaveMe: You want to know why this comment thread is about me instead of your collection of virtual rape porn? There are two reasons: 1) Everyone has made up their minds about whether you went over the line, and 2) I’m ten thousand times more interesting than you are.

    • Solo speak for yourself,do not include everyone!
      Don’t pretend the whole time you have a community of supporters behind you.

      Solo: I’m ten thousand times more interesting than you are;
      There is your little monster again!

      • Dear MR HP Darcy, for your information: Two Fish is not a LEA sim, it is a privately owned sim. And the toilet lady tries to keep it nice and clean. Since the main purpose of the sim is: showing art installations and entertainment for friendly fishy visitors, the toilet lady does not allow you to shit around.

      • Dear Rose, you’re getting more friendly by the hour. And that for ‘NOTHING’. Je begint nu toch echt te lijken op een naar boven gevallen viswijf, of in jouw geval, wat mij betreft, toiletjuffrouw. Ik begrijp dat je spontaan je verstand verloren hebt – geen wonder dat je mij van je eiland afgetrapt hebt. Voor jouw wetenschap: het is precies zoals ik SaveMe Oh zojuist via im meededeelde: Solo is dan wellicht 1000x interessanter dan SaveMe Oh, Ik ben een 1000x grotere pain in the ass dan SaveMe Oh.

    • Solo, if you really think that LEA would seriously consider providing a SIM in the true spirit of Salon des Refusés without control and restrictions, then I think it can be an interesting and worthwhile experiment for SL art.

      • Sca, you can’t know until you try. Especially if your only other source of information is SaveMe Oh. Send a pitch. I’m being serious. This goes for anyone.

        And… Rose! You *banned* someone?? Quelle horreur! For shame! Clearly you’re a megalomaniac bent on silencing all dissent!

        Or, you know. Just someone trying to protect art in Second Life.

      • Dear Solo, how about giving me some answers on the above questions please, about ownership of the LEA sims? ty)

      • …adding… The answer I gave is an explanation of how the sim ownership works at LEA. The committee decides what to do, we then scurry off and make the changes. You can go to any of the LEA sims and do ‘about land’ or ‘estate/region’ and see who owns what as a consequence.

        If you want a discourse on how land ownership works in SL, I can do that, too, but in a different forum.

      • ty Solo for your ‘answer’:

        I know how ownership of a sim works in sl.
        I have experienced it in two different ways:
        1: I’m the owner of a sim and pay a monthly tier.
        2: Linden donated us 4 sims for half a year to make
        a RL project, the ownership was more a technical formality,
        so we could use all the tools a sim has to offer and we paid no tier. The sims were granted to us to create our project, we were not allowed to rent it out for example.

        My questions were a reaction on the following:
        OK, so here’s what you do:
        You form the SaveMe Endowment for the Arts.
        You buy 30 sims.
        You do whatever you want with them.
        You get Gina to organize it and promote it.
        Then you discover that you’re a bunch of elitist assholes, too, because you had to exclude someone at some point, or you had to ban someone who was being abusive.

        You claim to be the OWNER of some of the LEA sims and I have the impression you also claim a certain overall power with that.
        So I try again with my questions:

        Are you really the OWNER? Did you buy the sims?
        Or is it a formality: the sims are put in your name, to give the committee control over the ownership tools and there is a contract with the lindens in which is described what the purpose of the sims are and how to manage them?

        If there is a contract with Linden, can we find it somewhere online to read?

        Is the Lea committee a democratic chosen committee and if the answer is No, why not and when will that change?

        Waiting for you respond
        ty Rose

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s