how to be an unprincipled wanker and pretend you have principles

I expect the Lindens to do it. I expect them to investigate, hear whatever sides are appropriate (those reporting the guy, the conversations, etc.), and come to a conclusion. Just as they do on everything else regarding griefing, ar'ing, and resident disputes.

coco

If I was LL I'd probably shy away from it as well, but then again they already prohibit various forms of content arbitrarily.

I'd actually much prefer a community response rather than an LL one.

I'm not countering it. I'm agreeing with it. It's called zoning, and done smartly, it can be a good thing.

'Round about 10 years ago, I lived in a town with no zoning. So when an assclown dropped a trailer right on our property line and rented it out to Mr. and Mrs. Redneck there was no recourse. And when Mr. Redneck put up a 50-foot CB antenna, there was no recourse. That disabused me of any notion that lack of zoning is a good thing.

Soon after, I moved to a town that had so much zoning that simply putting up a storge shed in your backyard was a legal nightmare.

One porridge was too hot; one was too cold. I'm now where it's just right.

Done well, zoning is a welcome addition to a place.

No one is trying to stop freedom of speech here, so far as I can tell. The message isn't even part of the debate. All some of us are asking for is some guidelines.




As opposed to what winners, save one, here?

When said arsehole goes on the verbal assault, he's pretty easy to sort from the innocent. Now, an innocent person would not go an any verbal assaults or just keep adding to the big pile o' spinny prim, would they? Most likely not. They would also most likely not try to overcome anything you have put up to block it from your view, as some arseholes have been known to do.

I would imagine their decision has already been passed, and they're letting the boxes stay. Hard to tell for certain, but I'm hedging my bets that this guy has been ARed numerous times already.




The community response, I would hope, would be to not purchase from this guy until he realizes his actions aren't profitable anymore and he quits.

Of course zoning is a good idea. You're preaching to an urban planning student, man.

But SL has no zoning. None. People have tried, and aside from getting a private island, it always fails. Zoning regulations have no teeth in SL.

And to be honest, I'm not sure I want them in a place of leisure. Ever read zoning ordinances? God, they're a pain in the ass.

Accepted It was only terrible for the couple of weeks. After that I was so used to it that it took me a while to figure out what was different when it finally went away. I'm comfortable with the fact that my freedom comes at the price of tolerating everyone else's, and I cherish it enough that I'm more than willing to pay that price. If LL allows themselves to be bullied into enforcing subjective tastes then we all lose.

The TOS are arbitrary, the definition of hate speech is arbitrary. Would "Impeach the Jews" be okay? I'm tempted to build a huge spinning block with a big penis on it over my land now to see what happens, but I'd rather not be confronted with that whenever I log in to be honest.

My point is that there are already restrictions on speech, and that therefore defending this land spammer on the basis that other forms of expression are allowed isn't accurate.

You missed my point, Chip. This would not BE an issue if LL stepped up and actually acted like The Owners. Of course, I realise that would just further erode the charade that we as customers actually own anything, but hey, they already shot that in the head with the new ToS and a variety of others mistakes in the recent past.

Very much my opinion as well. Also, nobody should sell to him either, and nobody should deal with anyone who does (since otherwise he would just be able to set up loads of alts).

You know, I just give up on this one. It would be a better world if the Impeach guy would just give a damn about the rest of the world and come to his senses.

I still say that having some guidelines would be a good thing, but yes, the question then is how.

And ultimately, Cory is right. Best approach is to be like the cockroach and simply outlast the moron. After all, that's the approach I have to take with the idiots who believe themselves to be my supervisors. Once again, Second Life becomes First Life. I only hope that he racks up big-time tier fees in the meantime.

I didn't miss your point. I just don't agree with it.

Its not so much the point that other forms of expression are allowed - its the point that other forms of expression are much more subjective than a glowing penis shouting KILL THE JEWS.

If this guy isn't advocating violence against a group of people, then he has a good chance of making an arguement of freedom of expression for almost anything else he puts up on his land. The people that will have to make that judgement - and every other judgement in every other scenario that stems from this - is LL, who have neither the manpower nor resources (nor inclination) to start babysitting between land owners because one person is aesthetically displeased with what their neighbors built on their own land.

This applies so often.

Well, you know, this is interesting. Like Chip, I'm pretty inclined just to live with whatever the next guy puts up. Generally, if you just wait around long enough, anything you didn't like goes away anyhow, and voila, you win! Or you can waste bunches of money constantly moving around just to escape some godawful build right in your face, without realizing that all the godawful builders are moving around, too.

Even in a beautiful zoned area, like Azure Islands, where I lhave a house, this is true. I've been with Gigas Group some 6 months now, and I've seen numbers of buildscome and go behind my property, and all around, and a couple of them were pretty awful. Patience usually rules the day.

But for me, this isn't at all a matter of, "Well, I don't like the looks of that." In fact, a piece of rock I owned for a while one day acquired the Impeach Bush signs right next to it - on little tiny squares of land selling for $500 each or something. It really didn't bother me in any sort of aesthetic sense, or any political sense, or anything. I've seen worse.

This isn't to say I loved it, just to say I'm real used to not letting things bother me. I would have just waited it out like I wait out anything else I'm not crazy about.

In fact, it would have NEVER bothered me, even if it had NEVER gone away, had I not discovered the modus operandi of this guy, and the fact that it is land extortion, pure and simple, and on a huge scale.

THAT is what bothers me. Not the aesthetic value, or lack of it, or whatever message or build he has in mind.

coco

Oh, certainly, it makes it harder for LL. It's not so clear-cut. And as I said, I can understand their decision on a rule-utility and practical basis.

It's just that there isn't anything in terms of principle that means that they can't - they're not intrinsically committed to free speech come what may. That's the argument that I'm objecting to. Unless someone is opposed to all of the other forms of censorship that already exist, objecting to removing these things because of "free speech" doesn't make sense as far as I'm concerned. All that says is that you think some things are okay for free speech and others aren't, which makes a mockery of the concept.

Oh I absolutely agree - one shouldn't say there's free speech in SL since examples A, B, and C aren't allowed. However, we (Americans) often tout our freedom of speech, yet we're not allowed to scream out FIRE in a movie theatre, nor any other number of things (usually hate-speechish). I imagine that the phrase "free speech" is being used in this common-sense context - as in "You're not actively hurting anyone else nor are you promoting harm towards others, so knock yourself out".

I don't think that that "common sense" interpretation should be termed free speech either, but that's probably more of a topic for discussion elsewhere.

Do they? I would question this. And to what standards. Should they do it when ever ten or more residents complain? You certinaly have drawn enough heat in these forums, should your voice be silenced because five or ten people think so? Should your voice be silenced when 90% of the community thinks so?

Where is that threshhold for when community interests take precedence over individula freedom? Should LL ban me for being a buddhist? What if I am offended by christians, should LL prohibit the building of churches on land we own? How about unsightly builds? who decides what makesa build unsightly? LL? What is the quantification of an unsightly build. LL has proven in a very famous case that they will on occaision punish someone for violating the TOS without that person actually Violating the TOS. You yoursef have voiced an opinion that that conduct by linden lbas semmed arbitrary and undeserved?

Should this new person be banned from the game for building what he wants on his land?

There are circustances even now where LL will take action against particular builds. They want to reduce headaches, not increase them.

It is countered very easily and by a simple truth that you seem to avoid at great pains -- you don't have any freedom here. You have precisely what LL is willing to grant you and only for as long as they're willing to grant it.

You may pretend otherwise if you like, however this does not change reality.

The next time you think you are free in SL, try doing something you know LL won't approve of and rediscover just for yourself that you are, indeed, not free at all here.

The thing that flummoxes me is that LL perpetuates this lie when supporting the truth would bring them much more, better, and faster.

It isn't YOUR land. Check the ToS and get real.

The bottom line is that, under all the hyperbole and posturing, we all KNOW this is the case and we all KNOW LL should be enforcing things and acting responsible and when they do not (as in this case), it really reminds us all just how far afield from professional they are, be it in the context of competing with the various virtual worlds that make up the 'simulation' niche or their bigger brothers, the content-provided games.

The only thing that annoys more than LL pretending this isn't the case are when people get all self-righteous and incensed that anyone could possibly demand a company be consistant in providing quality product and uphold a baseline of community standard from their position of authority.

The only thing such antics prove is that someone has let let virtual reality (realty, whatever) soften their brain.

It is not a matter of silencing a voice. Nobody wants to silence a voice. The voice can say "Impeach Bush" all he wants, and it's no skin off my teeth. He can come on the forums and put "Impeach Bush" in every signature of every posts he ever makes, and that will be his right of free speech. (Though "Kill the Jews" obviously wouldn't be allowed even with a general position of free speech.)

This guy is not just putting up these signs, apparently. He is putting up signs, seeing who he can get a rise out of, then retaliating. With more signs, bigger signs, I forget what all, in addition to abusive conversations with them.

Then he puts high prices on the lands he is selling. This situation has spiraled to a position he likes. It means he can increase his lands and signs, and make more and more money.

If he had wanted to write, "George Bush is God Reincarnated and We All Love Him Deeply," possibly 90% of the other people in SL would have objected to that one one basis or another. That, however, would be no excuse for "silencing" him. His poster should be allowed to stay.

But, as I said before, free speech in this case is only a red herring. That is my judgment, after listening to everything on the forums, seeing the places and the place next to my own, and reading what passed as an interview with him on Hamlet's blog.

It is not up to me, or you, or 90% of the other residents to decide what is to be done about this individual. It is up to the Lindens - who, admittedly, overlook just a whole lot.

But to overlook someone who is not only griefing and land extorting, but is actually CAUSING PLAYERS TO TIER DOWN by his actions, is not in the Lindens own best interest.

This is one case they need to investigate thoroughly, and if they find that land extortion and griefing are actually going on (which I believe they will), then they need to - not ban him - but force him to cease and desist from land extorting and griefing of his neighbors.

coco

P.S. Does everybody see my signature as too big and blurry, like I see it here on AOL? (My cable isn't working right.) It's supposed to look like it does when I access it from Mozilla - smaller, more low-key, and with no blurry-looking letters.

As far as I'm concerned, as long as the signs are purely on his land, then more power to him.

It's not the first time political signs have been seen in SL, and it won't be the last. Telling folks what they can build on their land is not a good road to start down, as long as it's not subject matter that would violate Community Standards or the ToS. And he can price the land however he wants. No one is forced to buy them.


Plus, I agree with what the signs say.

Well, they aren't, are they? The rotating signs are encroaching.

I agree with what the signs say, too, but that doesn't mean that spamming SL with them should be accepted.

Spam is an evil that must not be tolerated, no matter what form it arrives in.

Well fine. looking at this from a corporate stand point LL has neither the manpower nor the inclination to resolve any conflicts that fall short of actual violations of the current tos. To develop such a system that would be equitable and acceptble to the customer base would be cost prohibitive. Having anaylzed the issue, LL has decided that not taking a position on this issues is more economically feasible in both the short term and in the long run. In the short term they have establsihed an operating policy that is clear and will keep the from getting involved with every possible small dispute that puts a few forums user's panties in a bunch, and two, in the lo g run they cans be the sort of compnay who is known for zealously protecting the privcay rights of its consumers within the frame work of the world.

Finally, as I have stated before in this forum. LL does not want to be the policing force in SL. They want to innovate as a coroprate mission not administer.