Should the "Impeach Bush" Guy's freedom of expression be surpressed/censored?

I wanted Ulrika to make this poll but she refused. Do you think LL should suppress Lazarus Divine's freedom of expression? *

I personally believe the community can and should only petition Lazarus to stop what he's doing. It's not in the spirit of an open community to have him censored. It sets a bad precedent. Were that power to somehow fall in the wrong hands, everyone would face the wrath of aesthetic facists who want to end this era of bleeding eyes.

* I think of it more like an intelligence test actually.

It's no 'freedom of expression', it's extortion, nothing else.

If he was making a point, he wouldn't have the land for sale.

Lewis

Your lack of a pie-like third option is disturbing.

I have an irresistable urge to vote in a completely contrary fashion.

That's because it's a skewed poll that nobody can take seriously.

How about:

a) I have no problem with the signs.

b) The signs should be removed immediately.

c) I don't care either way.

Lewis

Tell ya what, I just don't see that much bias in the poll that is in the New World Notes forum:

I want them all removed 222 56.49%

Let them stay, it's harmless free speech 100 25.45%

Let them stay but limit the size, number, location, etc. 57 14.50%

No opinion

Is there someone who thinks they can make a less biased poll than this?

coco

Edited To Make Suzanne Feel Better

No, you cannot make a poll about an individual person.

Quite possibly, since the important point isn't what people would want to see, but how they would like that to be achieved.

I don't think there's many people who think the Bush signs are a great improvement to SL and who would prefer that they remain. Whether a removal is to take place (a) through simple LL fiat (b) through a carefully-crafted policy banning irritating speech but not legitimate protest - and I'd like to see how that would be worded (c) through voluntary removal (d) and so on, that's the question, that's the bit that's really significant.

Freedom of expression isn't something that you can just toss out the window as soon as it isn't convenient. Furthermore, half the threads in this idiotic forum have been about the Impeach Bush guy for the last two freakin' weeks. It was hard to read General before, but now? It's like a minefield of dumb. Just ignore the damn signs and don't buy the land.

There is something really, really gaudy outside the front window of my virtual house. I don't particularly care for it, but I also don't spend any time whining about it. I've never talked to the owner either. It's their land, who am I to tell them what to build? The way I see it, if I want to own the entire view and never see anything that will get me all flustered, I can bite the bullet and get a private island. Or move to a planned community on a private island or elsewhere.

Seriously, I wish people would shut the hell up about this guy and his dumb old signs.

Who are you to take away all of these peoples freedom of speech on the forums. You got an answer for that one?

your signature image's width exceeding the default text cell size by about 15 pixels is disturbing

That would be a DIFFERENT poll, Oridinal. One about HOW the Bush signs should be removed.

coco

people with IQ's greater than 140 realize that the underlying question is not what the mob wants but whether an individuals right to build something should be subject to the mobs desires, and to what extent.

No. The issue is extortion and griefing.

coco

if a neighbour puts a coconut koala house on their plot, can i claim it is extortion?

IQ has nothing to do with it.

It's got nothing to do with 'censorship', 'build quality' or 'aesthetic value'.

It's whether someone should be allowed to extort money from others by damaging their gameplay experience if they don't pay up.

Lewis

Only if it's right in front of their view, and they set their land for sale for L$300,000 as the only way to remove it.

But Coco's properties are pleasant and unobtrusive, and a great example of the sort of thing that SL needs.

Big blue signs conveying real life political messages as a disguise for extortion are not.

Lewis

One person's pleasant and unobtrusive is another person's political statement or advertisement for their club or business.

Who makes these aesthetic calls? You? LL? Who hires the extra staff necessary to make these calls? Who pays for the extra staff through an increase in tier charges?

Also - and this is my favorite link lately - here's the definition of extortion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion

If you built an ugly build and actually enjoyed it then great. I've got no problem with that SL is for everyone to use there own imagination. If you take that same build and put it onto several hundred pieces of land all over SL and all you get is griefing IM's all day then great I've got no problem with that. If you suddenly realize that people will pay you huge amounts of money just to take down your ugly build so that they don't have to look at it anymore and you decide to extort this practice then HELL YES I'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH IT

Its not extortion.



There is no harm being done to you, your reputation, or your property. There is no guarantee that your land value will not drop overnight due to a neighbor's build - devaluing land is not the same as harming it.


For the love of god, people, make up a word to describe what he's doing, but don't hijack a perfectly good existing word to suit your purposes.

Of course everyone's idea of 'pleasant' is different but it's all down to how you handle things.

I have a huge nightclub near me that had a loudspeaker system that would broadcast for several hundred meters radius anything the club owner/staff said. It was not something I wanted to hear every time I was at home, especially as I have my own club (not a rival club but I don't want their advertising on my property, for obvious reasons).

I contacted the club owner, who said he'd deal with it... a few hours later he came to my property to see whether I could still hear it, which I could, he went back and tweaked it a bit more and I no longer could hear their broadcasts.

Problem solved, the way I would expect it to be.


The real problem is thus.

If the guy was putting up the signs and leaving them everywhere, that's one thing.

The fact they are for sale, for extortionate rates, means that he is wanting people to buy them to get their view back. If he wasn't giving people that option, then he's making a statement. But he isn't, he's wanting people to pay ridiculous amounts of money to him to remove them, rather than, as I did with the loudspeaker system, dealing with the problem of griefing in a professional manner.

Lewis

If it wasn't doing any harm to anyone then what the hell is all the fuss about?

Please, tell us. What harm is he doing to you?

As he owns the land, its entirely up to him what price he wants to sell it for. Check the Land for Sale listings sometime - you'll find tons of places/builds listed for ridiculously high amounts, sometimes up to $L9,999,999. Are they also falling under your definition of extortion? If so, what's the cutoff between wanting to make an honest profit and this so-called extortion? 30% of the going market rate? Who is going to enforce this and make the judgement calls? What would your reaction be if you were selling your land for what you believed to be a fair price, but your neighbor disagreed and ARed you on these same guidelines you're outlining?