Talented designer permanently banned over extremely shaky charges...

That's reasonable.

What I object to is the notion that someone who makes things for sale somehow "contributes more" and should be dealt with more leniently than someone who does not.

So explain, how is LL supposed to ban anybody at all, then? Yes, the way you do things, you all 3 will get banned.

Unless LL could magically determine who's using the computer and who is the one that should be banned, they're going to ban by the one way they can identify you: by the card number. It's certainly not perfect, but it's all they have to work with.

/agree

Not unfair? Was not her punishment much greater than someone who had contributed nothing and thus owned nothing? To have the work of a summer taken from her? I would definitely question the fairness of that.

But different people define fairness differently. What I consider unfair, you might consider extremely fair.

But you need to consider the response of those that do think it's unfair, irrespective of your own specific judgement. If there is any real percentage that consider it unfair, their faith in the stability and security of their assets in Second Life will have been reduced. Perhaps just a smidgen, perhaps a great deal, but none the less, I guarantee you it has been reduced. Straws on the camels back.

And even if fair, consider the effect of laws that impose forfeiture of all assets in Second Life. Investment of capital is a necessary requirement for a robust economy. Who is going to want to invest much if it can all be lost?

The straws add up in the long run, it is Second Life and Linden Labs that will be hurt. No economy will grow if there is no confidence in the future value of property.

I don't usually come to the forums, but kin has been a friend of mine since I first joined SL. While it is not possible for me to adequately describe how much this upsets me on so many levels, that something like this was aloud to not just happen, but go on unchanged, I feel it necessary to voice how incredulous it is.

You do the crime, you do the time, no matter what you have contributed. You are suggesting that someone with a business or assets in SL should somehow be treated differently, and that I can not agree to. I have 30 sims in SL, so I do understand the gravity of the situation.

If someone has been banned unfairly, then that's another matter entirely, and by it's very defintion, it's wrong.

in either case, there is no reason for a person to be treated differently based on what they do or don't have in SL, or what they have or haven't contributed to SL.

LL is quite up-front about this. From the Terms of Service



As always, people who wish to start a serious business should do their homework before investing large sums of time/money/spirit.

Again. Since they gave up Credit Card registration as a necessary mean to be in the game, it's senseless and unfair by them to use it as a mean to identify just a PORTION of the population, while the other portion can do whatever they want without undergoing any definitive punishment.

Agreed Hiro. Unfortuantely it seems to not be the case in Second Lag..I mean Life.

Are you assuming this decision was made on credit card info? As far as I know, it's just "account info." I do know of a situation where someone with a banned account tried to log in from another person's computer. That resulted in the second person being banned until they could provide proof that they were different people. No credit card was involved.

LL really needs to get its act together in this area. This gal is looking at real money lost, and it amazes me (ok perhaps not) that they discover this lil tidbit, not as shes entered SL, played and created for months, but just as shes about to cash out.

The $L and her assets need to be held for her, until she can either in some way prove she is not her brother, and open up her own pay pal account or credit card. Its as simple as that, its not rocket science. Hopefully that is what is going on and they are not just letting her sit there wondering wtf?? is going on.

Am so hoping against my last hope that LL is doing everything in its power to resolve this situation for her.

The key term here has been highlighted.

LL gets to decide what "affiliated with" means. If they decide that "affiliated with" means you belong to the same group or are on the friends list of a deliquient account...will you still support this? That definition is just as fair as the one they are using now.

Hardware bans were supposed to make all this not happen. If I am stupid enough to let someone else use my computer, and they get banned and me with them..that was MY fault. I let them on my computer. But just living in the same address or sharing a family CC is not something I can control. In fact, its less under my control than who you make friends with in world. Arguably banning anyone who is friends with a banned account is MORE fair than banning people who live in the same house. As it is said...we get to pick our friends, we don't get to pick our family.

I find those who wish to sweep this under the rug or dismiss it with legal quotes while saying "you must have deserved it then" to have their head in the sand. I find it offensive in point of fact. The people who deserve to be banned are running around SL every day harrassing people and nothing happens. Those who do not deserve it get taken out as "acceptabel collateral damage" and some people think that is okay. Well, I don't.

And LL needs to stop fucking lying to their customers and potential customers about the opportunities available in SL because while the potential is there, they do nothing to support businesses. It's unethical and wrong to promote business here.

Really, it doesn't matter what you think. Or what I think. Or anyone else except for the people who run the company.

They make their decision on how to run the company. That is their right.

We decide whether to play by their rules or go somewhere else. That is our right.



I'm saying nothing of the sort.

I am saying that businesspeople really must do their homework and understand the legal environment in which they hope to set up shop. If the terms are not agreeable, then by all means, don't agree.

I understand that instabilities of SL. Phil may wake up tomorrow and decide to call an end to it all right now and pull the plug on the whole thing. Or I could be banned for something unjustly. Or any number of other things might happen that would cause me to lose what I had put into this place. That's why I don't put much in here and don't rely on it as a major source of income.

Maybe I just don't get where the lie is?

Chamber of Commerce in my town markets this city as a great place to do business. That doesn't mean they have to do anything to actually support those that locate here.

So what do we have the option not to allow unverified people for, then? If you have it enabled, things should work for you as they did before the registration was opened: if you ban somebody, you have a reasonable guarantee they're not going to come back under another name. For that to work at all, LL must not allow people with banned card numbers to come back.

Even without that, it has an important function: Now people start with L$0. This means that some forms of griefing require begging for funds or identifying yourself, making yourself subject to an effective ban. My own suggestion was limiting push and similar effects to verified people, which would mean that to grief effectively you'd need to expose yourself. Maybe we'll get that some day.

Laffin here, i am the only girl in my family, and i thank the good lord that i have not been held accountable for the actions of my brothers in their youth, omg id be under a jail..lol

There are federal and state laws that are enforceable to support businesses in real life. A chamber of commerce prints a magazine or brochure to promote businesses. People can trademark their logos and business names and patent their products. They pay taxes to support their local governments and receive protection in the form of police protection, the right to refuse service to anyone, a court of law to oversee corporate matters, guarantee of their rights, even small business loans. LL does none of this, but they promote SL as a place to make money.

Sans, I've read and re-read, but I don't understand what you're trying to say? What state or federal laws are you talking about that are being violated here, if that's what you mean?

That's backwards. Lots and lots of people share their computer, and there's nothing strange about it. We're talking about a machine often costing more than $1000 after all.

Besides, any hardware ban is trivial to work around. Presumably, it's done by checking serial numbers, MAC addresses, etc. I have here a pile of old network cards in a box. Not to mention that it's possible to come up with a program that gives SL a different hardware hash every time it starts up.


Why? When I wanted an account, I just went to my bank, presented my documentation, and in about 15 minutes had an account, with no minimum balance. Got my card next week. It's very easy, and a lot cheaper than having your own computer.

AFAIK, these days you can pay with Paypal, so even if you can't get a credit card you can get a debit card, and use Paypal with it.

Ahhh..

So let me clarify what you just said Lorelei..
Someone you know was banned and had it over turned by proving they were who they said, and not the other party.

So technically this person could do the same thing?

That's what I'm thinking. I could be wrong. Heaven knows I have been before

Also I would like to ask clarfication.. It was when the person went to use a method of payment that was associated with the banned account, than the ip address was checked. Am I incorrect on this?

All I'm saying is Linden Lab needs to stop promoting their platform as a place to make money until they are willing to provide some protection and support to the content creators and businesses in SL. People have come to depend on the money they make here. People join with the express plan of making money here. Then things like Kin's situation happen and LL does not have terms of service or policies to protect them or help them, or even an effective appeals process or customer service to straighten things out.

Probably a federal law was broken in there somewhere--fraud if nothing else, because the investment of Kin's time is at play here and the 'fake money' she earned cannot be exchanged for the rl money she thought she was making. Content providers provide what keeps many of us here in SL. Unless LL is willing to support content providers, they will leave, as will their customers, leaving SL where? An empty platform with nothing to offer other than some chatting and building of things that will be given away freely?

Right. Sorta.

Oh heck. Let's drop pretense.

It was my stepdaughter. She was 18 and wanted to be with teen friends on the teen grid. She lives at her mom's house and was busted for this.

She came to our place and tried to log in.

My husband tried to get into his account and was locked out. Called SL and had it taken care of in minutes.

Sheesh, I'm hesitant to put the details out there because I don't want the long arm of the law to reach out for us once more, but that makes it easier to understand.