What happens when you decline no copy inventory?

Sounds like a pretty obvious question, doesn't it? I thought so too when Ellie Edo asked it earlier. And I thought I knew the answer too!

This is languishing over in Technical Issues and I really don't think it's going to get the attention it deserves there. So I'm reposting it here, frankly quite amazed Ellie didn't make more of it!


From /111/4c/73503/1.html#post763395



Is that what you thought happened? Is it what you would expect? "If they reject it, it will be in their trash".

Food for thought, huh? As I replied in the original thread:

So. If someone sends you an object (very possibly for a refund) and you're set to busy, and therefore automatically refusing inventory, its not actually refused at all - its trashed without notification. Leaving the sender with nothing and the receiver blissfully unaware they now have the no copy item, I imagine.

And if someone sends a dubious unsolicited object to a bunch of people and they sensibly refuse it, it actually sits right there in their trash waiting for them to go 'duh.. whats this?' and rez it a month later.

I wonder how many people are aware of that? I wasn't. Silly me, I thought it just never left the original inventory. And I never dreamed that 'decline' was actually short for "accept and automatically trash".

Weirdness. It seems more logical to give the item back to whoever sent it.
This is one more reason why we should have a lot more folders... I posted about it in feature suggestions once, maybe I can dig up the link later.

I'm glad it's not just me who didn't know. See, Eggy has not known this since beta!

Though I've just been told by another oldbie who shall remain nameless that she's known this forever and just shrugged it off. So maybe I'm making more of it than it is. I was kinda gobsmacked is all. Just not what I expected at all and I don't really see how it makes sense.

I thought it was well known as well, and it *seems* logical to me. Then again I'm the type of person who accepts a gift and would throw it away when the giver is not looking anyway .

Well I was thinking more from my original example of someone who sends you something unsolicited. I mean, it rilly doesn't affect me - I don't sell noffin. But when I did, I know for a fact that people would just send stuff back unsolicited with maybe an "I want a refund" or "it doesnt work" or "i want it in blue" IM. Just the same kind of things they'd say without sending the item back first.

And I know I was often on busy. And I know that I would often time out/crash, get logged out, and lose the IM's altogether. And I wasn't one for checking trash. If I trashed it, its because I didnt want it. I just didn't expect stuff to be routed there automatically.

And now I'm wondering just how many people sent their bought, no copy stuff back to me and I had zero idea. I'd have hoped they'd have said something later, I guess

I've been aware of it for quite a while now, and just chalked it up to LL's sometimes quirky way of implementing things. Guess it just makes sense bandwidth-wise to just put it in the trash than to implement a 'proper' reject method.

- Newfie

Seems to me it should be returned to the sender.

Indeed.

Doesn't this have implications for griefing as well? During the last two grid attacks we were warned about accepting unsolicited objects. I wonder how many people have griefer balls just waiting in their inventory?

You would *assume* that LL would be smart enough to scour them off the server, but just because you do a search and delete for certain files doesn't really mean you have done due diligence. They should have told us all to empty our trash at the least.

I won't get specific because it makes no sense to give griefers good ideas, but this "feature" is an ideal leg-up for creative griefing.

Perhaps we are lucky that SL griefers (so far) have proven to be mostly dullards and fools.

Actually, this does happen, or at least it seems like it is.

As a fishing fan I spend hours fishing and all of the catches I get are no copy and not necessarily worth keeping. If I decline an object, it does not appear in my trash. I get a message saying that *You have rejected (insert object name) from (insert creator name)* I have no idea if it gets trashed in the owner's inventory or just turns into air.

Also, when IMing people from work via e-mail to IM, I usually end up with my SL offline IM capacity overflowing, then when I actually get an object offered (while offline), it doesn't even send me a message that I received anything, or goes into my trash or inventory. It simply makes it like there never was an offer in the first place. (I checked it by trying to send something to myself and when I logged in there was no record of the item being given, or the item itself anywhere to be found.)

So I guess we will not always get the items directly to our own trash.

P.S. Hope you get my meaning, English is not the easiest of languages (or the most complicated for that matter).

Is this scenario possible?

Buyer: I gave you L$100, can you send me the Widget?

Seller: Sure! (sends widget)

Buyer: (rejects widget, which goes to his trashcan) I accidentally Rejected it. Can you resend?

Seller: Sure! (resends widget)

Buyer: Thanks! (Accepts widget, then drags other widget out of Trash into Objects folder. Walks away chortling over how he scammed two Widgets for the price of one.)

Yes it is possible

Well, it seems to me that if the giver is told that it's rejected, the it should be rejected, not kept but put into another folder. That's completely ridiculous.

The inventory exchange system really needs an overhaul. llGiveInventory - or any inventory passes, for that matter - should work more like the currency system, when its almost impossible for a failure to occur. Ever notice that money never just "disappears"?

Inventory sure as hell does when passed! How about an event in LSL for llGiveInventory, and by the same mechanism, a return system for any inventory passes that fail? Having silent failures in inventory passes - either in LSL or because of a server or whatever - is unacceptable. Rejecting a no copy offer to trash is just downright silly.

Good catch Kris!

-Flip

I swear to god... it gets dumped into my inventory!! I log on and the size is doubled!! and you people pass some sick sick stuff let me tell you!

Agreed - if this is the way it's working currently it's just nuts!

Feature proposal anyone? lol

Damn, I should scour my trash more thoroughly before emptying it. Because I've been the buyer there... except for the business of pulling the duplicate out of my trash.

@Kris: still reading the rest of this thread but yes I was aware of this.. noticed several times when I "refused" inventory and found it there anyway.. some "gifts" NOT APPRECIATED ugh..

I had not thought through the seller-buyer implications though til now.. good call and thanks for raising attention level on it!

* yay! finally got to reply to a Kris post.. gives self high five *
* did you change your logo again?! *

I was taken aback by Kelly's response too Kris. If this is truely how it works, they flubbed and this needs to be fixed! Too easy to exploit.

Reading this thread made my eyes pop out (metaphorically). This sounds just like a wonderful vector for a virus infection. Has anyone done any experiments on whether the owner data is changed during the 'transfer' as this could have an effect for vulnerabilities.

It won't take long before some <insert foreign nationality> businessman's poor widow uses one of these...

Object "My late husband has L$5 million, but cannot get it out of Jessie, but if you transfer L$500 to bribe the guards, half will be yours" has asked for permission to empty your account.

Or how about an object script that rezzes self-replicating avatar attachments - let's use the colloquial term 'crabs' for sake of argument - that are too numerous to delete.

And once a script is running, it could then scan for avs in range and offer to infect them.

Actually, being an academic it would be an interesting experiment to make a flu virus that reproduces that way and see how quickly it spreads. Mathematicians get great kudos for modeling infections in populations. We even have the SL equivalent of the jumbo jet, in teleports and flying.

So, would SLers and the Lindens be interested in a voluntary plague? Controlled of course, with suitable measures for permissions/imunities. for example, people willing to catch a disease would need to be wearing a particular prim and to confirm an infection. Those that did not sign up for the simulation would be unaffected. The flu would self-destruct after 48 hours. Any thoughts?

It took me awhile to find this out too. Even an additional message saying "Well, now that you've declined this... you can find it in your TRASH if you ever wanna dig it up, avatar!" might be kewl.

Doctor, scripts dont run inside the inventory. People would have to dig it out of the trash and voluntarily rez it.

After reading this thread it seems more than just a loophole, it's like loopholapalooza or something.

Many many things could be done with this info if it isn't patched soon.
What bothers me more is the fact that it seems to have been around for a long time, and no one seems to care much at LL.

There are so many things we have to "trust the lindens" on, but this kind of stuff really makes it hard.

No-one at LL thought this was a bad thing?

???

my faith in the Linden gods is fading fast...

I guess I didn't explore Kelly's answer to my hotline question further because I thought everybody but me already knew the answer. How wrong I was.

What I have to do now is convince the seller who rejected the object I returned for a refund that he has it, not me. I think he thinks I'm lying. He wants me to send it again.

I'll point him to the forum, I think.

How many other times has a buyer who tried to return an object been mistrusted by the seller due to this cause, I wonder ?

Wow, learn something new every day! That's not at all what I'd have expected to happen. It seems more logical for the item to stay in the givers inventory since they failed to give it.

We desperately need logging of inventory drops. I sometimes get a dozen offline inventory drops a day and unless each sender sent it in a folder with a name like "something-or-other from so and so" I won't have a clue what they sent or where it ended up.

There should be another tab in account history that shows what inventory drops you received each day, with the item name, type, and name of the sender.

Or, we should have a special folder in our inventories where things we're given go automatically until we file them somewhere else. There could be a folder called "inventory drops" and whenever someone sends you something it ends up in a subfolder that has the senders name and the date and time it was received.

I'd love to have all the hours back I've spent searching through my inventory and IM'ing people trying to clear up issues constantly caused by this in the last two years.

sort by date, chip
move everything in your object folder to a different one and the object folder will always have your newest arrivals only.