Promote Gun Control

Hehe - I just realized that too, Nolan No worries - when it comes to push, we're in complete agreement - and yes - a button or slider to prevent *push* - would be awesome.

No examples neccesary - Linden has made it crystal clear that push-retaliation is unacceptable.

Sorry I misunderstood

*gets rolled up newspaper*



<3

Mommy make it stop!

Actually, I for one appreciate Travis mentioning that proposal. I'll go see take a look at it and see if I have any votes to use.

I suspect there are others in the same boat, who dont watch the proposals from day to day, dont have votes to use if they did, etc. I think its unfair for you to characterize everyone who hasnt voted for it in this way.

Nah, I clouded the issue, by mentioning TP home.

Going to see that proposal now!

First, these are not my suggestions, just restating what I understand otehrs to be saying.

And apparently a poor job, since I dont believe anyone is calling for eliminating security scripts -- only to make two very specific aspects of the ones in use a bannable offense.

I begin to see the frustration of having what you think are clear and simple statements misunderstood. From my reading of all this, no one is calling for removing functiosn from the language, or removing a class of script from distribution (not practical in any event); just the mis-use, as described by a policy decision, listed as a bannable offense.

Admittedly, from all accounts, enforcement efforts have been uneven, and not necessarily effective. But I dont think that means we should give up on the idea or the process. I know I haen't; I hope you haven't either.

I just took a quick look at prop 244 - hoping for some encouragement that the number of votes have gone up.

Not only has no one additional voted for it, someone actually took their votes away from the proposal in the last couple hours.

The proposal now stands at 31 votes, with 6 unique Avatars voting. This proposal was created on April 18th - so its been out there for quite a while.

Jim - I appreciate your encouragement on the proposal. I assume you just didn't have enough votes to add to this one

Edit: I just refreshed. Back up to 7 again

Sorry .. didn't mean to misquote you when I snipped down to the point I wanted to address. And I appreciate you adding emphasis to your restatement to help me see what you were saying. Thanks.

Travis, I understand where you are coming from with event disruption and I could see how having a security script would be a definate value to get rid of a griefer who is hell bent on disrupting your event. The problem is that these scripts are being used all over the place and it's getting very difficult to merely fly around the SL world without getting tossed into relog land. That's where people's complaints come in. I don't think anyone here is saying that there should be no defense for an griefer trying to ruin an event. I fully support better land access tools and I fully support the Lindens getting tougher with their handling of abuse reports (but I think Satan will have snot icicles growing out of his nostrils before I see them get tougher with anyone).

Kris, you seem to have some serious issues with anything that may effect the security of your land. I'm not sure what horrors you have experienced with intruders, but they appear to have been numerous and traumatic. Defending your land with push guns has come up and the Lindens have said that it is not an acceptable solution (and have made examples). Either way, I still fully support the idea of being able to stop the ability of others to push me (or teleport me home for that matter).

I also support better land access tool and LL getting tougher with people who grief. By grief I mean those who abuse other players intentionally (i.e. someone coming to your ruin your event or cause trouble) and those who abuse others casually (with these home security scripts). The benefit of these scripts does NOT outweigh the problems they cause.

Vote for Prop 389!!!

Spoken like a true American. Do you want to ban stem cell research too, Prokofy? Should we make sure that the government has backdoor access to encryption schemes so those can't be used as a weapon? Should I not have the right to speak freely because that can be used to incite riots and revolution?

I think we should consider Prokofy as a weapon, that way we can better control Prokofy.

I certainly haven't given up hope, but given that repeated RL death threats against a player results in a 3 day suspension, I don't have a lot of faith that there would be any teeth to the TOS enforcement - and honestly, I think banning is way too strong for this "offense". That is why I say it is far more important to give players tools to combat this themselves than it is to just punish their use.

At least theres someone out there thinking like I am - which is a relief.. thanks for posting that too! Shows that there is a legitimate problem out there that needs to be addressed.

The real headache is that there are definate problems that need to be brought to light and addressed.. REAL problems exist, otherwise there'd be no need for these scripts in the first place.

Unfortunately due to the way these threads run their course, someone posting why they use them runs the risk of the jackals decending on them.... so I don't blame them for not posting...

So the issue stays hidden... the *REAL* issue -- not that the scripts exist, thats just a symptom -- the issue of WHY they exist..

hehe at least you get it dude So theres hope yet

Siggy.

LL does it's darndest to make us come up with solutions - I rather expect that's why these script tool swere handed to us bevore expanded land tools.
Unfortunately, both the land tools and the script tools are woefully inadequate, though the script tools CAN be pretty darn useful IF you're smart and careful about it. Which is appearantly too much to ask for from many.
I would far prefer expanded land tools over any other solution. I simply don't hold any hope of getting them in and near-future timeframe. In the mean time, I want people to use what tools we do have responsibly. It's putting a bandaid on the seive, but untill LL focuses on land security tools, it's all we have.

Now, to let myself dream a bit:
Land tools should include: per-parcel toggling of llPushObject - like "local scripts only", only specific to applying force to physical objects - when checked, only the land owner's (see below) llPushObject calls will work.
Up to 40 meters (maybe more?) of controlled access area - definable per plot, and as floor and ceiling (ground to highest build height). This is in addition to the ground-level access control, and seperately configurable.
Banlists not only bounce avatars off the edge of the plot, but objects owned by the banned and thier chat as well.
More finely grained groups - Sub-groups that can be assigned any of a number of access rights to land tools, from terraforming to building to scripts to pushing objects to selling land. This would being able to form groups that are oligarchies or even despotisms - the founder would never be able to be removed unwilingly, and would maintain overall control. Center of power as well as responsibility.
I'd like to see improved script access to the land tools. Read and write the ban and access lists, read and write access modes, and (given proper permissions) return objects. I'd perfer to retain llTeleportAgentHome and llEjectFromLand. I still belive they have thier uses and can be used responsibly.

Things that need fixing: Agents that don't have a home set should be sent to some default place. There are still agents that can resist a teleport home becasue they don't have one.
The warning lines need to be visible from adjoining sims, and there shouldn't be a hand-off if you're av would end up inside a controlled access area you're not allowed to be in.

Sorry about the rambling. There's probably more on my personal list of wants for this, but the brain's a little jumbled at the moment.

Once again, you're all getting contorted about PushObject instead of looking at people and policies, which are at the root of the issue, not the technical script.

In the WA this evening, Philip materialized, and wouldn't you know it, bouncer scripts was on the agenda. Several players starting complaining to him about not only the bouncing of avs but the trapping of avs or blocking of avs as griefing.

Here's what he said about bounce scripts, and why they couldn't just get rid of them:

"Philip Linden: challenge is that if we change force calls... we could break stuff we can't imagine."

"but wait could you not ban a script without actualing trying to remove it?"

"Philip Linden: I mean that if we alter the benavior of the pushObject calls...
Philip Linden: we might break behaviors that people like."

When it was explained that what could be done was just have a Linden write a memo that henceforth bouncescripts would cause the player to be banned if he used them without warning and bounced av homes -- a policy, not a programming job -- he said "that is something to think about."

Later in an IM he said he would take a look at it.

We need them to do more than take a look, we need them to stop it, and stop it not by fussing with programming but by showing a display of will to ban people who use them without warning, and for far distances.

and it is so telling to me that when asked about how to ban bounce scripts, the answer the CEO gave wasn't how to ban PEOPLE or how to make a banning, POLICY but the horror of "taking out PushObject" which would then hurt war games, a totally techno-centric approach.

Honestly, they need a paradigm shift.

Actually I think you're wrong... the root of the issue is what has caused people to rely on these things...



It would hurt a lot more than just war games - but I wouldn't expect your close-mindedness to accept that despite it being explained multiple times... not only avatars bouncers and bullets use this call.. things such as trampolines, superjumpers, the list goes on and on... It's just easier to be willfully ignorant I guess.

Honestly I think your foaming mouth rush for policy changes is every bit as disturbing as the 'no push function' crowd... I don't think either camp is trying to even look at the real issue.

S'okay though - just push ahead with mindless sensationalism -- if having the CEO of the company talk to you about your concerns wasn't good enough , I'm pretty sure NOTHING is going to satisfy you.

Siggy.

You'd prefer them removing commands that have been in since Beta and breaking tons of scripts?

You'd prefer to remove useful commands that developers use to make cool stuff because some people abuse it?

Which paradigm are you referring to?
- Linden Lab talking to its customers about a serious issue rather than jsut making a decisions themselves alone?
- Linden Lab taking a problem so seriously that the CEO is personally involved?
- Linden Lab consistantly suspending and taking action against people who use PushObject against the TOS?

I assert that there is no paradigm to change.

IN YOUR OPINION.

In mine, the benefits VASTLY outweighs the problems. And I, like many others, will continue to use any means at our disposal to maintain a little privacy in SL. If you nerf the functions, there are other functions. If you allow avies to decide whether or not to be pushed, there are other ways. People *will* get round it.

Sure, you think you're addressing *your* problem of getting bumped around (you're not: see further down). But if you were, you don't address *my* problem of wanting to be left the fuck alone.

I note that the proposal to make yourself 'invisible to radar' has over 800 votes, which means that it's popular. So I know I'm not the only one who'd like to be left alone.

You have your problems, I have mine. Your 'solution' (if it were right) just makes my problem worse. But like I said, do what the fuck you please, because we can *always* get round it somehow or other.

If this sort of misinformed half assed botch of a proposal is what people are going to vote for instead of putting their brains in gear and coming up with a decent solution, then fine - we'll just work round it. But I guarantee you're causing yourselves far more problems than you're solving. Secretly I actually hope you *DO* get your little UI button, because it's gunna be funny as hell when you all realise what you've done

I guarantee you that all the people voting for your proposition are doing so because they think they'll stop getting thrown around by security scripts. That's not gunna happen, because thats not how they work!

Whilst it might look like you're getting pushed by a security script, you're actually getting ejected from the land parcel. So if you get a button that nerfs pushing, it wont make a blind bit of difference to the security scripts you're trying to stop 'pushing' you around. hehe.

So. What are we voting for again?

nerf anshe!

Alternative proposition to think about:

Clear Flight Path

Discussion thread:


http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?t=49637

Sorry it's not very dramatic and doesn't ban anything, nerf any features and could be implemented immediately

LL encourages you to report overzealousness in this area.

Just as the cops encourage you to report crimes like drunk drivers.

Should we ban cars because some folks drive drunk and actually KILL PEOPLE IN REAL LIFE??

Nolan, I think trying to ban PushObject is silly, but this is apples and oranges, here.

You don't ban cars, but you do ban drunk driving. You take away licenses from people who have been convicted of DUI. You install breathalizers in their cars' ignition systems when they get the license back.

So we'd be right back to having to abuse report everyone of these that goes after us as we try to fly by..... good plan


Now maybe I have this wrong, but your proposal keeps everyone in the same boat they are currently stuck in. All we are asking for is the ability to fly around without being bothered by someone's privacy drone. But I do have one quick question.... if push isn't used by these scripts anyway, why have you been sharpening your pitchfork and lighting your torch throughout this thread Kris? I would think it would be more prudent for you to go about your merry way and let us poor misguided souls think we're solving a problem.....

So let everyone vote to cripple some functionality for everyone based upon a misinformed proposal and fuck it up for all of us. Good plan. Being an ignorant moron is no excuse for fucking it up for everyone else, which is what will happen if uninformed voters blindly vote for your proposal because they think it helps them somehow. But it doesnt - your proposal solves nothing, least ways nothing to do with anything thats being discussed here.

I don't give a shit whether people vote for my proposal or not - it's actually of no consequence to me one way or the other. I don't fly, because I use a P2P transporter, and I've never been bothered by a security script. What I'm trying to demonstrate is that (a) it makes more sense to put your energies and votes into something that could make a difference to the thing you're trying to solve, and (b) there are ways to solve the problem without going 'fuck the rest of you. fuck your privacy. this is what we want at your expense'.

But it's ok. I understand that this 'community' is full of 'fuck you and your kind' kinda people. I'm one of them in reverse, I guess, because whatever you do to curtail my privacy in SL, I will find another way to get it. And you can keep crippling it til there is nothing left to cripple.

Or you could come up with a solution that actually addresses the problem now. Which, at least I'm trying - whereas you're just misleading people with your chicken little approach.

Oh you are definately a "fuck you and all your kind" person in reverse. This is starting to get a little comical Kris. So Kris doesn't fly so fuck whatever problems other people are having. Kris values her privacy so fuck the rest of you. I think I have the gist of your argument down. So the rest of us just have to put with problems as long as Kris has privacy. I take it this is not supposed to be quite as "elegant" as your proposal

Methinks Kris is trying get some serious personal attack action going to get this thread closed. As for your trying to find a solution to address the problem, your winning way with people seems to make you a poor spokesperson.