Overzealous Security and Rude Landowners

Your logic is hopelessly flawed, and while I dislike being so pointed, I will add that I feel in this case it should be obvious why. But I'll clarify:

When I orbit a griefer, it's an act of self-defense, a way to end the current attack being made against me so that I can once again function normally in SL. The person I'm attacking is without question a griefer, and I know it because I was attacked by that person specifically before I ever acted in retaliation.

By contrast, your no-warning, invisible-radius, teleport-home-on-contact security orb is not acting in self-defense at all. It doesn't identify an attack, take time to determine whom the attacker is, and then respond in a measured, minimum-necessary-force way to end an ongoing attack. Rather, it just attacks any random, frequently completely innocent and unarmed person who happens along.

A real-world analogy for this would be the difference between an individual or a police officer carrying a firearm for self-defense (and ONLY using it for the same in response to specific, individually identified threats) and someone just placing a bunch of landmines in some random area without even bothering to erect any signs warning possible passersby of the landmines.

In the former case, most will agree that the firearm-carrying individuals are fine as long as they act responsibly. They will very possibly never even use their weapons, and if they do, it will only be against someone who is already an assailant.

In the latter, most will agree that the individual is a psychotic mass murderer and should be locked away for life or possibly just put down like a mad dog. The landmines will very likely kill any number of wholly innocent people and, if they ever do happen to kill anyone who's actually deserving of the attack, it will only be by complete random accident.

See the difference now? I hope?

Do you want to continue using the most extreme and infrequent incidents, or would you like to use the more commonplace occurances?

More to the point, since the way I myself use an orb is to prevent people from being able to grief, by giving a warning in a very small radius, before ejecting them... I'm not exactly griefing anyone. (and I have seen people getting orbited because someone near them was griefing... It's not as clear-cut as you want to make out)
Or, placing landmines in a very small, tightly-confined area around a spot that is very much out of the way and warns you before they go off... as is by far THE most common way orbs are used. Ignore the warning, get thrown out... nice and fair to both parties, and it doesn't make a mistake and attack the wrong person... as people defending themselves from griefers can do.In the former, it's possible that they'll hit the wrong person... (don't say it doesn't happen, because we all know it does)
In the latter, it's unlikely it'll hit the wrong person, because the wrong person doesn't even come close enough to get the warning, let alone hit by the landmines...

That is, of course, using your example, but adjusting it for the most common circumstances... rather than the extremely unlikely incident that you seem to be implying is commonplace. (something Ramna and Lewis keep doing as well... amongst others)
Yes... I see that you are trying to use the most unlikely circumstances to defend your argument against the most common circumstances.

Now, since you've done that, if someone hits the wrong person, can I demonise you for orbiting griefers and compare it to someone who shoots into a crowd in an attempt to hit the griefer? No?


Well stop doing that with everyone who uses an orb...




:edit: By the way... someone once said that orbiters are griefing tools, and that anyone using them is a griefer.
I pointed out then that it's not that black or white. Now I'm having to point out that orbs and insisting that their use is griefing is also not as black or white.

One would hope that people would realise that there are shades of grey and trying to force it into a black or white argument is doomed to failure...

Well, since this is my assertion:

"To clarify, I'm not saying that all security devices are griefing devices but rather that some of them and some applications of them definitely are. I'm saying, in other words, that a security device is exactly like a weapon because it IS a weapon, and that means that the owner does not, or should not, have a right to employ it indiscriminately." (Quoted verbatim from my own remarks earlier in this thread.)

... I suppose it would make sense for me to reference the kind of case I'm actually objecting to, wouldn't it now?

These devices are griefing tools, pure and simple, unless they have a HUGE delay on them (enough to lag, get confused, lag some more, stumble around for a bit, and then finally pick a direction and begin plodding along ... at a walk).

The worst part is that not only do a lot of them have a very short delay, but some are actually no-warning. There is NO justification for them. NONE.

Also, it isn't as rare as you claim. It happened to Mistress and myself about a week ago, and that's not the first time I've suffered an unprovoked attack by a landmine "security system."

I don't have a problem with some uses at all. For example, at one point I worked as (in part) club security, and one of the things we did was add people to the security orb that kicks them ... after they had first acted as griefers. That application of a security orb is perfectly acceptable to me.

It is not that bad, you need to file a flightplan only for IFR (instrument flight rules) flights and over certain controlled airspace. You dont need to file a VFR (visual flight rules). Just get in your aircraft and fly!A transponder is only needed to fly over certain types of airspace usually over large airports, certain restrictive airspace etc. About waiting, you fly too much comericial The little airports I use dont have a lot of traffic. If I bought an aircraft would need to get my husband to do the inspection You understand many states and countries require an inspection on your auto or motorcycle and you can be banned from operating it if done in an unlawful manner.

Your car and motorcycle needs fuel too in RL. I am so cheap would run "unleaded" in my rl plane

As I said not all flight require flightplans. There is a lot of open space to make flights. What I would like is to have the no fly zones in second life clearly marked. In that way we can avoid them. There is no easy way to do that now.

I have started making RL flight again and love it RL requires a certain amount of care. It does not matter if you are flying a plane, driving a car or bike or riding a bicycle. There are rules to be observed and penalities if you break them.

Yours is a special case and prim land is different from Linden Land. Sorry I will not beg from landowners the right to walk down a public street.

Wow I never said to beg just be more adult than oohhhh ohhhh I have to report your security orb for attacking me! I mean really not everybody in this game is out to grief everybody for the fun of it. IMO the security orbs in question was set-up by a uninformed person, that might just reply to you in a civil manner. If the person is offline leave a Offline for them.

Just before constantly ARing use your head and say hmmm I wonder if this person needs help setting it up. I know I went to a former friends house with a current mutal friend and the formers security orb was giving a script error message because it wasnt set up right. Even tho it was trying to attack me I asked the person if they would like me to help them set the orb up correctly.

You simply stated about your plane, people drive through parcels too and if they compared the same situation, I would say the same thing. Unless you are operating a crop duster, which is NOT supposed to be used for fun, then yes, you do have to file a flight plan. I will easily link you the FAA pages that refer to this if you would like. My husband made me study with him when he was prepping for his piloting testing for the Air Force. I know specific air crafts are exempt, such as towed gliders, obviously the timing is pretty simple. The only exemption to all the rules is if you are flying over your own land only, out of your own hangar and runway. (Which some do, silly rich people!)

Smaller airports to do not usually require a detailed flight plan, but a general pathing and expected departure and return. You still need to wait in line for clearance at smaller airports, I didn't say a line that had other planes. Common sense says that commuter airports do not have high traffic. Since most planes are stored at the hanger, which are usually directly on the side of the runway, you can't just take off out of the hangar.



See above. As for no fly zones, it would be common sense not to fly over people's houses. But people still do. Just because you wouldn't maybe sit click in someone's house, or not fly over people's houses, doesn't mean hundreds of others haven't or won't. And because of those people is why these security things are going up. If everyone were as nice as that, no one would care. As I pointed out though, my sister had another female in her own home, telling my sister to get out and it was hers, people sit clicking into my home, and others randomly using my house at their leisure, I don't pay rent/tier fees just for someone else to enjoy my items without paying, or not leaving when I show up.



And this is why you cannot use a RL comparison in SL. SL is NOT RL, nor is it supposed to be.

As a side note, many of the security bots are in place, because people don't own their land, and either their landlords are extremely busy, or never around, this is one of the viable options.

On the other hand, your assertion is also...

Now... considering you're saying it's griefing unless there's a HUGE delay on them... a delay long enough for someone to do a HUGE amount of griefing, it's griefing to protect yourself from griefing...

On that logic... you using an orbiter to remove a griefer is also griefing.

with the huge amount of travelling I do, it's amazing just how many times I've run into these "landmine" systems you complain about this month... the grand total of ZERO.

So, basically, you're against the ones who've either not managed to work out how to use them... in which case we need to instruct then, not condemn them, or the ones who've suffered so much that they're no longer taking the chance to let someone grief them at home... in which case they could do with some sympathy instead of being called griefers, but also instructed on how to responsibly set-up their orbs...

No. That's exactly like being an apologist for griefers because it is being an apologist for griefers. Security orb owners need to be held to the same standards as owners of any other weapon, and yes, they are WEAPONS.

Then blame those who use the ones that do, and those who set them up wrongly, for causing the problem that many of us suffer on a regular basis.

Next I would have to have their permission to be on my property! Getting attacked on Linden Land is griefing. If they have trouble one of the Lindens wouuld be happen to help them. I am not a punching for everone with a seecurity orb!
Getting attacked on land that does not belong to the security orb resident and espically Linden Land is griefing and a violation of the TOS. I AR all such things. It is a no tolerance policy to griefers!

I do, and I suggest you do also, and cut those of us who use these things responsibly a bit of slack.

Yes and IMO that is flooding the system when you could take ohhh the same amount of time it takes to file the are and notify the person hey your secuirty orb is attacking people that isnt on your land! Oh but then you wouldnt be able to feel that you corrected a unjustice!

Wrong again I fly under part 91 and mostly VFR. Filing flight plans cramps my lifestyle! I do not need to file flight plans.

Finally you admit you dont want to do somethign because it cramps your lifestyle! sorta like ohhh maybe just continuing the flight when the lil blue box drops down instead of panicing and stopping. See I fly around the world myself and I know if I get a security warning that means I have traveled at the minimum of 6 seconds into the property all ready meaning I should be able to exit before the next 6 seconds is up. As for the lagg factor lastnight we had to bounce somebody that was being a total jerkoid from the club, mind you it took around 5 minutes for the scanner to finally find the guy and then to eject him from the club and ummm that is with some serious lagg going on! So the arguement that lagg has a factor is utter bs, if anything lagg helps you by giving you a extra few seconds!

Wrong again I fly under part 91 and mostly VFR. Filing flight plans cramps my lifestyle! I do not need to file flight plans and there is a very big difference between military and civil avaition in America. I fly at small airports because why do I want to get intangled with heavy aircraft? They are a true pain and they stall speed is faster than my cruise speed. It is better for both of us to stay apart

The FAA likes pilots to file flight plans but I almost never do!

link below please read!

http://stoenworks.com/VFR%20flight.html

The problem with your thinking is it closes all of SL for flying. You must be one of those trying to close down the local general aviation airport hoping for your property values to rise.

I just want the tools to avoid places where security orbs are operating and where the land is closed to flight. I fly all of the time in RL over peoples homes and dont expect to take fire from homeowners.

One question do you have a pilots license? I have one and my husband is a A&P mechanic as well. What makes you qualified about the rules of aviation?

Now, I want you two to have a nice clean fight...

I do, and I suggest you do also, and cut those of us who use these things responsibly a bit of slack.

No need, we already agree. Poll results at time of posting:

It's their land, they can kick out whoever they want, even if they are jerks. 126 40.00%


Security devices are ok if the delay is high enough. Otherwise, its a type of greifing. 96 30.48%

ANYTHING that forcibly pushes you without your consent is greifing. 66 20.95%

So... that gives us:

Security systems are OK : 40% (126 votes)
Security systems are NOT OK: 51.5% (162 votes)

I think you'll find that consitutes a MINORITY of 40% saying that people can do whatever they like with a security system regardless. 51.5% of us are saying that there should be restrictions on security systems somewhere between limits and a total ban.

The majority opinion, therefore, is that security systems CAN be construed as griefing, and I hope that Linden Lab will listen to us and implement new guidelines soon.

Lewis

The clarification was in the same post, so my total meaning was quite clear.

To a certain extent? Yes, it is. I could enter a sim and immediately (or perhaps after a brief delay and shouted warning) activate a large-area attack device, orbitting everyone in the vicinity, and claim that I did it to protect myself against potential area griefers. That would still be griefing, yes. The fact that I claim I'm only acting to protect myself from griefers does not magically absolve me.

No. What's more, I already explained why it isn't. In detail. With an accompanying analogy to drive home the point, ffs!

Okay? And? We each have different experiences. Some people have never encountered a face-to-face griefer, either, but amazingly, they still exist regardless.

No. That's exactly like being an apologist for griefers because it is being an apologist for griefers. Security orb owners need to be held to the same standards as owners of any other weapon, and yes, they are WEAPONS.

It's their land, they can kick out whoever they want, even if they are jerks. 126 40.00%

Security devices are ok if the delay is high enough. Otherwise, its a type of greifing. 96 30.48%

ANYTHING that forcibly pushes you without your consent is greifing. 66 20.95%

So... that gives us:

Security systems are OK : 40% (126 votes)
Security systems are NOT OK: 51.5% (162 votes)

I think you'll find that consitutes a MINORITY of 40% saying that people can do whatever they like with a security system regardless. 51.5% of us are saying that there should be restrictions on security systems somewhere between limits and a total ban.

The majority opinion, therefore, is that security systems CAN be construed as griefing, and I hope that Linden Lab will listen to us and implement new guidelines soon.

Lewis

Firstly, that site you gave was just a few weeks BEFORE 9/11. As I said, my husband has his license and I studied with him extensively for him to get it LAST YEAR. Also, the rules and testing STILL have to be passed by a military member ALONG with military flight testing, so he actually did have to do more testing than you.

http://www.faa.gov/ATpubs/FSS/fss0405.html

This is a direct link to the FAA site, from Feb. 06 that clearly states that you STILL have to check in each time you leave the airport to declare your intentions, which is basically leaving a 'flight plan' with your take off airport.

Another direct link to a document that shows how the airport must document VFR's with each time you fly. You don't just take off whenever you want.

http://www.faa.gov/ats/ars/Directorates/Arw/Report%20HTM/Ops_Impact/for_departing_vfr_part_91_aircra.htm

Not to mention you are subjected specifically to weather conditions, etc. which also means it takes away some of your freedoms because of RESTRICTIONS that are in place. None are in SL.



No it doesn't, just as there are placing for sailing, all out combat, guns only, etc. there can be such quite simply in SL as well. You are violating general airspace rules if you are buzzing people's houses within a certain range. It's basically a noise ordinance type of thing, but as you are SO knowledgable, I am sure you get the jist.

And I love how you want to play me as a money grubber. Which is rather entertaining considering I live ON AN AIR FORCE BASE. I hear planes all the time and have for several years, since my father was always working as a government contractor on an Air Force Base. Actually, that's how I met my husband.



One does not need to hold a piece of paper to be knowledgeable on a subject. Da Vinci was a master artist, who never attented a school AT ALL, would you consider him dumb on the subject because he doesn't hold a piece of paper? He was a master inventor, would you consider him unknowing on a subject, just because he didn't hold a piece of paper? The whole, I have and you don't argument is a little childish. Anyone can learn more than any given person on any subject regardless of paper dolings. All it takes is a willingness to absorb.

My father held an A&P license and served in Desert Storm with the Army, attaining E-5, before leaving straight out of Bosnia. And frankly, why doesn't your argument hold true to yourself? You do not hold an A&P license, and just because you know someone who does makes YOU knowledgeable in that area? Hello, Pot. This is Kettle, you're black.

Anywho, either way, you are STILL not allowed the freedom to buzz someone's house. I can look that up too if you so desire. There are federal airspace and noise laws that prohibit that and you CAN lose your license for doing so. If SL is supposed to mirror RL, then technically flying too low into someone's house can make you not be able to do it again. Let alone the responsiblities if you crashed into someone's house. Hey, actually, let's do that! I want SL to mirror RL. I want all AV's who crash on/in their vehicles to permanently die, and all their money goes to their SL partner.

Are you saying you are taking or giving flight training when you go VFR?

I have never been ejected, nor have I ever been bumped or banned from anything in SL and I still believe in security systems. Just because you haven't been ejected or banned doesn't mean you aren't doing something in SL to piss people off... like fly in their land while they are busy on it.

You like to go on more than my big boss at work! Ah you dont know a thing about me. How old I am, where I live, who I work for, etc. I might have more training than your husband, you dont have a clue to who I am and that suits me just fine

Live on an Airforce Base well goody for you! Maybe if you are lucky you will win an award for the best yard or something. You must be the spouse of a Airforce Officer. You sound like one.

Wrong again, here is the title for everone Section 5. Special VFR Operation The second link is no good.

Well it has been fun but all things must come to an end. Why dont you take some flight lessons at the Aero Club? Also try not to be so high strung, it will ruin your health!
Well bye bye! This thread has become unproductive!

On the other hand, it gives us 70.68% who say that security devices are fine if set up right...
The majority opinion is therefore that security devices are perfectly fine and that a minority considers them griefing...

Selectively representing the results is a rather dishonest tactic, and one that you should have known better than to try.


I'll repeat the results AS THEY ARE just for you Lewis, so you don't misrepresent them again...

70.68% say that they are fine as long as they have the delay and don't push... which just happens to be the current view of LL.
I hope that LL listens to the MAJORITY and keep the current guidelines.



Oh, and thanks for reminding me of this little gem... "ANYTHING that forcibly pushes you without your consent is greifing."

That very nicely classes Alex as a griefer for forcibly pushing someone (orbiting them) without their consent...