Who are the Lindens protecting?

It ain't the av that restrains themself I'll tell you that.

Glyth Stryker THREATENED me. Implied RL. This is not my imagination.

I put it in the forums. It was DELETED.

I log in three days later or wait, a week. He is online GLOATING (quote "I see you took my advice...", i.e., you ain't around much anymore).

I am openly griefed by my "neighbors". Dan Linden shows up and tries to broker the wants of these people to alter my land with me. God forbid he'd say, "it's his land. You openly griefed him. Leave him alone and enjoy your vaction from SL". No, in fact, one of their group bounces me from my land!

Go ahead, delete this one. F abuse reports they are for chumps and mean nothing. I'm going on the offensive.

Up go the banishers, out come the weapons. Abuse reports pfft. This game has gone PvP as far as I'm concerned.

And not minutes after I log on, I get attacked, in Natoma! If not for my object bouncers/banishers I'd probably be writing this from Taber.

The admins have lost control. Yeah sure they get to one or two here and there. Or, I can let these people ruin a month or so of my experience while they get around to doing something about it.

This is not comforting at all. I've been wondering if your neighbor situation was resolved, Tcoz. I mean, if nothing is being done especially after you've been threatened and harrassed ... then we could all behave like complete asses and insult other players and not worry about the consequences. Because it seems like NOTHING is being done for anyone.

What the fock?!

10,000+ players in SL.

Probably 50+ abuse reports a day.

2 guys, tops, at linden labs to go through them all, on top of their other duties.

Do the math.

LF

You could still report to the police about the RL threats, that would get LL's attention on this.

The only time I've had troubles with land luckly my neighbor didn't like it either and we were able to fix it.

I agree with Lordfly, I think alot of it is a lack of people to handle it.

I do honestly think anyone who makes a RL threat on someones life should be permantly baned from SL, wether they say they were "only joking" or "in heated moment", its not just something to brush off. And I think they should be TOLD WHY THEY WERE BANED when they are for making threats, just so no one thinks I think different. Threats are not to be taken lightly.

I have a copy of that thread if anyone wants it
LL must have way too much time on their hands these days. I am vehemently against any and all forms of censorship. We dont have them on usenet, so why should we have them anywhere else?

Lordfly, if what you say is true, that's not a reason, it's a problem and needs to be fixed.

How about this math...25+ bucks a month, 2 or three logins in a week, 5+ abuse reports, destroyed game experience every time. The only way I can see that ensures you are not bothered and can work in peace is to go full on banishing and never go anywhere unless you are sitting down. I prefer banishers because you don't get those lovely game experience-enhancing red lines. Oh but I'm sure somebody will whine and I'll log in and find the banishers shut off.

SL is getting overrun by idiots, alt griefing is a fact of the game, theft is rampant, the situation is out of control, and I've essentially lost faith in any administrative ability to remedy it; Lordfly's statement about the problem having become overwhelming is probably accurate. I see no alternative but to offensively defend yourself in game.

It just seems that unless you own a whole sim or are part of a large group, you are at the mercy of anybody that can buy a bouncer or feels like walling you in. Regarding the walls, I was told that as long as your movement isn't obstructed it's all good. So these people just made their walls phantom. THAT was the remedy. Fine, I can do that too. Oh, but now those people, who own land on EVERY side of my house, have all turned on access bans. My house is now surrounded by red lines AND I can only get at it from the top. THIS is legal. What a total crock of SHIT.

Since 2002 I have never, ever had a problem in Natoma. These people move in and it's now "well, you really should play ball with them." F that, I'm not a politician I'm a private PAYING resident.

Actually, I've heard multiple times from different lindens that this is the one thing that may *not* be done.

letting people grief you into buying your own sim may be considered good business. if we all end up having to own individual sims, ll will make a fortune.

it's been my observation that when the lindens allow this type of behaviour on one side of the fence, they come down very hard when it's reciprocated from the other side. you're obviously in a situation where your antagonists have more clout with ll than you do.

btw, the terraforming limit in nantoma is 40m from the height the land was when 1.2 was released. your land was comparatively tall then so you probably can raise a 60 - 70m "hill." build on top of that and you'll be above the red lines.

Tcoz, IM me the names of which neighbors are bothering you please, I havent exercised my neg rating rights in a long time. And if the Lindens STILL aren't doing whats right with respect to griefers, its time I got off my butt to do what little I can.

There's got to be a technical way for LL to stop users from creating dozens of alts. Isn't there a limit of 2 or 3 accounts per player now?



That doesn't sound consistent with past decisions. If a structure is built with the obvious intent to harrass, whether or not it's an obstruction, it violates the ToS, IMHO.



That's a blatant ToS violation. You absolutely can't use land banning to box-in someone's land.

Limit is 5 alts per credit card I believe, however people who already had more than 5 before this was inacted got to keep them.

I think its 5 per credit card, since theres no way to tell if its the same person with a different credit card, basicly you could have as many as you have credit cards x 5.

And yes the usage of land baning red lines has been proven in previous cases to be a TOS violation (i'm not sure if this was before or after they lowered the ban red lines height limit).

If a LL isn't responding to that as a TOS violation, then thats another mess up on their point.

I'm not taking -any- sides in this thread whatsoever but I think I should add some information on this. I'm not sure if it changes anything or all, not sure if it should. :/ So anyway, Glyth Stryker is an untreated person with Asperger's Syndrome. If LL somehow knows this then they could be itchy about booting him in fear of the whole discrimination thing? Though I can see, judging by experience, that some of the things that come out of his mouth are clearly against TOS. Like I said, just wanted to throw a couple pennies into the pile.

Hmm, while it sucks to have disabilities (suffering from one myself), I think everyone should be treated equal on all maters, wether they have disabilities or not. So TOS violations should apply to everyone equaly.

And I'm not sure how you could prove you have a certain disability or not, such as if I blurted out "I'm going to kill you all!" or "I'm going to kill you in your sleep!" and then claimed to have OCD or Turrets or some other disability that may cause something like that, would I provide a dr.'s note? Would the police go easier on me if I claimed to have that disability?

If you know the person in real life, I guess that could prove it.

But I don't think that even with a disability such a thing as a threat on someones life should be taken lightly.

Some disabilities may even make a person more of a risk to your physical self.

I wear glasses. It's a disibility. Therefore, I cannot be banned.

Erm, no.

If you're violating the TOS, I don't care if you are a disembodied head in a jar, you aren't going to get preferential treatment.

LF

Well crap. There goes my excuse.

Please post in this thread carefully or it will undoubtedly be REMOVED...again.

I've actually met this person in world. He told my friends & I that we were just "graphed". Still don't know what the hell that means. The whole experience was bizzare & left me rather confused. Later that evening I was IMed by someone telling me that my friends had somehow hurt this person's feelings & was also told of his condition. I was then offered a Tped.. felt obligated to be "nice" & make this person feel better even though.. from what I experienced no one had done anything wrong what-so-ever. Many people see this as a good learning tool for those with disabilities. Right? Wrong? I don't know... I think it's a little strange personally.
There should not be any special treatment for anyone period. The advantage of secondlife is everyone is equal reguardless of stresses experienced to individuals' bodies. With so much technology for those with disabilities to utilize for interacting with computers SL becomes a rebirth for everyone and they should be judged by their behaviors.

At the risk of being flamed for this one - several points. I am not speaking as an advocate, so don't waste your time in criticism on that point. But the Americans with Disabilities Act is federal law, and it is enforced regularly these days. My points are about the law as it may apply.

(1) Daemioth, I assume that Glyth Stryker gave you permission to disclose his/her disability in a public forum? Written permission, I hope? If not, you could be held in violation of the law. If you don't have his permission, my advice is -- go and report to Glyth what you did, and apologize. Take someone with you as a witness.

(2) Every argument against extending accomodations to disabled persons made on this thread has already been struck down by federal courts, and big fines have resulted -- including the "what if I wear glasses" and "what if I'm a disembodied head in a jar" arguments. The law is both well-defined and deliberately nebulous in terms of who and what is covered -- and that makes it a potent and unpredictable force.

(3) I'm certain that the Lindens know the law and how it may apply to SL -- especially since they've had lawyers and health care professionals working for them in the past. Count on them to be -extremely- careful when persons with disabilities are involved, assuming those persons have disclosed their disabilities, as is required by the law.

(4) No, the ADA does not give disabled persons carte blanche to behave any way they like. If you're interested in what they can and can't do, read the law. There are plenty of websites out there.

(5) Don't construe this post as in support of Glyth Stryker, or -- again -- advocating ADA issues. Just a friendly reminder.

The lindens are protecting us from The Terrible Secret Of Space!
http://www.jonathonrobinson.com/3.0/web/webtsos.html
PAK!CHOOIE!UNF!

If this person has Asperger's Syndrome, then perhaps someone should make sure he understands the provisions of the TOS and explain to him that his behaviour is inappropriate.

Hopefully, that should do the trick. People with Asperger's never walk on the grass.

I suspect that since Glyth lists himself as an Officer of Club Autism or whatever the group was, he is fairly open about his condition.

If true, that meets the ADA criteria, then. She/He's a "public figure" who has publicly disclosed the disability.

On the other point, the courts have held that reasonable accomodations have to be made that do not endanger an organization's ability to operate or infringe upon certain common sense personal rights of another individual. If a person who meets the criteria of the ADA discloses the disability to Linden Lab and asks an accomodation, and LL can grant the accomodation without undue hardship (presumably without destroying the credibility of the ToS), then the accomodation should be made.

Having a disability does not entitle you to make death threats or compromise somebody's sense of security or well being with suggestions of injury to your person.

sadly the wheels of justice are slow. taking justice into your own hands is a chancy endeavor.

* * *

regardless of what is currently going on, at this time i advise that you step away from the keyboard and calm down.

when arbitrating a dispute, there are two sides, and of course the arbitrator tries to see where a mutual compromise may be reached. i don't think you can fault dan linden for that. anyone who has arbitrated a dispute knows that it is better to get the parties to compromise, rather than make a decree.

* * *

"an eye for an eye will blind the whole world."

if you take the PvP attitude, then 1) you will eventually lose support (official and unofficial), and 2) there will be no end to the griefing.

step back and decide what your long term goals are, and act with those goals in mind. acting in the heat of the moment is unlikely to get you what you really want. unless you really want all this drama.

* * *

the price of peace is first purging your own anger without creating more anger than you started with, for yourself or for others.

* * *

the best revenge is to live well.