The land griefing continues...

From the SL website...

Yes, and it shows the beautiful skyscraper built by LF, sure not an ugly useless badly textured 30X150 meters wall that just damages someone else's property. How comes?

Seeing a pattern there?

honestly i think by setting a plot for sale you are agreeing ahead of time that you are no longer interested in mantaining the plot yerself, and i see no problems with the system returning all yer stuff, good, or bad, to you, so that it is no longer possible to extort neighbors... i mean what do you care, yer moving out anyway

Lacking arguments there?

That would be very unfair, as I would still be paying the tier for the land until the sale was final. It would be no one's business why I would continue to build on it. What if it took months to sell, and I wanted to use it for projects until it did? What if I wanted to use it as my own private sandbox? What if that was my only land, and my home, and I couldn't afford to buy another piece of land until I recieved the money from the sale of my original land.

My point is, I would be paying for the land, not my neighbors, and can and will and could do with it what I want.

I'm all for folks being good neighbors and trying not to do anything to cause them grief, but you certainly can't please everyone, and many times a neighbor will find a reason to complain due to thier particular tastes or wants.

well okay mabye offer a new, tiered type sale service... basically you can continue to list for free, with no objects... but if you wanted to continue to USE the land, while leaving it for sale, you could have a cost per sqm based 'listing fee'.

aka selling land for $3 per sqm, you could charge the seller $30 lindens a week to list it WITH the ability to still build on it... sellin the land for $50 per sqm, they would be charged $500 lindens a week to list it, with the ability to still build on it... or even have a 'current average' subtraction system so that if the current going rate of land is $4 say, subtract the $4 from the sale price, before calculating listing fees..

that way people just wanting to sell small plots for reasonable prices and move on would be completely unaffected.. and other people wanting to sell otherwise useless spits, for extortional rates, and push it via grief centric builds, would be paying through the nose to continue to have that 'priveledge'

Forgive me for overestimating your deductive powers

And me for overstimating your discussion capabilities, your posts are nothing else than personal attacks sometime disguised as irony (it's interesting on how you stalk prokofy around the forums to try and belittle his opinions with personal attacks that have normally nothuing to do with what he says), so maybe i should just stop giving you the attention you seem to badly need

On one hand I can see Shiryu's point. Building for the purpose of forcing someone to buy your land is wrong (By the definition of extortion).

On the other hand I can see the other's points. When you try and force standards of building on people, you inherently limit their creativity by telling them what they can build and how they have to go about building it.

There really isn't a solution. If you have someone 'policing' builds you are inherently limited by that person's subjective view on what constitutes a 'good' build.

There are tradeoffs to either point. Yes, you can eliminate extortionist builds, but to do that you have to regulate builds, and to regulate builds you inherently force someone's subjective views on all builds.

It is sort of like the death penalty... I know, you think I am reaching here, but I think it's valid.
You can either make sure you prosecute and kill EVERYONE that is guilty of first degree murder. To do that, you simply have to switch from an 'innocent until proven guilty' to a 'we have a reasonable evidence' paradigm but if you do that, some of the thousands of people who are accused of murder in the first degree who are truely innocent will die.
Or you can stick with the system we have now, where you it must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that you are guilty, the dissadvantage is that some who are truely guilty escape punishment, but a MUCH higher percentage of the people on death row are truely guilty of their crime.

I guess my point is there are tradeoffs under both systems.
The current system promotes maximum flexibility and allows for the most creativity but also, by that very nature, allows for the potential to be abused.
The second system which you are saying should go into effect Shiryu, is that of limiting creativity to prevent the system from being abused. What the majority of people here are saying is that they do NOT want their creativity stifled in any way by anyone even if it is just to prevent extortionist builds BECAUSE the only way to do that is to rely on subjective views of what is good or bad, ugly or pretty, etc...

Any ideas that offer a compromise between the two systems that would allow for maximum creativity AND has someone saying, you can't build that because of XYZ (Even if XYZ Reason is Valid) reason, is not possible because the two ideas are mutually exclusive in nature. (Unrestricted building vs. Restricted building)

I guess, to sum this up, there is no system which is perfect, but the majority of posters to this thread feel that the current system is the best.

I had to add this because of a potential arguement that could come up that I just now thought about (Editted to add the following

Yes, of course the linden's can say a build is inappropriate or does not conform to the PG theme

This has come up in the past ... what exactly is PG vs. Mature... and that is subjective as well, yet they do exactly that. And you see the problem with that of course, two Lindens can come in and look at the same thing and one will say, Yes that is art and as such can stay in PG, and another can say, but it shows a nipple, therefore can't be in a PG area.

And of course, the Linden's also have to work within the larger legal context with illegal photo's and clear copywrite infringement (But usually these are Objective and clearly defined)

However Shriyu, what you are suggestion is not a problem with the build itself, but the REASON for the build. You're suggestion that the Linden's make a judgement call on THE REASON a build was built in the first place, and that is VERY hard to do. How can anyone say well, X person built this build for B reason... it is not possible.... the only person that can say that IS X person.


OKAY NOW I can make a light hearted joke.....

... This is entirely posted in a joking and light hearted manner as a lot of the participants are friends, and I don't want to upset anyone. I don't have an opinion on this one way or the other, and it is a hard issue to resolve.



Yes! The pattern is S O S S S O S
S.O.S. (Morse code signal for help)
S (Shiryu's First Initial)
S.O.S. (Morse code signal for help)

It's saying. 'Help Shriyu Help'

Jess

hehe, maybe I should have used "opinion" and "proveable" Then it would have been O POOOP O

As its creator, i beg to differ. It wass a kludge job, architecturally and creatively (it's the same 15 prims repeated over 15 floors, times two). its main purpose was to make rental money.

As nice as it looked from afar, once you got close to it you would feel aesthetically bored. it also did NOT mesh with the rest of Grignano, as it was the only high rise in the sim (neighbors were old style Venice, a christmas shop, a furniture store, and garth and pituca's vehicle showroom.)

It could be conceived as an "eyesore" by my neighbors' tastes. However, it is subjective.

See the problem here?

LF

LF and Jessica:

My point is that if you allow one to build a wall (that enters other people properties) to block out others properties, you imply everyone can just out of a whim, so there would be no problem if everyone walled out each of his neightbors that way. What would be of SL if everyone did like the builder of that wall?
All properties encircled by 30 meters tall walls, a little ugly berlin with people griefing each other and competing on who builds the tallest wall.
I perfectly know it's a gray area, but i do feel some kind of regulation is needed, maybe not a very strict one, but something that prevents people to just turn SL in a mutual griefing hell.

I think it boils down to the problem of "what is griefing and what isn't"? It's far too subjective. Too much guess work and assumptions. If someone builds a large neon green tower on a neighboring plot, and then a week later puts it up for sale, I should assume it's griefing? Or did they just like neon green towers? Or was it a new builder learning as they go? Or maybe they needed something that could be spotted from a ways away as a landmark. Who decides? The Lindens?? Umm..they have enough work on thier plates chasing down known and provable griefing without the added responsibility to play Judge Judy for each pissed off neighbor.

David, if i am not wrong haney posted that one of main LL goals is to keep the value of land stable. If a building blatantly reduces the value of neightboring plots... well... i think the situation is pretty clear, at least in extreme cases like the wall i posted the picture of.

If the wall exstends beyond thier property lines, then I do think the Lindens would take action. But if it's just big and ugly, I don't believe they will ever do so.

Haney was talking in terms of land released not what people build.

You'd have very high fences, and that's about it. You CANNOT build a wall taller than can be flown. It is impossible unless you own your own sim.

Actually, let's do a little math exercise.

To wall off a sim, you would need 25.6 walls sideways, times 76.8 walls high, times four.

That's a little over 8000 prims just to wal off your property properly. If you're using your prims to keep everyone out like that, you are wasting many dollars a month for the privilege, in which case the joke is on you



Walls can be interesting. To wit: The Jessie Wall, a permanent symbol of free speech and political demonstratino in SL. Check out Hamlet's articles on it.



The day regulation on my own zone-free land comes is the day I defy that regulation in as blatantly offensive a way as possible.

LF

I agree completely that it would have been courteous for the wall’s builder to contact her. If I were her, I would have wanted and expected that courtesy.

I disagree that his failure to do so constitutes your unequivocal conclusion that the builder is exhibiting dishonest intent, and no other interpretation is possible. It is too great a leap from the legitimate charge that the wall’s builder is acted like an elephant in china shop to the unfair public accusation that he is dishonest.

Someone who is a klutz in courtesy is not necessarily a Bad Person.

I have seen it. It’s a big ugly wall. I’ve already stated I would not be happy to have that wall on the other side of my property line. This is not what I object to in your statements on this issue.

However, the description of it being a griefer’s attack is an inference which you cannot objectively demonstrate. There could be any number of reasons a person might erect such a structure which have nothing to do with griefing, and it is unfair to present a knee-jerk first reaction as objective fact.

Building an ugly wall which disturbs neighbors makes him a builder of ugly disturbing walls. It does not necessarily make him a griever as you claim.

Um, if grief-building causes the neighbors to buy me out at a higher price, then I've raised the value of the land. It's now worth more money.

So is this about a power plant build or has it been changed into a thread about something completely unrelated because the original complaint has been thoroughly obviated? Man, I need a scorecard.

Page 7, 6:09am today. Top of the page.
Shiryu cited breaking news in which a landowner had constructed a large, poorly textured wall on a property line/sim boundary between Dari and Davvi, and that the wall obscures the view from at least two neighboring lands.

It's always been about griefing builds in general, you don't need a scorecard, because this is not a match, maybe you need some private lessons on how to cope with a civil discussion without recurring to pointless satire and personal attacks, but this is another story.
Anyway about the wall, after at least 6 hours of fighting, cross neg rating, mobbing accusations, discussions, childish attacks raining all over the place, grief and countergrief, rants, utter chaos, various group expulsions, the intervention of two lindens and a live helper, and half an hour of photoshop work for me, the matter has been settled to the satisfaction (hopefully) of both sides.
If the owner of the wall IMed palomma and his other neightbors before deciding to wall them out just out of a whim (ah, btw, the wall was set to emissive light, turning local lighting on i found myself with a big rectangular sun in front of my face) all this would have been reduced to the half an hour of photoshop work.
Now if there was a simple and not extremely strict set of rules of conduct about how to behave with your neightbors i would have probably spared myself an afternoon trying to mediate between deaf parties, thing that honestly heavily weighs on my nerves.

There is. It's called "live and let live."

All this has demonstrated to me is that I don't want neighbours who will criticise my building on the forums.

I'm not sure if that was the point of the thread or not - we're not allowed to mention names but I'm glad I live no-where near you...