Carnildo Greenacre, I don't HAVE to give you a reason.

Ok, I concede that naming this person publicly was inappropriate. So, I deleted it. Report in progress. Logging in and seeing your game standings reduced for no reason simply is a lousy way to start a game session, and I overreacted.

The statements made by the people responding are illustrative of what is wrong with negs. Apparently, even senior players seem to feel that giving a neg for any old reason, which materially effects your standing the game, is aok, and that putting you through the subsequent hassle of reporting it and dealing with the fallout is also no big deal.

I could not more strongly disagree.

Negs, unlike muting, banishing, and so on, are essentially violation tickets with a no-appeals penalty. If the neg is reversed, then I would also want any and all monetery and ratings deficits reversed, no matter how small. I'm sure the admins will welcome this additional work.

But hey, I don't have to give a reason.

Ladies and Gentlemen, without further ado, I give you Colin Linden:

General Discussion->Ranting Threads

Tcoz,

Just as you don't have to give a reason, or have a reason, for kicking someone off your land, he can choose any reason he wishes to grant a negative rating.

stop the public lynchings! If you have been abused file an abuse report, deal with the person privatly or through lindens. Don't tell people how they have to rate people anymore than you want people telling you how you have to admit guests.

Its perfectly legit for a person to feel that kicking off land with no reason is worthy of both an abuse report and a negative rating.

BAH! If you guys have a problem WORK IT OUT IN PRIVATE. This thread serves no purpose besides spreading a bad opinion about Carn, which isn't fair at all. Frankly, I would call it slander.

Ama is totally right -- you can neg rate anyone for ANY reason, just like you can mute them for any reason, and you can ban/boot them from your land for any reason. You don't have to GIVE a reason. The fact of the matter is, Tcoz, had Carnildo not given any reason in the rate window, you would have probably not posted this.

If I was banned from someone's land with no reason, I'd be pretty angry, and worried about what offense I had given someone.

Like the ratings system instructions say, if you're nice to people, they'll give you good ratings.


If you had've appologized to this person and explained why you kicked them off your land, they probably would have taken away your neg rating, or even given you a positive one for the explanation!

Instead you came here and encouraged us to do something bad to him!

None of you people seem to get it. I do not want to be forced to allow people on my property when I am offline.

I didn't ban this person. The banisher bans everybody because I don't want people poking around in my house when I'm offline. I should have my world rating reduced for this, and/or spend time hunting this person down to beg them to reverse it? Or go through the process of reporting and abuse?

Why can't people say, "hmm...maybe I'll wait until he's online and ASK why. Or...maybe he just wants to be left alone, and I respect that." I would happily have given this person a tour.

Why isn't anybody critical of the person that neg'd me when I was offline, a person I never even met? Why is everybody in this game so willing to state negs can be given for any reason and that a desire for privacy or to be left alone is offensive and should not be respected?

I WAS OFFLINE. This person NEVER spoke to me. EVER. It's MY land. I have NO IDEA who this person is. I am not in violation of ANY community standards; in fact, there's now a built in mechanism to do what I'm doing. Negs effect your standing in the world. Stop ignoring that.

All right I'm done here. Neg me for no reason and expect an abuse report to be filed, every time.

Find two people who are sympathetic to your plight and have them positive rate you. Cancels the neg, and puts you one up.

Tcoz, if you dont want people in your house, why do you have a notecard giver well hidden inside a chest, specifically adressing people who might have somehow managed to get in
When I was a noob, the first time I saw your house I actually thought it was some kind of game. A key, a chest, etc... it all reminded me of those good old adventure games, and all things considered it definitely looks like a challenge.
If you want to be left alone, dont draw attention to yourself with a banisher, cancel every calling card and go underground
Actually, back in the goold old days, before banning was a FEATURE, having a banisher script premanently set was considered abusive because it unfairly restricted a persons movement. But LL keeps changing their mind for mysterious reasons. I dont know a single person who likes the banning feature, and cant remember anyone having requested it.
If anyone has ever landed on a banning ceiling, the effect is much like an orbiter, you get pushed way up in the sky. So LL basically introduced an automatic griefing feature into the game. How sensible

Having a banisher on your land has never been a TOS violation in and of itself. Having the set up to deny people access to their own land, or to block free passage across a sim was the violation.

I ain't touching this one

we requested it, once, quite awhile ago because of a complete inability to control our land. I think it is fine to have, and i don't have any problem with tc using it the way he does.

he is treating his house the way we all treat out rl houses. As to the outburst, well i didn't see it, and he did edit/apologize... it does seem a little odd to hand out negative ratings because you can't look at the house the way you want to, maybe an im from the banisher to tell people to swing by when you are online, or something along those lines would alleviate this problem?

I rated it negative because I was flying along from the welcome area towards Jessie, decided to pass over some interesting architecture (Tcoz Bach's building) to get a look at it, and got bounced quite a ways into the air. I wasn't trying to enter the building or anything, just admiring the outside design. I personally find indiscriminantly ejecting everyone from your land unacceptable, especially when that land is in a major flyway, and I expressed that feeling with a negative rating and a message.

You could just set the banisher on a timer...

I might add that this is a fun thing, if you are into flying into orbit

I've run into this a few times, and I've never rated someone negatively on it. I figure that folks want their privacy. I've thought of doing the same thing a few times myself in order to get something I was working on finished.

Yes, Jim, but it's not just a case of him locking his door when he's out to protect his stuff - which is more than possible to do if he wants privacy.

Catapulting anyone who dares to come near his property high into the air - whether they actually cared anything about his property or even knew it was there, is in a different league altogether.

I don't see why I shouldn't be able to fly in a straight line to my destination without getting ejected. And to that end, I think it's perfectly reasonable to neg someone for it if that's your thing.

Personally, I just make a note not to deal with such griefers again and delete their calling cards. There's a big difference between a door lock and an ejector, and I don't see how you can justify automatic ejection because 'I don't want people poking around in my house when I'm offline'. Which I don't get anyway... what are they gonna do there anyway? It's not like they can steal your stuff.

Of course, you could always have your entire property derez when you're offline. Not only will no one be able to poke around but you'll save money too.

That's an interesting question actually...what's the big deal? I'd want people to look at the stuff I've made, that's why I did it in SL, and not in Rhino 3D or something.

They should. That would save them a ton of cash, it would reduce server strain because no one would have to upload a big empty house, and if it became commonplace it would definitely reduce how much the prim limits effect us.

As for the main topic of the thread, I don't think privacy is possible for anyone, not even if they own a sim. It doesn't matter if they are bounced when they're on your property unless the banning zone is the perimeter of a gigantic dome that stops them getting close enough either horizontally or vertically to possibly zoom their view and see you no matter where you are on the property. =)

On the other hand, nobody's saying you need to make your land public. Use or misuse at your will, so long as you aren't hurting anyone. Land's expensive for a reason.

However... Bounce scripts are abusive. I think officially abusive, given that it's coded that when we're so much as walked into too hard we get some abuse report popping up. Whether it's actually abusive, IMO, depends on how much they are bounced. 2 meters = no, 2 sims = yes.

We now have a user friendly and easy way to set up banning lists, allowing us to stop certain people, or everyone but individuals and groups. It doesn't push them that far, and they're still able to fly at a reasonable height to avoid bumping into it.

I think it's the best blend of giving rights to passersby(unimpeded ability to travel to their destinations w/o giant invisible walls or being bounced two zones), and property owner(the 'lasergrids' make it obvious you don't want visitors without blocking your view, and depending on the height of your building it may be impossible for them to enter).

As for ratings.. some people make negative ratings when someone uses 'minor' exploits to get into their property despite very solid barriers meant to repel them. Some people make negative ratings because they think someone's using fake money to say they're better than everybody else and don't want our grubby footprints on their property. Guess what? They're both right. There's a stigma about negative ratings that's really not productive, I think we need to realize that Heaven and Earth don't need to shift just to get a positive rating, so a negative here and there doesn't mean anything.

edit: You crack me up, Garoad, that frankly made me laugh uncontrollably, even though I feel the same way.

Well, the message here is pretty clear. Just read the post.

The SL community thinks that a wish for privacy on land is somehow offensive and will not be allowed. I've seen here, "privacy isn't possible", "what's the big deal", and attempts to point out that it's not legit because there are some scripts running inside, and so on.

Well, new tactic. You want to up traffic through your land? Tell people you dont' want them there and that you would like some privacy! The SL community will come in droves to prove that you can't have it! And make sure you hide your prims somewhere else, because anybody who simply wishes to be left alone must be doing something wrong.

The SL community is also entitled to neg somebody, hurting their game standing, for any reason whatsoever, and it is up to the person being neg'd to go through the inconvenience of convincing the neg'r to reverse it, mining ratings to balance it out, or go to the admins. People are not in any way responsible for using negs properly, go ahead and neg whoever you want for any reason at all.

I've also seen people invade others people's builds with the singular intent of finding something to report them for, even going so far as to post pictures of their prim hunts.

A poor trend for SL, and telling of the character of many of the residents. In spite of it all, I will continue alone down the path of respecting these sorts of wishes, and refusing to neg somebody unless there is a concrete reason for it.

And eggy...it IS a game. I don't want people figuring it out before it's finished. So I put a banisher up. So people won't. BTW regarding the good old days, that house has been in world easily twice as long as you.

lol. I pressed 'quote' to take issue with Tcoz last reply, and it bore no resemblance to what I wanted to take issue with... seems Tcoz was editing his reply at the time.

So I'll let you off on your now invisible oversimplification of what everyone was trying to say here, Tcoz... and instead take issue with another point instead.



Not at all. I have a lock on the front door of one of my properties... and I bet you couldnt even FIND the front door if you tried. Hell, I bet you wouldnt even know there was a build there at all.

But I think the point that people are trying to impress upon you is that there is still a world of difference between locking the front door and saying 'this is private' and doing the equivalent to employing a bouncer to forcefully eject anyone who strays on or even over your land. I don't want to come on your land... trust me.... but I'd still like to not be inconvenienced if I fly over it.

Its not that you ARE doing it... its HOW you are doing it. Sure, it's not against the ToS. Sure, it wouldn't be an option if it wasn't allowed. But that doesn't make it the best or right way to enforce your privacy, and it DOES inconvenience others. My door lock does not. It's about respect at the end of the day. They should respect your privacy if thats what you want (in something you describe as a community yourself) but you should respect other residents with how you implement that privacy.

i saw a pretty cool place that had a good way to keep griefers and such out of the house. For one its locked, and two there is a no sit script so they can't sit on a block and slide it inside to get in.

I felt the same way the first time I ran into the red wall around Tcoz's house. I stopped and asked myself what it was I had done. Because of the way it's situated in the sim you really can't avoid running into it either. Still, we are apparently all free to set our land however we like, so it isn't something you give a neg rating over. When I first started SL someone took the time to lay down SL's peculiarities for me but that doesn't happen all the time, so I'd cut Carnilo a little slack here. A lot of newbs just have no idea that some of us view a neg rating very gravely and some laugh at them and invite their use.

Good feedback here regarding the ban/access list behavior bouncing people too high into the sky... we will take a look at how to improve that behavior. More a bug than anything else - not intended.

The intent of land parcel access restriction is simply to deny movement into the area and limited height airspace above the parcel.

Balancing the rights of landowners and passerbys is admittedly a sophisticated discussion. Glad we are getting into it - we will watch and listen and try to come up with appropriate solutions.

Limit llEjectPest() or whatever the old torches use so that it is constrained to the same altitude as the built-in land controls.