Malicious Office-Recall in Ravenglass

Groups are groups. Simple.

Accept a member into the group, you run the risk of being voted out by recall.

Groups are intended to be shared equally by all members and not used as a dictatorship, which Prokofy seems to attest to. Grouping is not necessary on rented land, in fact it's commonly used to exploit the 10% land bonus.

So Prok, if you want insular control of your land, don't group it. Otherwise quit whining.

Good job Cubey.

Yeah, that's a good idea, Cubey. It makes a lot more sense than the system they have now.

Perfection. Much admiration for not just throwing out a problem, but coming with a solution.

No, Weedy, the community at large AND even the Lindens agree that the current socialist-commune style group functions are not helpful to promoting even equal-member group projects they claim to facilitate. And the objectively harm businesses and corporations formed on the CEO/board of trustees model, and they objectively hobble game progress.

Any one member of even an all-animals-are-equal type of group can disrupt the entire project by officer-recall that paralyzes the group for up to 7 days (there are workarounds but they take some doing).

That's why the utopianist socialist ideas you are touting just never work, because there are too many terrorists spawned by those systems who then paralyze groups and entire societies.

People often behave irresponsibly when they always feel that someone else is paying, either an individual or "the group". They feel they can take actions without consequences, and endlessly receive entitlements. That's why socialism, whatever its noble-sounding ideals, always contains the seeds of crime and terrorism within it.

Groups may be "intended" to be seemingly "shared equally" but just because someone comes up with some different models doesn't mean a dictatorshp is in the making. We've just seen Cubey come up with a dozen different refinements of the system and provide insights on how to toggle them effectively. That's the wave of the future. There's not going to be an attitude of "groups are groups" -- not when their weaknesses cause this much havoc.

The collectivist/commune/collegial type models of all members equal and all sharing a forced redistribution of resources, the kind you see in parts of Eurasia, for example, just don't work to bring prosperity and freedom to most of the citizens of societies with those models. If they did, their models would be more successful in spreading Westward in places other than college campuses and Internet tekkie communes.

A CEO and his board of trustees take a position of accountability -- each has made an investment, and has motivation to act in a way that is responsible to it. By not threatening him with the rogue confiscation of his assets by a terrorist who installs their own Bolshevik-style treacherous officer to sell the land or seize control of land they didn't pay for, you can encourage a climate of stable investment that is for the good of society.

If someone pays all the tier and all the upfront purchase price for land, then they ought not to be separated from it in the name of "terrorism of the people" practiced by one rogue member.

In this game, people are free to come and go from groups they don't like, and not patronize clubs or malls or establishments they don't like, so if they felt someone became a "tyrant" they could just opt out. That's the great thing about a game that still, thank God, doesn't instill a player-run government with people like you in it hectoring everybody and running things and ruining people's enjoyment by their artificial and sectarian notions of property ownership.

Grouping is vital to renters to be able to see the land list easily, to gain from the group's additional purchases to create more land for them to have more prims if they wish, to gain from their share of the group's dwell benefits, to gain from group messages of events, and so on.

Grouping isn't an "exploit," it is allowed and indeed encouraged in the game. That nobody seems to have used it much for rentals is just a function of its huge risks from officer recall and tier pullers.

There is nothing wrong with benefiting from the 10 percent bonus. The Lindens put the 10 percent bonus in precisely because they want to encourage groups and group land. The 10 percent bonus is an incentive for big projects, artistic and non-profit, or commercial and business-related. So far, the Lindens on the whole tolerate this sort of entrepreneurial activity, although due to a minority of players such as yourself, and a minority of Lindens with certain social engineering ideas (I'm going to hope they are a minority), they still hobble things like events and have been slow on fixing up group tools that essentially function not to stop tyranny but to cripple investment.

To try to portray the 10 percent bonus as evil, or used maliciously if it is used for businesses such as rentals, only reveals your views to be of the socialist/sectarian variety. Most people understand, with common sense and a general shared sense of liberal market democracy, wherever their place on the left-right spectrum, that bulk discounts are normal for larger purchases, and incentives to business, even in a social democracy, are to be appreciated, not condemned.

This looks pretty good. It means run the system through a set of increasingly restrictive functions that the founder toggles, rather than trying to devise a set of disparate roles in the group that has a statis set of functions tied to it.

You'd have to add "set URLs for music and video" on to the list as well as "name/count prims" and "return prims" and "name av bans" and "use freeze and eject bans"

I think clubs want to have a management group that can set URLs, return griefer prims, eject avs etc but not

When these tools are fixed, large mall and club owners can provide more jobs reasonably and support more projects, without having to turn over their land to the vulnerability of sale if the land is in the group.

I also wonder why we can't have ordinary members with deed-to-group privileges. Of course, deeding an object that can accept money currently redstributes money to the entire group. But if the founder/investment officer gets to decide how income from deeded objects work, or if founder plus management officers or whatever formula, maybe that could work.

I almost would agree with your point, but to throw this bullshit into the mix leads me to think you are once again incapable of debate without making accusations.

You have NO right to accuse me of socialist anything. You have no idea who I am, what I stand for or what my beliefs are, so just back off. In fact, I am AR'ing you.

Sure they have... teleportation.

The ultimate in public transportation.

Nowhere did the Lindens say "socialist-commune" style, thats just more of your crap. The community at large is not represented by you.

No, you won't name names. You are violating the Forum Guidelines by doing this:



This is an informal warning. If you continue to name names publically in the forums, there will be formal warnings.

Thank you in advance for respecting people's privacy.

pwned!
(the image link went *poof*, so now you only get text)

Man...

Triple neg rates,

Secret handshakes

and the smackdown from Pathfinder

this thread has it all...

WAIT WHERES THE OBIGLATORY T SHIRT PANDA?

Pathfinder, you really need to clarify that.

Naming names happens around here continually and is very inconsistently enforced.

Look at Pete Fats - he was constantly named around here and no one did anything about it, and it's quite probable it was all inaccurate in the end as well.

Targeting Prok because he defends himself against constant attacking by the community just makes you look like you're trying to appeal to popularity, it doesn't make you look like you know how to apply the rules.

I would agree with you blaze, but in this case I cannot. The reason I cannot is that in conjunction with naming names, Prokofy tries to lead us to believe that the person threatened Prok and continued by typing out questionable materials about Nexcom and its employees. Are these accusations true? We don't know, which leaves the window wide-open for slander by Prokofy. I'm not suggesting Prokofy would do such a disturbing thing as lie, but the opportunity is there.

Three points:

One: In the Pete Fats case, this wasn't 'private' knowledge. Anyone could go in world, fly up to 500 meters on their plot, and get the name. Nor was it "all inaccurate". The items were 100% verifiable.

Two: No, pathfinder doesn't need to clarify that. He was clear enough.

Three: Actually, PN should be more sensative to the ToS rules, what with the whole personal information thing. But, repeatedly lately, PN has very vocally been saying that PN will break the rules as it darn well suits PN, from naming names, to mass neg-rate campaigns, to horribly abusing the rating system at large, and so on. It's past time a linden stood up against that, frankly.

Can this poisonous thread infecting our world's foremost forum be moved somewhere else? Please?

In the guidelines:



First sentence in this thread began with naming someone and accusing them of malicious intent. Whether or not that intent was indeed malicious is irrelevant. Such things are a private matter and NOT for public posting.

People who feel the need to "defend" themselves by breaking the rules here are breaking the rules. Period.

I'm leaving this thread open because there are constructive things being posted about how to deal with groups and group officer issues. But if people attack each other or post names of individuals, I'm going to close it.

"You have not convinced a man because you have silenced him."

Henry David Thoreau

Do you not have an alt placed as an officer of the group, so you can just leave the group, end the recall and then invite yourself back in?

Eh, good enough for me.

The Golden Rule


"TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE TREATED."


"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men
should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is
the law and the prophets." (Matthew 7:12 KJV)

The truly frightening thing is that I believe he does exactly that. That's the problem with people who want to be martyrs for their "cause." The more he baits and antagonizes people into retaliation, the more he feels he can justify his agenda of painting the rest of the community as insular and antagonistic. It's the snake eating its own tail... the self fulfilling prophecy.

Good point Chip
maybe this is better


can’t see the forest for the trees


An expression used of someone who is too involved in the details of a problem to look at the situation as a whole: “The congressman became so involved in the wording of his bill that he couldn’t see the forest for the trees; he did not realize that the bill could never pass.”

Prokofy, do you have a book/chapter for that Thoreau quote? I'm not entirely sure Thoreau actually said that. Is it possible you're thinking of John Morley? He wrote, "You have not converted a man, because you have silenced him," in Chapter V of On Compromise.

WHAT NOW BIATCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!