Question about banning players

It's stupid to blame the victim.

While there is a certain amount of ... "Ooh, she was fun to grief, when's her next event?" mentality, it's hardly scope for allocation of blame.

I've been griefed in the past... sometimes by determined griefers, sometimes by someone who, for whatever reason, was just stupid that day. I've also been accused (wrongly in my opinion - but I would say that) of griefing others... and in fact, though I won't mention who, it was someone who's posted to this thread, and whom now, I am on good terms with again.

Sometimes, it is all a misunderstanding.

But I still say, the only way to beat them is to stand firm together.

I call upon you all... if a griefer attact a citizen of your home sim, then join your neighbour in a land ban. Don't go further for now... Don't use the griefer toys... There is no need for violence. When the griefers can no longer leave their own land, they will learn.

I agree with that, Siobhan. But wouldn't you agree that it's silly to pretend to be a victim in a place where the worst thing someone can do is "push" your little avatar around?

Seriously, people. When the grief gets soooo bad, there's a little "X" up in the top right corner of your monitor.

Click it.

Because you're not a victim here.

By claiming to be a victim in virtual reality you trivialize the victimization that occurs in actual reality.

It's only in situations where someone is threatened with harm in the real world that I feel any sort of justification for the use of the term is valid. And in those cases, the Lindens are not the proper authority. Call the police.

-JMonde

Ok I will tread carefully here because the last time Grimmy was brought up, I experienced that lynch mob first hand. Let me start off by saying that I know he caused a lot of grief and pain for some players in SL. I don't discount that, and for those actions he deserves not to be part of SL. However, I agree with Justice that the entire thing was blown sky high out of proportion. Grimmy was different from your run of the mill griefer. Like him or hate him, you have to admit there was a very sharp intelligence and a razor sharp satirical voice behind his antics. Did he cross the line and go way too far? Yeah in some cases he did. Did the griefed also cross some major lines and become griefers themselves? Hell yes. It was one of the most interesting social phenomenoms in SL over the past year.

Hell, I remember Justice being blasted for even remotely supporting him, and being accused of being Grimmy himself. The whole thing took on a life of its own, and spiraled out of control.

Grimmy did feed on the outrage that he got - and that is Justice's point about not feeding the animals. I do see not making yourself a target as a different issue than blaming the victim for what happens to them. It is difficult to not react when you are being taunted and harassed, but it is true that griefers do move on if they can't elicit that all important reaction out of you in most cases, though not all unfortunately.

Ok now back to the original point, which I summarized in my previous post.

Then it sounds like we need the Lindens to very specifically come in and post what we can and can not do to remove annoying people from our presence.



By reacting the way you are reacting in this thread.

It's just like elementary school. Trust me. I was the griefed way back then, and reacted just like you do. They kept doing it. When I finally got my head on straight and stopped reacting to them, they stopped griefing. Simple.

Well, I'm not saying you deserved anything of the sort, for starters.

Realistically, you should be asking yourself the questions you're asking me. You are the only person responsible for the way you behave and react. I am not interested in judging your character directly. I spoke in general and didn't target my response to any person in particular.

As for what you call my "rhetoric" - well, that's precisely another indication of my point. If my rhetoric doesn't appeal to you, then you have every right to completely ignore it.

I won't stop you.

Because you can either MAKE yourself a victim of my words, or not.

Viola!

-JMonde

Ok I'm not understanding. Where in that incident did I react in a way that invited what Grimmy did? Where in that incident is the reaction you are speaking of? I don't see it.

I have looked at that incident and more than once. I don't see where I invited a response from Grimmy. Since you say in essence that you do, I'm asking you to point it out to me. It would be helpful to me.

Of course, if there is nothing in that incident in my behavior that invited Grimmy's response, then that's helpful for me to know too.

Thanks,
Candie

Fool!

I never claimed to be a victim.

I have more weapons in my armoury than you can dream of. I am no "victim".

Yet you seem to equate me with one, because I take their side?

So tell me...

Put yourself in Candie's place for a moment. You have a regular event, a few times a week. You make nothing, or little from it, but give out a load of prizes to newbies.

Imagine then, that I fly in, armoured up, with shields and weapons... and I cause your event to be halted. You shoot me, but my shields are better than your gun... you ban me, but I can hover at 40 meters, it does you no good... you try all your fancy scripts, yet nothing helps, I, in leet parlance Own you!

So you call a Linden, and I am sent packing. Until the Linden leaves. And I return.

The next event, since that was so much fun, I come back... You've done nothing to encourage me, but all that powerplay was fun for a griefer. And the story resumes.

Eventually, you get a Liason to help... He, or she says, get your neighbour to help.... So you do... and your neighbour is banned for it.

Eventually, I get suspended, or even banned, though it's known that you never really get banned for griefing, only for fighting back.

So I'm banned... and I make a new, disposable av to carry on the griefing until I can get my main one back... assuming I even care about the original... After all, a new name, a new av... a new licence to harrass...

Pfft! I say, and verily thrice more Pfft!

So to all you natsayers who think Candie and the other ehem "victims", brought it on themselves, I say, try it yourself for once... be a public figure in SL... be so famous that people think it's fun to bring you down...

And when you know, I'll consider your comments with less contempt.

Fool!

Do you host events Justice? If you put on 'good' events, you spend hours in preparation. And if you're a good event host, you feel responsible for the people who have taken the time to come to it.

Whereas I have indeed left events I was hosting where extreme griefing occured, it's a last resort. It leaves the attendees sitting there, and is irresponsible.

Let me also describe for you some things that are worse than having your little avatar pushed around:

- people running in front of, sitting on, blocking, using particles to block, game objects that are necessary for event attendees to play a game

- having your land sunk from mountain to below water level, in such a way that you can't raise it back up again. Particularly bad if it leaves part of your build hanging in mid-air.

- spending a ton of money and a ton of time and effort to establish a regular event, whether that is to make money, or to provide entertainment, or so that others can make money, and having it destroyed

- building a dock with boats for sale and having someone buy and raise the land around the boats so they can't get out

- having someone come to an event you're hosting and repeatedly shout personal and private information about you

- teaching a class and in the middle of explaining how to do a step have someone orbit you 3 sims away

- coming back to the class and having it firebombed so no one can see, and no one can learn

- having someone set something up to blast the same annoying sound clip at your build over and over and over

- same as above, but they delete it every time a linden comes near

Those are some examples of things that have happened to myself and others. Now have them happen almost every single time you log into SL for weeks on end, and the effect takes a toll.

If someone is sensitive, or ill, or having r/l problems at the time, the effect is compounded.

Did you know that people are developing real problems like Post Traumatic Stress Disorder from griefing? I read an interesting study on it recently. There's a real effect in your real life because you are a real person who's really being harrassed.

It seems to me as if everyone here is shouting their asses off in fear and preperation for a "judgment day" in SL, where the griefers take over and everything just falls apart. Where creatiive potential is based on how much money you have IRL. Where we have to be reminded that personal attacks are bad... by the CEO of the company.


The day is already here. If we all just calm down and accept it, maybe we can fix the problem. Now I expect great hoards of people to start shouting "THERE IS NO SOLUTION" and flaming me for no reason at all. Well, this is my last post here.

"Fool!"

That's classic.

I wasn't speaking about you, personally, Siobhan. I used "you" in the literary sense to address the general audience, not you specifically.

To be more clear, I *did* addressed you specifically until I said:

"Seriously, people. When the grief gets soooo bad, there's a little "X" up in the top right corner of your monitor."

From then on the focus was removed from you.

Good example of how missed contexts in a thread can throw things horribly awry, though. I'd say we've just about nipped that point in the bud.

Sorry for the confusion.

As for Candie Apple, and your sequence of events and how I'd feel? Let's focus on your point about being in the public eye, because it's a good one.

If you're in the public eye, and you're outspoken and direct and affluent in the ways of the community, expect to get hammered. If you intend to be a public figure, check your sensitivities at the door. You'll be heckled. It's a certainty.

It's like they say, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Great point, Siobhan!

-JMonde

Not at all, I've already told you the solution.... ban the griefers from everywhere... and if the Lindens would join and say, OK, if X is banned from the WHOLE SIM, then there is no altitude limit, a ban is a ban... then it could work!

OK, Justice, sorry for the misquote then.

My point still stands.

And yes, people in the public eye do and should expect more, but they still have a right not to be heckled every time they appear.

I mean, ok, GWB may or may not deserve heckling, but when he appears to "address the nation", does he get griefed?

Maybe LL should hive us a TV analogue, that we can stay priate and not let the griefers get anywhere near the host and/or contestants...

but wouldn't that deny your precious free speech?

Make a decision folks...

Free SPEACH does not mean free HARRASSMENT!

I think that about covers it.

Sio

p.s. To the person who contacted me in world; I didn't mean to offend you on this, and I apologise if I did so.

Sometimes debates get a little erm... heated...

Everyone who holds events intends to be a public figure and should expect to be 'heckled'.

Linden encourages residents to hold events. Because events bring in new customers, and increase customer retention. And anyone who takes the measly bait and helps Linden and SL in this way should expect to be abused. And be happy about it. In return for which you'll get a dollar or two USD.
And that dollar or two makes it all worth it. Gotcha.

Honestly, Candie - you seem to want me to address you specifically with my rhetoric. Please be advised that I'm not going to do that, ok? I'm going to address your POINT.

Those who have illnesses that are affected by the things they do in a virtual world would be told by a doctor not to indulge upon said virtual world.

Someone dear to me has PTSD for something a lot more severe than the sort of trauma mentioned here. I'm talking about PTSD that comes from actual war, where people take real guns and actually kill each other with them. To even remotely compare SL grief to PTSD is troubling to me. I would suggest those people who feel so affected by griefing in this virtual world remove themselves from it.

No one forces anyone to participate in SL, and the notion that people are subjected to PTSD because of their interaction in it is highly irresponsible.

I can understand anyone (such as yourself, Candie) expecting the Lindens to address the problems of griefing, and I think I and others have covered that point. They're not doing enough. More needs to be done.

The reason I felt compelled to enter this thread has nothing to do with any specific event.

First of all, I felt Catherine had a very good point - one that strikes near and dear to me, so I desired to show my support for it while others decided to shoot it out of context.

Secondly, simply stated, one who finds himself in the public eye (especially by his own deeds) needs to learn to deal in a mature fashion with the sarcastic shmucks who come to ursurp his freedoms - because the shmucks are always plentiful in all aspects of life, and if a person can't handle them in Second Life....?

I wouldn't speak on this issue if it hadn't hit me close to home before.

Like middle school, for example.

-JMonde

Unfortunately I don't have the solution to this issue but in some ways I agree with the Lindens stand-offish behavior. Of course many times this can leave a player that is harrassed with little recourse and that is the downside of it. However, if you could get someone banned from the game for grieving wouldnt this open up a whole new area for the grievers to step into?
Wouldn't they simply use other accounts to get innocent folks banned? Would people use this to try to get players banned when their "in world" relationships ended etc etc.
SL is one of the most unique worlds I have ever experienced and I love the fact that the Lindens let us have our freedoms here. I wouldn't want to live in a virtual world where the "police" showed up and interfered in my business constantly.
I wish there was an easy answer to this. I think the idea of collectively banning from land has some potential but it would take a certain amount of unity which at times, in SL seems a bit shaky. My empathy to all those that have been grieved.
Peace,
Nova

This could be expanded world wide...

We could set up a Forum here that announces the griefing incident, and once confirmed (three people from the event post their account of what happened, better ways?) then those of us who support this idea can also ban them from our land.

Or even do it inworld only - find a place to set up several large communication billboards, linked by the Darwin's TV system for network auto-worldwide-updates.

I agree that LL needs to find a new approach, as the double standard of telling us to find a solution then not supporting those who try to deal with this problem is not good management.
----


Edit For Spelling

Justice, I think maybe you should read or re-read Cory Linden's paper which was linked to for all of us to read with regards to the direction that Phillip, Cori and the rest of the Lindens want SL to go, i.e, a meld of RL and SL, a place where one could possibly make a living by participating in SL, akin to the Snowcrash world. This goal for SL pretty much negates your assertion that by claiming to be victims ppl in SL are minimalizing *RL* victims. From your tone I wonder if this is the same way you ACTUALLY feel about RL claims of victimization, something that seems to echo in your statement about your RL experience and *getting your head on straight*. At any rate, just because you possess armor shields around your emotions and feelings doesn't mean that the rest of us do, and expecting ppl to behave like you is unreasonable. Diversity is a good thing.

What baffles me is how ppl want to hide their heads in the sand, claim the recipients of greif (is *recipient* better?) are responsible for other's sociopathic behavior, when in essence it's those selfsame ppl that perpetuate the cycle. Whether one reacts or not is not the point really, (I rarely if ever even speak to a greifer, but that doesnt mean I am not bothered) in either example it's still unacceptable behavior.

P.S. I also do not want the Police showing up and mommy and daddy Linden having to step in to solve player issues, at least the ones short of hate speech and RL threats. I just want the tools we do have to be made effective. I also like the idea of a citizens group way of dealing with as Merwan mentioned.

<<Viola!>>

Merde!

Good point but no...

There's never been any qustion of banning someone on one person's say-so. If you grief my events constantly, I know I can get a number of witnesses... On the other hand, if you had a personal problem with me, then maybe I'd get one or two, but they'd be the same people every time, and would start to lose credibility as I did...

a good point, but one who's solution is itself.

I really do feel that those people who say, "If you don't like it you don't have to stay" are making an even more daft comment than, "It's only a game." Do they advise people with rl problems to commit suicide?

The fact is that if someone is being given a hard time inworld, there is no reason at all why they should be made to leave, on a temporary or permanent basis.

What is needed is for the people who actually cause the problems to be prevented from causing them.

A revolutionary idea, I know.

Pareto's Principle (The 80-20 Rule). They would merely be replaced by others.

Griefing is a fact of SL life. I have no idea how to change that. Actually, I doubt it *can* be changed.

Personally, I stopped having events. Now, if I experience griefing I have many more options since I'm not "required" to be somewhere doing something.

Nolan,



On that day, when that happens, I expect we'll have a better police force in place to take care of the "crime." I'm all for it. Why exactly do you feel I need to re-read it? How is it applicable to the point at hand, at this very moment, in this time and place? We don't yet have what they supposedly envision, and by all accounts it's safe to assume that reality is a long way off. Let's focus on today and the tasks at hand.



I'm sorry you feel that way. I see a huge distinction between the things that occur in this virtual world and the things that occur outside it, for the time being. I'm very glad I do.



That's a big leap of assumption on your part. I don't think it's necessary to state assumptions about my character. You wouldn't want me to do that to you. Can we address the points, and not the people who post them, please?



And you're making equally unreasonable assumptions about me. I can assure you I do not expect anyone to behave like me. I also love diversity. You might want to get to know me personally before you begin posting presumtions about my character. Can we address the points, and not the people who post them, please?



What I'm trying to suggest is that people can save themselves a lot of grief by wearing a thicker skin. Have I harmed anyone by stating this? Have I trivialized the problems in SL? That's possible. You know what, though? The point is really moot because no matter what happens, here's what's going to happen anyway: people will either thicken up or they will move on once they've had enough.

Merwan's point is indeed excellent. I'm sure that's the system that will emerge, just like it did in some of the other virtual worlds I've been a part of. In at least one of them, a band of citizens who go through company sponsered training is responsible for the policing of the world.

It works.

-JMonde

Not that it hasn't been stated by every single person in this thread already.

-JMonde

The only thing I've asked you to specifically address in regards to me is to apply your 'you asked for it' theory to a specific griefing incident. And yes, it's ok that you're not going to do that. I knew when I asked that you would not be able to answer. I won't push it any further.



You think? I'll dig up the URL to the article. Perhaps the author would be interested in your views.



And as said above, you were unable to support your stance. Np.



Where do people get this notion that people have to accept and be happy with shmucks? And that is you don't accept them and aren't happy with them then you're immature.

It's the schmucks who are immature, and it is they who need to learn to handle the majority of humankind. Their development was inhibited. It never matured. Their inability to deal with themselves, life, and others in an appropriate manner is what makes them... yep, you got it -- schmucks!

What a strange and horrid world it would be if we all accepted deviant behavior. That means that all those people now confined to prison, juvenile delinquent centers, psychiatric hospitals for the criminally insane, would all be out walking among us.

Get it? *They* need to accept *us*. *We* need to keep sending *them* the message loud and clear that their behavior is unacceptable.


You are welcome to say what you like about people like me who scream when themselves or others are abused. I scream because those who are abused frequently can not find their voice. I scream for them. Someone has to. And I'm perfectly willing. If I am abused, then others can be abused. So I scream when I am abused.

Call me immature, crazy, paranoid, whatever you like. Those things do roll off me like water. Because I do know myself, and I do have a strong sense of self. And if the payoff is fewer people abused, I'm down with it.


What kind of person finds it amusing when others are in pain? What kind of person laughs at another pain? Is that mature?

What kind of person shrugs and tells someone who's been hurt that it's their own fault? Is that mature?


I remember when I was 6 years old and the neighborhood bully went up to a little girl who was playing in her back yard. "Yo let's play slugger" he yelled to his friends, laughing. "You're her" he said to the little girl and punched her in the face. "Get it? Slugger? Slug her!" he shrieked with laughter and all his friends shrieked along with him.

When the little girl asked why he had done it, he said it was because she hadn't come out of her yard to play with them.

They found it amusing. And said it was her own fault. Of course, they were only 6 years old.

Candie