The New - New Zoning Discussion Thread

The purpose of this thread is to discuss the specifics on how to encourage zoning in SL.

This is not about whether or not zoning is good - it's about how to implement it properly.

With that in mind:

/invalid_link.html


My opinions:

Unanimous vs. Majority:
I think a constitution / agreement for zoning should be unanimous of voting members of a quorom of 2/3 of owners in a sim, but enforcement should be majority, possibly 2/3. (So if you don't vote you don't count as a no.)

Vote:
Absolutely. I think the group voting is a natural setup, however we're limited to 15 groups. My suggestion is that for each sim, a mechanism for zoning voting be added to the UI specifically for this reason.

Absentee landlords:
A zoning constitution should take care of this from the user end, but I would like to see Linden Lab come in and enforce - this would be on clear-cut basis.
1. To use means of communication not given to players to get in touch with landlords. (They know their e-mail address, they have their credit card.)
2. To be able to provide automated warnings. (Warning! Your sim has voted that you have been absentee for 1 month! Please log in!)
3. To be able to reposess land and auction at fair market price, giving the proceeds to the owner, and return all objects on the land.

Grandfathering:
I think the easiest / least headachey thing to do would be to say yes. Let people agree to contracts and enforce them.

Organization
Sims / groups of sims are the obvious choice since they share resources.

Unanimous vs. Majority:
100% unanimous and an absent vote is a NO. Just because I take a break is no reason to come back and find my build torn down cause it no longer works with the new zoning law.

Vote:
Absolutely. If a sim can get all its residents to agree on local standards, then by all means it should be implemented. Perhaps owning land in a sim puts you in to some sort of automatic group that has some special functions related to land management. (Like all the members being able to vote anonymously if a member is in violation of the standards, at which time Linden assistance can be called for to enforce the rules of the zoning)

Absentee landlords:
If absentee before the zoning takes place, then sorry, its a deal breaker.
If absentee after zoning has been decided, then the bylaws of that area would take effect. Like 2/3 rules or whatnot. It's whatever the group setup at the start about ongoing votes.

Grandfathering:
Nope. Cause there should always be 100% agreement to implement a zone. No one should ever be subject to forced zoning. So there's nothing to grandfather..everyone is on same page.

Organization
Some sort of group, but maybe with special feature related to enforcing zone requirements. Like once land has been set to a certain zone...It remains that way for all time or until another sim-wide unanimous vote changes it. So any future buyers would be subject to the zone restrictions. It's a group tied to the land. Buy the land, in the group..when you sell the land, you're out of the group.


I would really hate to see zoning as a way for some people on a sim to force someone else out. As long as its something everyone agrees on, then its all good. This means that zoning will not solve existing neighborhood tensions. But it will make it possible for groups or even land developers to buy new land and determine a zone for it, with the assurance that it will have enforceable rules going forward.

Also zones have to understand that the sim next to them might not be zoned or zoned differently, so views may vary

Unfortunately I am against any type of zoning that wasn't paid for by groups.

I don't believe that 15 out of 16 members of a sim should be able to determine by majority vote how the last person may or may not build, if they do not own that person's land.

I think that we should have as much zoning as we can afford or organize on SL. Meaning, if you can afford an entire sim, you may zone it to your own heart's content. If you get a group together and all agree together to zone a sim, you may all do so together.

Currently, the only two ways that I know of to zone a sim is to personally own the entire neighborhood by oneself, or to group-own a sim entirely. This is difficult because people are hesitant to pay rent to a landowner instead of to the Lindens; also, groups can be mismanaged by officers (any officer in a group can sell that group's land. If I were an officer, I could sell the land to myself for $0, then sell it off to others at whatever price I want.)

I think that zoning should be kept this way; users have the right to as much zoning as they themselves are able to enforce, or as much as they can afford, or as much as they are able to group-organize for.

Because it's rather difficult to pony up the cash for an entire public sim, and harder still to arrange a trusted landlord relationship, I propose that the lindens accommodate a loose sort of zoning by taking action in several areas of technical and social development.


1. Allow Group Leases on Private Sims. Permit groups of residents with similiar residential ideas to lease private sims as a group. Give them the same per-meter discounts on land-tier that a full-sim owner would have, but require that they lease in increments of 1/16 of a sim and sign onto the lease for a longer period of time; say 1 year (but billed quarterly). Make them subject to each other in terms of building and enforcement, a sort of mini-government as loose or strict as that group cares to make it. This would give people 2 ways in which they can own land at a discounted rate; either by owning lots of land, or by owning a smaller amount of land for a required longer time-frame, and subject to group endeavors/opinions in their builds. Some groups wouldn't have any restrictions on building, while others would attempt to recreate a Heian-era Japanese settlement. Also, players would be billed to LL directly, which would encourage rather than discourage such endeavors.

2. I'll keep bringing this up, because it's a radical, wonderful idea. Turn off rendering by plot/by avatar. SL is not RL, so why should RL modes of thinking have to apply in our solutions to creative vs annoying dilemmas? Not only would this cut the knees out from people who wish to grief-by-building, it would also potentially reduce bandwidth costs for LL, even if slightly. It would also passively reinforce good neighbor standards, because a margin-griefer would not be so likely to try and annoy me, when I can simply turn their build "off" if I don't like it.

3. Areas of the world with no telehubs. This would discourage, but not disallow high-traffic builds like shopping malls or clubs in certain areas of the world. These builds would not be disallowed, but they would be less likely to flourish if they're out in the boonies, travel-wise.

4.Levels of Trust feature (specifically, land). Included in this suggested feature is the ability to designate very specific and often complex permission sets for your land. One thing that would be useful for this would be the ability to have multiple officers in a group, but only one of them, or none with the ability to sell group land. This is one way to encourage people to congregate in group endeavors.

Yes, most of these ideas are simply ones that I've suggested before. Yes, there are other equally good ideas that are suggested by others. A constant theme throughout these suggestions however, is the idea that in SL, it is often not necessary to solve disputes with Linden intervention, or with the creation of new rules. Often they can be solved if the UI or economic model is altered to allow each individual to exert a level of control over their own SL experience, and thus take away the ability of others to cause grief for me.

Also, and I can't stress this enough: I don't think that SL is the type of place I want to be, if it is against the rules to offend other people, even deliberately. Just because one person is deliberately trying to offend another, and the other person is offended, ought not necessarily mean that a rule (stated or otherwise) has been broken. "Second Life" includes Second Artists, Second Architects, Second Clothiers, Second Gamers, Second Everyone.....including Second Asshats. I may not like what someone is doing, but that does not always mean I would report them for it, or wish them to be suspended/banned.

I'll just say that I agree with everything Bel said Oh, and I'll add that I think zoning is a bad idea because it makes spur of the moment inspiration and innovation much less likely. If a land owner gets a brilliant idea and wants to run with it while the idea is fresh it would suck to have to get all the land owners together to vote whether or not to allow it. Zoning is the antithesis of creativity in my opinion. Even if I was in complete agreement with everyone else in my sim I would never ever agree to be bound by zoning rules.

We need to work towards a free market. Implementing zoning restrictions would be a step back from a free and open market.

Just as zoning does not work in the real world, it would not work in SL.

Zoning works best in large scale group projects.

Or such when one person owns a sim, and implements a theme, then others join in the theme.

The best way to implement it would be for a single owner or a group to restrict building of certain items.

Zoning groups with 100% voluntary memberships can be a positive thing. What's great is they can even set up their own rules and voting standards like the Neualtenburg Projekt (maybe LL could give these groups tools to enforce their bylaws). But the moment any person is forced into a zone/group/homeowner association that they don't choose going in, then I have a big problem with it and we're right back into the whole evil Government arguement.

I think zoning would make a lot of people happy if it were implimented properly. Unfortunately, publishing guildelines and peer pressure don't have the teeth to enforce much of anything except neighborhood strife when something goes wrong.

Give us the tools to do this properly. Let adjoining properties join together programatically and became visible neighborhoods if they so desire. Maybe have an option to hide certain parcels or neighborhoods. Have specifically zoned areas and impliment limits. There are plenty of options to consider, but they must have teeth to be effective!

Sometimes I feel as if I am being gummed to death here already. Enough is enough. Give us the tools, and by extension, the empowerment to do what you think would make us happy.

In the interest of continuing discussion, I'll respond to each comment briefly:

@Bel:

I think we see zoning very similarly.

@Unhygienix:

I agree with your concern - 15 of 16 people shouldn't dictate what the 16th does. That's why I think entering a zoning agreement should be unanimous. Now, they are free to decide what terms they'd like to agree on, whether it's something as complex as Neualtenburg with a player government, or something simple like the Varney Preservation Society, whose authority is not binding as is mostly about communication.

@Chip:

I don't see how you can agree with Bel and then be against zoning. But, as to your concern - who is to say that a zoning agreement has to stifle innovation? Zoning doesn't have to be "You must have a 2-story victorian with a 2-car garage etc etc" - zoning very well might be, "This is a creative sim and residents are encouraged to go nuts without lagging the zone" - or, a sim could just choose not to have it. Choice.

@Oz:

Good observation.

@Tina:

To echo what you said - this definitely #1 priority should be to ensure this is always voluntary.


@Lukas:

In my experience, when people calmly band together, peer pressure does work. Especially when done in a friendly manner. Worst case, abuse reports can be filed with the names of multiple people attached - which seems to carry additional weight in SL.

Some people obviously want it. If they allow it then I agree with Bel's comments about it such as it having to be completely unanimous. For myself, I would never vote to have it in my sim. Understand now?

I don't understand what all the fuss is about zoning.
We've had themed sims since beta. We can do that with groups.
Buy a sim, deed it to group, invite people to build on it.
If someone doesn't build according to your theme, kick them from the group and delete/return the build.
I am against any type of zoning that could generate friction between SL players.
Zoning should only be used when a player or group has control over the entire sim.

Zoning is one of the main reasons that I have been so against a player run government. As Chip has said, it is the antithesis of creativity. The issue that I see with everyone in a sim voting to accept zoning is one where after the zoning has been agreed on and then someone changes their mind or has an idea they think fits within the parameters of the zoning but everyone else on the sim does not. Who will resolve the issue?

As long as there are "No Zoned" sims available for the people who want them, I really don't care, but again, as Chip said, I would never move into one or agree to be bound by them on my current land. I enjoy SL because I can take images from my mind and literally form them in a 3D manner any time that I wish to log in. If I had to get zone approval for every new plant or build I added - I'd be hunting people down almost every night.

If I had to fight to justify my creation - well then SL would just not be fun any longer.

I get enough of that crap in RL.

I agree wholeheartedly with Eggy about this.

NO to player majority forced zoning.

I disagree. I don't think someone should have to shell out hundreds of dollars just so they can live in a zoned sim. SL should have some kind system set up for players who don't want to spend money on land only to have something they can't stand pop up next door to them. A little predictability is nice in my opinion. It's not for everyone, but it should be there for people who want it.

And as for it stiffling creativity, there's an entire grid for people who want to make whacky builds. Let the players who don't want whacky have a place in the game too.

I agree with ingrid - people who spontaneously agree to 'live' in a sim should be given the ability to organize and do it properly. Yeah Eggy, oh-jaded-before-time-began, there has been zoning, (areas like Kissling come to mind), and has always been a major flop.

I'm talking about people being able to cohesively band together, not make some broken party structure. (It isn't about gov't, its about just getting along with a similar idea.) The only way this works is being able to hand off property, and have some kind of succession for chrissakes.

What irritates me is the opinion that 'zoning' is doomed to fail? I say bullshit! Groups of people can and do get along, and you don't have to necessarily own an entire sim to do it. Just give us the proper tools -- its one of the major reasons anything cooperative blows up in SL.

I love Ingrids suggestion of 'turning off parcels' in view. God, I'd love SL so much more if I could just filter out what annoys me, and Linden Lab could tout the feature as well -- making land ANYWHERE more attractive to ANY buyer. I'd say that would be worth its weight in gold.

It wasn't my idea but it's a good one.

It's been suggested in feature suggestions. Be sure to add your two cents to the thread.

The only way zoning would work is if LL offered people who would be losing their shops a free plot of land in a shopping area..

How would they be losing their shops? I don't think anyone is talking about re-zoning existing sims. Just getting a system together that would let people zone a new sim.

I don't know, I think a lot of the problems could be alleviated through technical approaches that would also not require human oversight. Like turning off view of a neighbor's build as suggested, although I think that might be overkill.

If a neighbor's lights didn't extend on to my land and I could mute his parcel, for instance, that would pretty much cover the issue for me.

The big issue for me and many others is neighbors (e.g. clubs, casinos) hosting large numbers of avatars and lagging the sim into uselessness. I think it's a resource distribution issue analagous to the old prim hogging nightmare. Maybe they could use a similar solution; limit avatars per m2 owned in a sim (for some sims). You have the same kind of problem with scripts and textures, and I also think there could be a technical solution.

Something that does exacerbate clashing building tastes is the crowding. A lot of people only get aggravated by a neighbor's "ugly" build when it's right up against the property line hanging over them. I can imagine an automated system that enforced a no-build buffer between parcels to prevent this (for some sims).

I'm just saying I think the style issue is a bit of a boogeyman. There are a few people who seem to get upset by other people's tastes, but I think the vast majority of distress is caused by things that could be alleviated with automated, objective solutions.

Ohhh...hmm..I really should wait to have coffee before posting.

I'm all for that idea then

Ditto.

As long as there is available land for people who want no zoning and sims with existing builds are not affected then I have no problem with this.

No zoned land availability could become more of an issue than people think though.

Look at what has happened in RL. Here in Florida it is nearly impossible to find a home that is not in a gated community run by a home owners group unless you pay a big premium.

I've already noticed that SL mature land is more expensive than G rated land. How much would the delivery of zoned sims drive the price of mature, non-zoned sims up or would it? It is a concern.

I like the idea of allowing people to have rez control over parcels on sims they own land on. Though I doubt that I would use it (even if my neighbor put a big pic of George W in his front yard).


.

Yes, the perfect solution for you is to not live in a zoned sim. Which means all you have to do to avoid this is stay where you are. Or buy land in one of the hundreds of sims that are not zoned.

I just wanted to add, I lived in zoned sim and I'd like to think that despite adhering to the zoning rules, the builds my friends and I have made there, although being realistic looking, are still "creative" and inspired. So far the lindens haven't told me that I can only live in a shoebox if I live in Boardman.

Several of my favorite people have spoken eloquently enough on the topic and bear the same sentiments I have about it so no need for me to elude to any further commentary than to mention who they are and let thier posts speak as an echo to my thoughts.

Bel Muse
Chip Midnight
Rose Karuna
David Valentino
Ingrid Ingersoll

Don't missunderstand they all have great view points. I am still against Player run government world wide as a forced issue and simply stated the same goes for Zoning.