Please have a backbone, Linden Lab

this tread is getting anoying, i dont want in Second Life someone that will thinkwhat is best for me, for you or anything.
The is reserved to what i call the "real" world.

If you dont like it dont look at it, but its not gonna disappear because you arent seeing it.

I can well believe that this thread is annoying you. At the end of the day whats right is right and whats wrong is wrong and if,like yourself,you live somewhere in between,then you get annoyed because you have no argument.

To TRY and return to the original question - why are LL not using CC/ISP bans - would be a waste of time now that you've spent 12 pages striking a blow for freedom Kyrah.

It's a fair question.

Sox maybe you can start a new thread to bring it to LL attention.

A lot posted in this thread....so sorry if I state something that's been brought up since I last posted.

Sox, I can understand your point of view (well, in a way). As a police officer, you must see the lowest behaviors of humanity on a daily basis. So people with racist views must really grate on you...since they're probably a bit reminiscent of the criminal elements you have to deal with.

However, as an officer of the law, don't you agree that saying and doing are two different things? If these self-proclaimed Nazis start terrorizing other players (which has been mentioned), then the Lindens have cause to go after them. Simply showing their beliefs, no matter how repugnant we find them, isn't justifiable cause for perma-banning them, IMHO.

How, then, do we deal with things like KKK photo shoots and Nazi buildings? It's my opinion that making a fuss over hate groups only gives their cause prominence. If they want to build concentration camps and burn crosses *on their own private land*, then let them...and ignore their bluster.

When they lash out at others is when we need to take action. I'd like to hear more about what activities these people have actually done against *other people*. If all they're doing is the racist equivalent of masturbating...then there's really no reason why I would want to make them a spectacle for all to see.

No, it's something they aren't doing to your liking which is different than not doing anything.

You can call them freedom fighters or whatever you like but they are bringing up another side to the issue that you want to disregard. Everyone has a point of view and just because you disagree with it doesn't make it wrong.

People like you scare the hell out of me...Now its the internet...next it will be tv and books....Read Fahrenheit 451 and tell me we aren't heading for that future.

So it's not ok for them to break rules but its fine for you to break rules by posting names?...

That's an ironic absurdity. Truly Orwellian. The death of reason.

Freedom of speech is the ONE thing that prevents Marxism. Freedom of speech is your only defense against tyranny.

In the US, a "hate crime" is a crime that is motivated by hate, such as assault or intimidation. Hate is not a crime, the expression of hate is not a crime. Assault and acts of intimidation are examples of crimes.

"Freedom of speech" is not merely a nice but unachievable idea. It is a fundamental necessity without which there is no freedom or liberty. It's the most fundamental freedom, next to freedom of thought.

Does a "right to bear arms" include the right to use your gun to shoot anybody any time you want? Of course not.

"Freedom of speech" likewise does not give you the right to cause actual harm to other people using your words (or images). It does not include the right to intimidate, libel or slander.

Buster

At the end of the day LL wont ban someone for being a Nazi or anything because it will open them up to legal action. However what they will do is look for conduct that clearly breaks the TOS and implement the standard penalties everyone gets. Why? Because its the safest action legally and financially. Until someone breaks the TOS enough to where the standard disciplinary action is to call for a perma-ban, then LL wont do it. And thats the smart move as a business entity. We can discuss right/wrong, policing, etc until we are blue in the face and it wont change things. The only thing that would make LL act differently in these cases is if they could prove they were losing a large amount of customers due to a person(s) actions.

I don't like 'hate groups,' those that marginalise and demean others from bigotry and warped thinking, and I also do know that SL is not a 'free world,' that it is owned by LL and can have any policies enforced they want to enforce, but....

The Lindens have chosen to let SL operate as a free world, and most of the people in it live in some form of democracy. It seems to emulate the American form, for the most part, a free market for our talents and creativity, and yes, our ideas of what life is all about. And this American form, this free market that it resembles, does guarantee the right to free speech and public demonstration.

Here's the thing: if you say, "All have the right to free speech," but they are not allowed to actually 'say' or 'show' their ideas, only allowed to think them privately, then there is really no free speech. 'Speech' is an action, a verb in this case , not *just* a thought. As long as they abide within the limits of the areas of SL they own, or areas where all other SL peeps are allowed to express themselves freely, and as long as they inflict no actual harm, such as somehow destroying a sim or someone's property, then we've got to allow them the opportunity to speak. Now, just like any Real Life legal public gatherings, they can't be allowed to take over an area that does not belong to them. If they do that, then they should, indeed, be banned, for 'breaking the peace,' taking an area that is public and making it their own to the exclusion of other's rights to assemble there and use the area.

The thing about free speech in America is that it's a 'buyer's market.' Peeps can put out their ideas in the marketplace, but if we don't support them, they will whither and die or become marginal nonentities, not because they were forced to silence by threat and law, but because the lack of merit in their speech and ideas caused them to be rejected by most of us. I know this doesn't always happen immediately, this turning away from the cranks and haters and psychotics, but if we are people of sound mind and good will, it will happen eventually.

I don't think we need a bunch of Presidents, Mayors, Lawyers, etc, in our SL. (Dang, don't we have enough of that in our FL???) We need reasonable controls to keep others from griefing us. However, as long as LL operates the community in the 'America mode' we have to let others have their say. Once we let legalisms rule our lives instead of our own good judgment, then any part of our lives and speech and beliefs that others find repugnant can be done away with. If 'their' share of the public square can be taken away, then so can your's, so can mine.

Our SL freedom to think, do and create can be ruined for all of us very easily, even with the best of intentions. So please tread carefully, think carefully, before imposing legalistic systems in our little Second Lives, my friends.

Yeah, why should the so-called 'freedom fighters' have a say? They just get in the way of Sox telling us more about his being an American History major, a Marine, a cop and whatever else fits the topic du jour.

Shoo, freedom fighters! You're not wanted in Sox' world. Better to shut up and wait to be clubbed in the head and banned because today the P.C. crowd wants to quote Marx and ban people whose favorite color is blue.

You (and others) are worrying too much. LL will act as a business with its best interests (financial and growth) at heart. If they impose new rules or regulations its because something is either hurting them financially or stumping their growth. There is no government other than LL. And for the most part our vote does not count unless alot of us vote by not spending our real $$$. Then change will occur. Ranting on the forums like we all (myself included) do, wont change gobal LL policy.

Sorry to go off on a tangent, but...

Buster I'm a bit confused about free speech preventing Marxism!! What is your definition of Marxism!? Do you mean dictatorships? Or the baddie Russians? Read a bit about Marx and what his ideas of free speech in a capitalist economy can achieve and you will see what I mean! Still it gave me a chuckle.

It's been represented repeatedly that people are getting around the rules with alts, and that LL for whatever reasons doesn't have the tools it needs (dare I say, the tools it should have) to prevent rule-bending. So, it seems, that even if John Q Public and Jane M Everyman are characters of the same credit-card holder, John Q Public's player can engage in harrassing and threatening actions all he wants, get banned for a paltry 14 days, and still enjoy SL as Jane M Everyman.

Smart business move? Maybe -- a token appearance of keeping a clean house while raking in the money. But ethical it is not. As I understand the TOS it applies to users, not characters. And until Linden Labs establishes a record of enforcing its own rules consistently and effectively, then I most definitely shall withhold my financial support. I would encourage others to do the same.

Thank you - in the midst of the apologists trying to dilute this issue or turn it into some free speech argument, it is nice to see someone sum up the point that this thread started on so perfectly.

Umm..Cris..I think it was stated over and over again that free speech is entirely a different issue from harassment. I don't think folks were being apologists, but some of us were trying to be realists when it came to talk of what folks could believe in, do on thier own land, and not be subjected to reverse-censorship and harassment. Some folks were going overboard the other direction and trying to hamper all expression that doesn't fit into their perfect little worlds.

I am in total agreement with the idea that LL should be far tougher on hate crimes and harassment, those that repeatedly abuse the system and break the ToS, and those that make any sort of RL threat.

Correct. No where in my comments did I say LL has the correct tool set or policies in place. I am simply trying to get people more focused on the reality of business and stop going off on tangents about free speech.

Again, you are responding to my comments out of context. My "smart business move" comment was based on a choice between following standard procedures/rules everyone has to abide by versus acting on 'emotion' and going outside the standard procedures just to deal with an alledged 'trouble maker'. Legally its the smarter move. Thats my only point. Your talk about "token appearances" is an entirely different subject.

Yeah, and even if it's different people sharing the one credit card then tough. Random strangers don't share credit cards, it's usually people with close relationships. Let them sort the person in real life if someone using that card gets them all banned.

I wasn't referring to you - but other people in the thread misrepresented the original post and just went off on a freedom of speech tangent, which this is not about. As always, your posts were rational and on point.

There is and always will be 2 sides to this issue You can't argue one side withought recognizing the other side of it.

I do recognize it - what I don't do is misrepresent it to suit my own arguments. This is about stronger enforcement of things that Linden Lab has already stated that violates their own policies.

No, you haven't misrepresented your views...but others have taken those same views and wildly distorted them ...such as:


Wheras I agree that should adopt a stronger stance on their policies I vehemently disagree with the above quote and there are those who would love to use this instance to try and silence more than hate.

I agree with you, that post is way over the line - it distorts my original posts as much as many of the free speech ones do.

The lens focuses. As it does, it's good to see a bit more unity come out of it. That's the message I hope LL can filter out through all the noise: while particulars vary, no one is alone in asking LL to apply policy consistently and strengthen their tools and response against those who harrass and threaten others in-game... whatever their motives. No one would be alone in incurring financial repercussions should LL fail in this regard.

Let Linden Labs work out the details; it's their right as company holders, just as it is players' right as customers to see policy enforced and enjoy a GAME true to its advertised goals. The rest is, I submit, plenty of fuel for fire in another thread.

I do agree that if we are talking about the TOS, those rules are plainly stated and should be enforced. My reply was more to those that seemed to be taking it as a political thing in SL.

What I really meant to put forth in my rather long-winded (and yes, political sounding) post is this: We do affect LL policy, if we grouse loud enough and long enough, especially if we paint LL in the light of being uncaring. Nobody and no company wants to appear that way. I just would not want to see policy set up that essentially would lead to a 'fearful' attitude by the SL population as a whole in our exploration of creating virtual realities here.

I really enjoy the freedom and creativity and exploration of virtual ideas in SL. I don't enjoy bigots and hateful people, not at all, but I wouldn't want to see a policy that might impinge on our virtual world in a negative way for all of us.

There Stated a bit more simply, I hope.