Since when does the word game notate shooting and vandalism?

The Outlands wall used to be the pride of the wwIIonliner group.

It was our graffiti wall, with non-political signatures of each member posted tastefully on the wall.

It was really cool.

But, lately has been subject to incessant vandals. It has been nearly completely destroyed twice, and several griefers started spamming it with political messages.

What used to be really cool, turned into a huge blob of political spam that nobody really enjoys.

We've decided to clean up the wall and set it to "no build" since the wall was intended to provide clear demarcation between safe and unsafe land. The current poster campaign seems to be obscuring this function.

So does this mean we can not post anything on our wall? Next are you going to erase all the images on our properties? I would agree to not put up political messages (not like I have done this anyway) if you let us put up stuff on the wall.

Also to the guys bashing us wwiiol'ers again get a clue. The people that live around us do not complain about us shooting them. The only ones that complain are the people that come to our property and vandalize or make rude comments. If you do that you are asking to get shot. So if you do not want to get shot do not vandalize our stuff and do not make stupid comments to us while you are on our land. Or better yet stay out of areas with damage turned on. I see a million things that I think are way out of line and would like changed but this game is all about being able to do anything so I just do not visit the areas I do not like.

I guess you don't get that it is not your wall. Just like this is not your game. The Lindens can delete anything they feel like and you can't do a thing about it. You stay out of my garden too.

Nicole, of course Camaro gets that it isn't his wall.

That's why he's asking the question, and requesting that we be able to post our tasteful graffiti as we did before political griefers came along. Unfortunately I don't think that's possible. The same thing that happened last time would just happen again.

Relax - we aren't out to get you, or your garden.

Thank you Haney! Not that I am against people having an opinion but that was just getting ridiculous

First, it is not true that the only ones complaining are those who come to do you harm. I have long mainained that i should be able to visit the residents and businesses in Jessie without interference, if I come un-armed and do not confront. I still believe this. Now, when people come up to me, look at my lack of arms and the big fat smile on my face and after thinking carefully about it for a few minutes they decide to simply blow me away, I get a bit cross. Just thought I'd clear that up.

Second, yes, the game is about doing what you like. I like the outlands. I will continue to visit. Please arrange not to interfere with my visits. I will avoid interfering with you.

Thanks

Kathy, I thought we talked about this the other night?

Nobody can garuntee that you will live in the outlands. Your expectation that you should enter the outlands unarmed, and not be shot at is simply irrational.

The whole premise of the outlands was originally one of uncertainty and danger.

That's what makes the outlands inherently different.

Until you realize that, you're going to continue to be frustrated as your expectations are not fulfilled.

Read my reply in another of your many posts on this topic.

Simply put, you are mistaken, I think, in your understanding of what the outlands CAN be without having a bad effect on the ENTIRE game.

We're not talking "uncertainty and danger". We're talking assault - virtually and psychologically.

If we agreed to anything when we "talked" it was that I would stop setting my "Home" to your property and dieing 200+ times at your doorstep, if you would let me go buy wings at the black pyramid.

If you want a more meaningful discussion, don't make it up in your own head. Come see me - unarmed - and we'll talk.

Please remember to come unarmed.

And please don't reply to this without reading my other post. I'm supposed to be working, not arguing with you.

ick, i hate to stay on the subject of the flag... but mind readers aren't the only ones that can utilize common sense. did you expect more of a positive reaction to your rebel flag? could somone possibly be so oblivious as to not see how the rebel flag is seen these days? like i said in my example earlier, you could have just put up a swastika... they are both good symbols that have been perverted by hate. the only reason you shose a symbol like this is to stir things up that could lead to an argument. worse things, like writing racial slurs on the wall, certainly would create much more of a stir. the problem with that is... you would immediately be banned - without giving you an opportunity to argue. you COULD have just notified a linden. you COULD have just found the owner of the tagging. you COULD have dealt with it in a respectful manner. but did you? no. and that is reason enough to question your motives.

So, you want a feeling of uncertainty and danger, but no such actually present?

What's the point?

I can't believe you guys want to go on and on about that flag. To decide that it means something good or bad is just a means of getting yourselves worked up. No one did anything to anyone, yet you choose to be offended. You have control over your feelings and you choose to find fault. (Brentosh, I am really just teasing about my garden, I know that nothing could really happen to it.)
If I don't like what you have to say, I'll avoid you (or kick you out of my spot) but I am not going to demand that you all behave. I am not your mom. I can't make you be what I think is good. I can wish you all weren't such a pain in the ass, but I don't expect you to agree with me or behave the way that I want you to.
People go on and on about rights, you only have the rights that you are given, not the rights you want.

I have my first property in the Outlands, so I guess you could say I 'live' there. When I first started building, I did so because my friend that introduced me to the place lived there also, because there was open land, and no other reason. So I built next door. For the first little while, I didn't realize that there wasn't a health meter everywhere because I was quite laggy at first (I've been on SL since April 1st) . By the time I did, I had already put a lot of work into my temple. Since I dug down, it would prove quite difficult to move it somewhere else. Plus, my friend was right there and had no intentions of moving.

Now, I have to preface this by saying I don't mind the possibility of getting shot. I do however, mind being shot and shot and shot, and chased into the bottom of my temple and shot and shot again, while I'm trying to build. If it had been once or twice, okay. Fair enough. It is the Outlands, I understand this. But it was the repeated shooting. I once got shot fifteen or twenty times within a half an hour, on my own property, while I was trying to build. This is not funny. This is not cool. This is irritating and pointless. And sure, I could give a negative rating, if I could see my attacker. The biggest problem with negative ratings is that the person can negatively rate you back...for rating them negatively. Which is a problem.

There is a point where your enjoyment starts to ruin my game. And this is a line where it must stop. We all have equal rights here.

Since the change in the Outlands, I haven't been shot, and can't be shot on my own property. It's much nicer. CyberCity is an example of a place with an element of danger where you're not going to get shot at the moment you step in there. You have to be careful about flying, you have the possibility of getting shot or attacked by Cyber Ninjas, yet you can still fly around without the guarentee of that happening. To use a geek reference, it's like using the Holodeck with the safeties turned off. You aren't asking to kill or be killed. You're looking for that element of danger. And if it can work in CyberCity, it can work in the Outlands. If people play nice and respect other people without forcing them to by turning off the health meters.

The other issue is, most guns don't just bring your health meter down a little, they take it /right/ down in one shot or within two or three. What might make things better is that say, in the Outlands for example, it would take as many as ten or fifteen direct hits to kill someone. That way? The person being shot at has a chance to defend themselves or get undercover if they don't want to get killed. It's more of a game then, and not hunting.

I don't have a solution to offer. But there must be a way for the war-people to have their war, the element of danger people to have that, and the people who want peace to have that. And to be able to do each of these things as the mood strikes. Unlike real life, we should be able to choose when we're vulnerable. That's what makes it a Second Life.

Don't take me the wrong way, I'm the last person to be offended by the rebel flag. But the thing is... many more people in America see it as a hate symbol rather than what it really is. And if Syank is as passionate about the flag as he claims to be, he would know not to use it.

This flag thing is just a small example of what many of the problems stem from. Childish argumentative logic.

Well since I am the only WWIIOL guy in SL without a gun I can say I have never blown away an unarmed person. Its funny how you label us as a group and stereo-type all the members. I have never seen a peson blame it on a single person. It just always blamed on the whole WWIIOL group. Notice to SL residents other people besides WWIIOL guys have guns. Stop blaming us for everything that goes wrong please. I know this may sound a bit harsh but since parts of Jessie are a live fire area maybe the businesses/people that do not like the guns should stay away. I suppose I could act like some people here and go cry to the lindens because their area is not live fire and I want it to be.

One more thing on the Confederate Flag. I can see how it can be offensive to some but how far are we going to let censorship go? Like I said I can think of a few things in the game that offend me. Are the Lindens going to ban their accounts and remove the offending items like they do to the WWIIOL guys?

Kathy,
That was me that blew you away.
Why?
I was flying around jesse and all the sudden you start shouting "WHO THE !@# SHOT ME?"

Over and over.
Then I shot you.
You asked why, I said because your here (in the outlands).

You proceeded to call me names. I shot you again...

Incidently, it was a non WWIIOLer that shot you the first time, I killed him.

I would have let you go before but you kept mouthing off.

And you know its bad when other SLers ask me to shoot you.

As far as I am concerned, if you enter a place where you can get shot, that is also nicknamed the "Outlands" then you get what you get.
Don't be surprised if you get shot for being on someones turf.

Its my friggin second life, and if I want to pretend that I shoot people for being in the wong place, then I am playing SL the way I want to.

If you don't like it, don't go to jesse.

OK Kathy there you go. If Clint is telling the truth you certainly fall into the rude coments catagory.

"IMHO -- the WWiioler guys came in with a war mentally..."

I know you know at least a few that don't fall into that catagory.

Also...
What's going to happen when SL goes gold?

Whe it goes gold 99% of the WWIIOL people will not play due to the treatment by other residents during beta. Most of the other residents are awsome but there are a few (maybe 10% of less) that are not. Since nothing was done about this and that minority of not so nice people screwed things up for a lot of players the blame falls on the Lindens. I know most of the WWIIOL people are already bashing the game and I am sure they will not recomend it to family/friends. I wish this game would have turned into a game where you could truley do anything but it has not. I wonder how the playerbase will turn out if people can still get banned on false complaints with ZERO investigation or without even hearing the story of the person complained against. Good Luck if you are staying because I highly doubt I will.

I hate the word "game" altogether when applied to Second Life. To me it cheapens the experience. If the goal of SL were to be just a fancier version of half Life, or Quake then the word "game" might fit. If you suggest that life itself is just a game and therefore everything we do in life is also a game, then that broadens the use of the word to the point of meaninglessness.

There is of course a game aspect to the Outlands and for people who are into that their use of the word game is fine. For the rest of the SL world there is also a "game" which we might call the "popularity game" which I also think serves to limit rather than enhance the appeal of the PROGRAM.

In theory you could have a dozen different sets of rules in SL, and so it would be more akin to a casino than a game. We don't call casinos games do we? SL is a 3D-VR PROGRAM d*mnit!

As to politics, religion, pacifism, or war mongering my sense of deja-vu tells me that the sooner the Lindens can dispel the myth that SL operates under the rules of the US Constitution the better. It's a PROGRAM, run by a COMPANY under the rules of the TOS (Terms of Service). The objective is to provide a vehicle (ooops, now don't start calling SL a vehicle) where the maximum number of people can enjoy themselves online and they (LL) can make a profit.

That PROBABLY means that at some point certain extreme ideas and activities are going to have to be forbidden or at least limited. It has NOTHING to do with whether those ideas or activities are Constitutional, ethical, or moral. IN fact, if SL is to do well it will probably have to be less FREE than real life is in some respects. GET USED TO IT!

If you feel strongly about guns, flags, freedom of speech and many other issues, then by all means write your congress-person, march in a picket line, sign petitions, but please don't bring those things into SL, because hashing those issues out in SL won't do a darned thing to solve those differences in the real world, and the process of all the endless debates will make our collective second lives miserable. In fact if you spend all your time on "issues" in SL you will have a lot less time on your hands to do some real good in the real world. Save SL for fun stuff PLEASE!


SL is a virtual reality, that can in theory take on the appearance of any historical or SCI-FI novel ever written or to be written. For real world ISSUES we are much better off solving them in the real world, not in the context of a fantasy.

Having played a number of online games going back to the early 90s. i find this game's situation interesting. Alot of other games also had the same kind of issues. It parallels that of of many i have played before. Reality that dispite the makeup of the original beta community, if this game hits the shelf, those who want no part of shoot outs will likely be in the minority. As others have said, if you dont want to fend for yourself in jessie, stay away. If you dont want to be offended stay out of the mature areas. Some conduct recently is clearly in violation of the ratings rules as they took place in non mature rated areas.

One of the problems here is that the damage enabled area went from 4 zones to 1. There really needs to be many more. If the Lindens want to keep many of the incoming players they need expand the damage zone.

There is also problem with the discipline system when you suspend people and cannot even tell them what they did wrong. Appearently if you make the wrong people mad, you get booted with no explaination other than they dont like you. You end up with players having no idea why they were banned. And players getting banned for things they should not be.

As it is this game is way to clickish. If the lindens don't mind limiting membership to those think and act the way the high and mighty beta testers want them to then fine. But dont expect to retain alot of your new accounts. The current attitude basicly removes the PvP customer from considering this game viable and the PvP croud is quite a bit larger than the bread baking crowd. if you think you can survive in the bread baking niche (and then only those approved by the original bread bakers) then carry on.

"One of the problems here is that the damage enabled area went from 4 zones to 1. There really needs to be many more. If the Lindens want to keep many of the incoming players they need expand the damage zone. "

Definitely.

But once thats done (or even until thats done) the Outland folk need to keep the war games confined to the Outland sim(s). This notion is not for or against war gaming, it is just a matter of sticking to the rules of each sim whatever those may be.

Where physics and other program setting can be used to control behavior automatically thats great, but there will always be aspects of the program that can't be automated and thus will require people to adjudicate disagreements and ultimately may result in someone's privileges being limited in some way.

Well, the fact of the matter is, he is not telling the truth. He is ALMOST telling the truth. First, I did not swear at anyone. I challenge anyone to document sny time I have sworn at them in anger. Second, I admit that id did not have proof that he had been the initial agressor, but I think it was fair of me to make that assumption when the response to my query was a blast to the head.

Finally, Clint makes the wll-worn, by now, assumption that his hopes of playing an irresponsible child, or a muderous thug, are license for HIM to be a child or a thug. This is wrong too. As far as I know, children and thugs are not allowed to log on.

If he has a problem with my confronting him after shooting me in the face, or with my ability to get him to stop shooting me while remaining non-violent, then maybe HE should question the "PVP" model he seems to espouse.

I shoot people for being annoying. It's that simple. It doesn't matter if you are violent or not. If you bother me, I will shoot you for whatever reason. It may not be fair, but I never promised to be. Given that I have only shot one person in SL, I think that it is safe to say that I don't go around shooting people for imagined slights.