Immense ugly griefing eyesores, a risk land-owning for residents?

Now I have. I admit that it's a bit hard on the eyes.
Still, what if the owner liked his build? Unlikely, but do we have to censor some of the things that are to some people's taste?


In fact I have in mind the kind of "shop" that's just a lot of flat prims with texture on it, floating in thin air. Not even a building around it, so it's obvious for me that the owner doesn't care about making it look nice.

I tend to agree, Khamon. Certainly the many hints by Philip Linden tend to point that way as the "future".

While I think that you should be able to parcel out smaller plots, I tend to agree on LL that they - as a company - should only be dealing "wholesale". If the sim owners want to split up the sim as they see fit in many parcels, and deal with all individuals that way, that's their problem - not LL's. At least that's the way I see it.

estate sims do this all the time. but we're back to that "owning an entire sim" routine. and i agree that people can still grief at a border. but they can't get away with it if you can just pick your sim up and move. they'll find themselves floating in the endless sea alone. that's one of the better attributes of the metaverse. we're just not there yet.

As painful as it can be to live next to someone's masterpiece that you find hideous it is one of the prices of freedom. The moment we gain the ability to force someone else to conform to our particular standards, we should also agree to allowing others to force us to conform to theirs. Who gets to choose the standard?

I think a simple solution would be to allow us the ability to have our client not draw the objects on a parcel we don't wish to see. That would allow people to avoid seeing builds they find objectionable without taking away anyone's freedom to build according to their whim.

Come on, let's be real....


Chip: It's not forcing prople ton conform to our standard, it's protecting people that PAY for their land and put effort and time in itheir builds from unwarranted griefing.

I don't know that it's obvious he is an alt. He belongs to several groups and has mostly plus ratings. He was onllne so I just IM'd him asking if he knew there was a thread about him in the forums. He didn't know but does now. Maybe he'll pipe in.

Thank you for informing me.

Very well said Cadroe. And that's why we can't go to the people that created this combination of tyranny and permissiveness and ask them to fix it. Players have to fix it. One of the ways they can fix it is to use the negrate. That's really all they have.

This is a clear-cut case involving a big, glowing ugly box put there to extort a land sale. It's a clear-cut public nuisance. But so many people become contorted in the tyranny of subjectivity that they can't join together in a common consensus and start to put an end to these pernicious practices. They endlessly discuss who one man's freedom will be hurt if another man's freedom is "limited" making up all kinds of abstract scenarios which aren't related to the actual case at hand: a big ugly glowing tower put there to extort a land sale.

But...even if "anything goes" fuck-you hedonism can skirt the TOS, there's no reason why it has to skirt your negrate button. Use it.

What disturbs me most about this thread is how the accusations in the original post rely so heavily on conjecture about the builders character. Yes yes. It's a big ugly building. And despite Shiryu saying this isn't about judging attractiveness or ugliness, there is nothing substantive beyond that judgement. The only *action* from the builder has been to create something of questionable aesthetic value.

All the rest of it: he's clearly an alt, his intent is to force neighbors to buy, his building has no other practical use, etc. -- this is just guesswork. Aesthetic judgements buried beneath a cloud of ad hominum accusations of grieving which have not been demonstrated. Apparently Shiryu didn't even bother to contact the builder before posting his intuitions in the forums to see if there was anything to be known beyond his inductive leaps. And if he's incorrect, some guy with gaudy tastes is now going to be in the position of having to justify things about himself beyond questionable choices in color and scale.

This thread does indeed exhibit a "tyranny of subjectivity" and "abstract scenarios not related to the case at hand". But based on the *actions* described and presented here, I think there is much confusion about which characters play those roles.

Vestalia, to pull understanding of other's tastes to the very limits, i could accept the possibility of it not being done for griefing or annoying IF the texture was not animated. But if instead of starting the usual crusade in favor of freedom (or anarchy) you can take 2 minutes to teleport to Ontario, you will notice that the texture is animated in a way that i think objectively reduces the possibility of a very subjective form of art to zero.
The whole texture on that cube is purposedly flashing in that way to cause annoyance, there is no other possible purpose for it.
Try to look at that tower for 2 minutes in a row and then tell me if it's still about attractiveness or uglyness.

I note that you filed an abuse report without ever trying to contact me and resolve the issue.

Those are cute little mushrooms in the background!

For the record, I wasn't condoning forcing anyone to build in any particular way. I was making a broader point about control.

Look at PG versus Mature. Periodically we have useless fights in the forums about this. But when VirtualPlayboy arrives, which won't be long at all, the argument will look silly. At that point, people will be able to choose the environment they want to be in, and the problem will dissipate. The problem now is that there is one grid with one set of rules that we all have to live under. The Lindens can't make a rule that says "No builds that we think are just plain abusively ugly", because it would piss some people off, which they aren't willing to do. I think it's only a matter of time until someone launches a "grid" that does have that kind of rule, and in fact markets itself as having that kind of rule. Just like there will be a "grid" that has no rules, or that has no currency, or that is all combat everywhere, or that is an artist coop, and people will be able to choose. Personally I'm hoping that the looming teen grid is a sign that LL intends to be a part of that.

In the meantime, I agree that we just have to live with each other's tastes and interests. I don't pretend to build for my neighbors' well being, and I'm glad I don't need their approval.

That would be GREAT Jillian. I completly agree!

Cat

Excellent post Vestalia! Couldn't agree more

I have seen it. It's a big ugly building and am not contesting that. My complaint is that you are posting assumptions about a person's motivations and character without knowing whether they are correct or not, and you are basing them on nothing more than looking at a big ugly building.



It is not clear to me that the owner is an alt or how that is relevent. The use of the building is something you aren't in a position to evaluate -- maybe the guy likes gaudy colors and was simply experimenting with texures. Maybe he hasn't owned land before and doesn't know how to turn the for sale flag off. Maybe the sale flag got turned on by accident and it still shows the price he paid for it. Maybe it is for sale but he doesn't follow current land prices. Maybe you're correct in all of your assumptions. Maybe you're not.
Instead of trying to find out if there was anything which might not be apparent to you, you publish an accusation about the motivations and character of someone based on nothing more than having been confronted by an ugly building with a sale price on it.

Please don't intuite my motivations either: I'm not crusading for freedom or anarchy. Let others argue land rights. I'm arguing for fairness and facts before we make public accusations about other residents in SL.

i say take advantage of it. buy up all the now cheap land around it before he does and wait. two can play those games... and usually people who resort to tactics like that have no patience at all.... which is why they need little tricks and scams.

eventually he'll leave, you buy the lot he had, and all the proporty value goes up. and sell it all away to nice people =)

I'd do it myself.. but i have 61 L to my name lol

If LL laid out exactly what their policy was, someone would think of something they didn't, exploit it, and then scream bloody murder if the Lindens acted. I believe this is the reason they keep some of their policies vague, so that they will be 'allowed' to make situational decisions. Too many people have already proven that they don't recognize the difference between can and should.

Again, it's not only a big ugly building, there are big ugly building you can look at for more than 1 minute without having your head starting to throb. This goes beyod uglyness or aesthetical value (or lack of thereof), it's a matter of simple, plain damage to the neightbors, whose land loses value and whose enjoyment of the land they bought and spent effort on is objectively disrupded by an unwarranted behavioir

Having now seen it... I think it's kind of cool looking.

Irrelevent to my point. Both you and I are capable of coming up with a list of guesses why such a building might be constructed and for sale, and none of them may be correct.

Whether I would live next to it is also irrelevent to my becoming involved in this thread -- maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. What I hope I would never do however is post accusations about someone unless I knew for sure that I was presenting factual information and not just more guesses.

Any honesty of his intent, or not, from a subseqent post is irrelevent to my point. That information was not available to you when you posted your accusation. Even if your guesswork proves to be correct by subsequent information, that doesn't change my complaint -- a public accusation based on guesswork, even if it proves correct in the end, is not fair.

I say we gather on top of the tower and party! It makes a cool dancefloor.

If my assumptions were that uncorrect he would have negated them.
When i see ugly buildings i normally just shrug and walk away, but there are extreme cases in wich one can't simply stay silent. This is one of them.

Welcome to the SL forums, Vestalia. What you're describing is pretty much standard operating procedure around here. Thanks for adding some intelligent arguments to an otherwise hopelessly dumb thread, but trust me it's probably lost on most of these people. It's actually kind of fun once you get used to it.

EDIT: Issarlk, you have an excellent idea! If ever I saw a party tower, that would be one. OK, maybe I've never seen a party tower -- until now!