Second Life Forums Archive - Land Access

Woopsy Dazy

Registered User

Join date: 12 Nov 2006

Posts: 173

11-28-2006 15:56

Restricting people to fly over your land is very very very annoying. One can't fly around in the neighbourhood and check the area without constantly bumping in to some non-access area. In fact flying around is almost impossible anywhere it's crowded.

I understand the possibility to not want unwanted visitors but mostly people just block their land because there's an option to do it, and not really for any reason.

My suggestion is that you have to pay to deny access to your area, or at least pay to deny flying over it. Most people would avoid blocking if they had to pay for it. I really don't like taxes on things but it's the only way I can think of.

What you say? Isn't flying and bumping into hidden walls sooooo irritating!

Hey, at least do the denied areas more visible so we can avoid them (or maybe there's an option for that already?).

Brigit Flasheart

Registered User

Join date: 29 Nov 2005

Posts: 23

11-28-2006 16:04

If you fly high enough (500?) you will be able to cross these, though there are good reasons why people don't want others cross their land, privacy is hard to get in SL.

Woopsy Dazy

Registered User

Join date: 12 Nov 2006

Posts: 173

11-28-2006 16:08

From: Brigit Flasheart

If you fly high enough (500?) you will be able to cross these, though there are good reasons why people don't want others cross their land, privacy is hard to get in SL.

I don't wanna fly in to peoples bedrooms. Just over their land

Haravikk Mistral

Registered User

Join date: 8 Oct 2005

Posts: 2,482

11-28-2006 16:38

iirc only ban lines (ie you are explicitly banned) go up infinitely high. Access lines are only supposed to go up to 60m, so if access is restricted then just fly more than 60mb up.

I think the best solution I've seen has been to mark restricted plots somhow on the mini-map so you can see if you're about to fly into a barrier.

_____________________

Computer (Mac Pro):
2 x Quad Core 3.2ghz Xeon
10gb DDR2 800mhz FB-DIMMS
4 x 750gb, 32mb cache hard-drives (RAID-0/striped)
NVidia GeForce 8800GT (512mb)

Angel Fluffy

Very Helpful

Join date: 3 Mar 2006

Posts: 810

11-28-2006 16:46

Suggested many times before.
IMHO landowners have already paid to buy the land. They are still paying tier on the land. Asking them to pay yet more is pushing it.

Instead, it would be better if people voted for something like this, which contains the idea that :

From: that url

13) People who cannot access a parcel should not be able to see or interact with its contents and vice versa.
Anyone who does not have access to a parcel should not be able to see any objects or avatars on that parcel. They should not be able to see, hear or interact with *anything* in the parcel. People in the parcel should not be able to see them, and none of their scripts should work while they are in the parcel. They should not be able to rez objects in the parcel, or move already rezzed objects into the parcel. They'd be invisible to the parcel and the parcel and its contents invisible to them. They'd be able to move through it but not interact with it in any way. Being banned from parcels would completely remove an avatar's ability to interact with that parcel or people on it - even their scripted attachments using llSensor should not detect avatars in parcels they cannot access, and they should not see minimap blips for people who are in those parcels. No chat text on any channel by them or any of their objects should reach into the parcel. Preferably, 'ban lines' could be removed completely as there would be no reason not to let banned avatars fly around in parcels they are banned in (because they cannot do ANYTHING there)... so it would be needless to force them to leave. Plus, ban lines are ugly, and a solution where content on parcels one cannot access simply does not render at all is neater, cleaner, and hopefully will result in a lot less ugly features (ban lines) on the landscape, and a lot less impediment to peaceful Residents who harmlessly want to fly around.

We can give landowners privacy, AND fliers the ability to fly unimpeded, if we adopted a system like this.

_____________________

Volunteer Portal (FAQs!) : https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Volunteer_Portal

JIRA / Issue Tracker : http://jira.secondlife.com (& http://tinyurl.com/2jropp)

Seola Sassoon

NCD owner

Join date: 13 Dec 2005

Posts: 1,036

11-28-2006 18:03

From: Woopsy Dazy

Restricting people to fly over your land is very very very annoying. One can't fly around in the neighbourhood and check the area without constantly bumping in to some non-access area. In fact flying around is almost impossible anywhere it's crowded.

I understand the possibility to not want unwanted visitors but mostly people just block their land because there's an option to do it, and not really for any reason.

My suggestion is that you have to pay to deny access to your area, or at least pay to deny flying over it. Most people would avoid blocking if they had to pay for it. I really don't like taxes on things but it's the only way I can think of.

What you say? Isn't flying and bumping into hidden walls sooooo irritating!

Hey, at least do the denied areas more visible so we can avoid them (or maybe there's an option for that already?).

If ban lines are removed, then you'll start seeing a lot of people snagging a one time charge for security systems that tp you home immediately.

Would you prefer to get TPed back home constantly, or hit a bump and have to go a bit higher?

Woopsy Dazy

Registered User

Join date: 12 Nov 2006

Posts: 173

11-28-2006 23:35

Seems like restricted area ends at 115-117m somewhere. Should have checked, I thought they were 768m. No LOL, land-level (height over sea) is about 60m so +60m is correct! Gah forget this!

Argent Stonecutter

Emergency Mustelid

Join date: 20 Sep 2005

Posts: 20,263

12-03-2006 15:16

From: Seola Sassoon

Would you prefer to get TPed back home constantly, or hit a bump and have to go a bit higher?

Would I prefer to be TPed home immediately, or locked into a falling "sitting" animation for over a minute when I cross a sim boundary into restricted land, and eventually have to relog and find myself home anyway?

No solution short of real privacy (phantom zones or parcel basements) is going to (ahem) fly.

tristan Eliot

Say What?!

Join date: 30 Oct 2005

Posts: 494

12-03-2006 17:31

how about this... I will charge to allow people on to my parcel. I pay for my land and as i see it, i am the only one with the right to be there. Ready to pay your share to be there too?

Fenrir Reitveld

Crazy? Don't mind if I do

Join date: 20 Apr 2005

Posts: 459

12-03-2006 17:41

Shoulder the system load and then we can talk about you having unrestricted access to my parcel.

_____________________

----
----
----

Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

Land Access - Pay to Deny!

Land Access - Pay to Deny!
Woopsy Dazy Registered User Join date: 12 Nov 2006 Posts: 173	11-28-2006 15:56 Restricting people to fly over your land is very very very annoying. One can't fly around in the neighbourhood and check the area without constantly bumping in to some non-access area. In fact flying around is almost impossible anywhere it's crowded. I understand the possibility to not want unwanted visitors but mostly people just block their land because there's an option to do it, and not really for any reason. My suggestion is that you have to pay to deny access to your area, or at least pay to deny flying over it. Most people would avoid blocking if they had to pay for it. I really don't like taxes on things but it's the only way I can think of. What you say? Isn't flying and bumping into hidden walls sooooo irritating! Hey, at least do the denied areas more visible so we can avoid them (or maybe there's an option for that already?).
Brigit Flasheart Registered User Join date: 29 Nov 2005 Posts: 23	11-28-2006 16:04 If you fly high enough (500?) you will be able to cross these, though there are good reasons why people don't want others cross their land, privacy is hard to get in SL.
Woopsy Dazy Registered User Join date: 12 Nov 2006 Posts: 173	11-28-2006 16:08 From: Brigit Flasheart If you fly high enough (500?) you will be able to cross these, though there are good reasons why people don't want others cross their land, privacy is hard to get in SL. I don't wanna fly in to peoples bedrooms. Just over their land
Haravikk Mistral Registered User Join date: 8 Oct 2005 Posts: 2,482	11-28-2006 16:38 iirc only ban lines (ie you are explicitly banned) go up infinitely high. Access lines are only supposed to go up to 60m, so if access is restricted then just fly more than 60mb up. I think the best solution I've seen has been to mark restricted plots somhow on the mini-map so you can see if you're about to fly into a barrier. _____________________ Computer (Mac Pro): 2 x Quad Core 3.2ghz Xeon 10gb DDR2 800mhz FB-DIMMS 4 x 750gb, 32mb cache hard-drives (RAID-0/striped) NVidia GeForce 8800GT (512mb)
Angel Fluffy Very Helpful Join date: 3 Mar 2006 Posts: 810	11-28-2006 16:46 Suggested many times before. IMHO landowners have already paid to buy the land. They are still paying tier on the land. Asking them to pay yet more is pushing it. Instead, it would be better if people voted for something like this, which contains the idea that : From: that url 13) People who cannot access a parcel should not be able to see or interact with its contents and vice versa. Anyone who does not have access to a parcel should not be able to see any objects or avatars on that parcel. They should not be able to see, hear or interact with anything in the parcel. People in the parcel should not be able to see them, and none of their scripts should work while they are in the parcel. They should not be able to rez objects in the parcel, or move already rezzed objects into the parcel. They'd be invisible to the parcel and the parcel and its contents invisible to them. They'd be able to move through it but not interact with it in any way. Being banned from parcels would completely remove an avatar's ability to interact with that parcel or people on it - even their scripted attachments using llSensor should not detect avatars in parcels they cannot access, and they should not see minimap blips for people who are in those parcels. No chat text on any channel by them or any of their objects should reach into the parcel. Preferably, 'ban lines' could be removed completely as there would be no reason not to let banned avatars fly around in parcels they are banned in (because they cannot do ANYTHING there)... so it would be needless to force them to leave. Plus, ban lines are ugly, and a solution where content on parcels one cannot access simply does not render at all is neater, cleaner, and hopefully will result in a lot less ugly features (ban lines) on the landscape, and a lot less impediment to peaceful Residents who harmlessly want to fly around. We can give landowners privacy, AND fliers the ability to fly unimpeded, if we adopted a system like this. _____________________ Volunteer Portal (FAQs!) : https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Volunteer_Portal JIRA / Issue Tracker : http://jira.secondlife.com (& http://tinyurl.com/2jropp)
Seola Sassoon NCD owner Join date: 13 Dec 2005 Posts: 1,036	11-28-2006 18:03 From: Woopsy Dazy Restricting people to fly over your land is very very very annoying. One can't fly around in the neighbourhood and check the area without constantly bumping in to some non-access area. In fact flying around is almost impossible anywhere it's crowded. I understand the possibility to not want unwanted visitors but mostly people just block their land because there's an option to do it, and not really for any reason. My suggestion is that you have to pay to deny access to your area, or at least pay to deny flying over it. Most people would avoid blocking if they had to pay for it. I really don't like taxes on things but it's the only way I can think of. What you say? Isn't flying and bumping into hidden walls sooooo irritating! Hey, at least do the denied areas more visible so we can avoid them (or maybe there's an option for that already?). If ban lines are removed, then you'll start seeing a lot of people snagging a one time charge for security systems that tp you home immediately. Would you prefer to get TPed back home constantly, or hit a bump and have to go a bit higher?
Woopsy Dazy Registered User Join date: 12 Nov 2006 Posts: 173	11-28-2006 23:35 Seems like restricted area ends at 115-117m somewhere. Should have checked, I thought they were 768m. No LOL, land-level (height over sea) is about 60m so +60m is correct! Gah forget this!
Argent Stonecutter Emergency Mustelid Join date: 20 Sep 2005 Posts: 20,263	12-03-2006 15:16 From: Seola Sassoon Would you prefer to get TPed back home constantly, or hit a bump and have to go a bit higher? Would I prefer to be TPed home immediately, or locked into a falling "sitting" animation for over a minute when I cross a sim boundary into restricted land, and eventually have to relog and find myself home anyway? No solution short of real privacy (phantom zones or parcel basements) is going to (ahem) fly.
tristan Eliot Say What?! Join date: 30 Oct 2005 Posts: 494	12-03-2006 17:31 how about this... I will charge to allow people on to my parcel. I pay for my land and as i see it, i am the only one with the right to be there. Ready to pay your share to be there too?
Fenrir Reitveld Crazy? Don't mind if I do Join date: 20 Apr 2005 Posts: 459	12-03-2006 17:41 Shoulder the system load and then we can talk about you having unrestricted access to my parcel. _____________________ ---- ---- ----