The Garlic Necklace doesn't really work.

Agreed, you would be surprised what I can talk people into for a meal VV

Can you explain the difference in terms a ferret could understand?

Not at all sir; I'm acutely aware of why the game, as it's currently designed, requires your inclusion to exclude you. It's one of the reasons I find the situation as frustrating as it is - because with just a little consideration at the planning stage, the whole problem could've been completely avoided!

As for the game requiring you to spam - that is a serious problem as well; it's like a scripting competition that requires one of your entries to be griefing tool of some kind. But I think there's plenty enough people that have that particular angle covered. I'm unhappy enough with the whole mess that I don't mind pointing out any and all of its flaws, whatever their importance.

/me snickers

oh I stick with threat of the brolly up their a.. erm, nose. 'Specially the wooden 'andled ones, they just hate'em! Gives'em the heebiejeebies I think... too much like a stake yer see?

Not actually in Ferret no, however in english, strictly speaking they are just longer socks, though most of mine are of the sheer "tights" variety, made of nylon or something like it instead of cotton or wool. Surely a Ferret has run up a few ladies skirts at least?

Yes, I complained about that on SLU also where the announcement was made.
This kind of crap is going to get out of hand eventually and cause all sorts of problems. Then LL will have to step in and do something. Already we have werewolf variants and other variants of the same strategy.
Just because LL does not have a policy to deal with third-party preservation of data on an avatar today, does not mean they will not or will not have to going forward.

Any of these?

ROFL, certainly not!

I do beleve that is one of the consequences of a vampire bite.

OK. I guess I really don't understand what the issue is here, then.

Is it that your name is in someone else's database, potentially associated with some irrelevant private info? Not much sympathy there; that doesn't hurt you, and your name and key (plus probably other info as well) are probably in quite a few databases for various reasons without your knowledge or permission. That's likely not going to be addressed by the Lindens, and is, again, harmless by itself.

Is it that their website has an ambiguous/misleading statement as to the actual effect of their opt-out mechanism? Well, OK. It's simply a semantics issue, since the effect is as advertised, allowing you to "opt out" of the game itself.

Is it that you are involved in something that you never wanted to be involved with in the first place? OK, but that has nothing to do, really, with the garlic necklace, or how its function is represented, but simply having been spammed with bite requests and having to go out of your way to stop it.

By drawing attention to semantics issues and matters of general principle, rather than the real issue, it doesn't attack the real problem, and puts people on the side of defending something they would rather not have to defend, because you're attacking a principle, rather than an abuse of one. In principle, there's nothing wrong with them storing the info to properly implement an opt-out. In principle, there's nothing wrong with someone keeping customer info, or keeping traffic info. When they misuse that info, or otherwise tie it with the implementation of something bad, then that becomes a problem.



Well, except that it isn't a flaw. It is "working as intended". The necklace allows you to "opt out" of the game. It performs that function properly. I understand that you feel misled in terms of what their site tells you it does, and that is understandable, as the wording could have been made more clear. However, for the necklace to do what it does, it has to keep your information stored, including any game-related information about you, in order to prevent people from cheating.

The issue is that you have to choose between either a) being "fresh meat"; or b) being in the database. Either way, you are "involved". You are not truly "out".



You keep writing this as if it was a law of nature, but it isn't, it's just a random decision some random person who designed the game made. It's something that person is responsible for and can change.

If that is so, why would this happen? This should NOT have happened.


Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleMe Jewell
I got the necklace and wore it quite a while back -- I even posted a thread about the necklace that has been necro'd a few times.

However, just 2 days ago, I had some guy ask to bite me. When I got mad, he said he could tell me where to get a necklace. After I told him I had already done that, he said that apparently I need to do it again for some reason.

Pissed me off.


Quote: Treasure Ballinger
****SCREAM**** CRAP. How long ago did you do it? Activated the necklace? Before you were asked again for a bite?Quote

That's a design flaw in the game. Making it "opt-out" is unethical, AND leads to Dakota's problem.

Perhaps it is working as "intended" by the creator. I suppose my problem is that "how the creator intended the system to work" blows dead rats. It is completely, totally, 100% possible to design a system that functions the way Bloodlines does, without the need for them to retain all my data, or even have to "opt out" at all. Not only that, but I contend it wouldn't require a significant re-write at all, because the way the system works now is already four-fifths of the way there.

Except that it isn't a design flaw in the game; the game is flawed in design.

Those two things are not the same.

For the game to work the way it was intended, it provides a mechanism to "opt out". The "opt out" mechanism works (or is reported to, anyway, other anecdotes to it not working notwithstanding), and for it to work, it has to operate the way it was designed. Thus, it is not a design flaw (it works as it is supposed to).

The fact that the game itself uses a model which requires unwilling parties to "opt out" in the first place makes the game design itself (in totality) flawed.

Again, as I said, it is a semantics issue. All I want to do is to get at the heart of the issue so that it can be addressed, as opposed to worrying about ancillary parts of it that can't really be done anything about without screwing over every other form of avatar data storage system.

If this could lead to the Lindens saying "you can't store anything about anybody anywhere", I will have no part of it. Attack the problem, not how the principles (mis-)used by the problem (avatar data storage) are applied.

I think that depends on what "the system" is here. Technically, sure, they could just change it to opt-in eligibility and everything would keep working fine and newbies wouldn't get bite-spammed and everybody would be happy--except for the BL creator. And that's why "the system" isn't anywhere nearly ready for this change: it not only depends on spam for survival, it *is* spam all the way through, with a thin veneer of vapid, vaguely vampire-esque role-play (purely optional, of course).

If this stupid game were really the only thing at stake here, I frankly wouldn't care that much. Yes, it sucks that newbies are mobbed by bite requests. (If you haven't gotten bite requests yourself, try creating an alt and hanging out at newbie-frequented places. You won't have to wait long.) So it's making the New User Experience suck even more than it used to, pre-BL. But that's not the big problem here.

As I mentioned elsewhere, why shouldn't I start a "game" that gives newer residents L$10 for IMing the BL creator, role-playing a swift kick in the ass? I mean, it's not my fault he's getting spammed, right? I'm just the creator of a game with an incentive that happens to result in some messages being sent.

Bullshit. I'd be completely culpable; the creator of BL is equally at fault. My game artifacts would--and should--be blacklisted; the BL ones should be, too.

If LL doesn't do anything about this little mess, it will certainly not be the last spam-for-profit scheme that exploits the diffusion of responsibility loophole.

Calling me at ten in the evening for a survey when I did NOT opt into the list and making me demand to be removed ... or to call another phone number .... is also 'unethical'.

Guess what? It happens.

No offense argent, but a LOT of unethical crap goes on in real life ... and no one does a bloody thing about it.

There is really a simple cure for the whole thing.. If you get a bite request, or even see the Bloodlines display above their head. They are marked as a Vampire, and can be killed. The BL group can sell a "stake kit". Anyone can buy for say 100L. If the stake kit is used on the vampire it dies. And has to pay say 5000L to be "reborn"

The BL company could sell lots of stake kits. I am sure I would love to become a "Vampire Hunter" in my spare time. At a cost of 5000L to be reborn I imagine the "Vampires" would want to stick close to home and not wander the grid in search of the "virgins".

Just make it so the kits don't work on the BL home sims. So they have a nice safe haven.. If they leave it, well then they risk "death". Oh yes one more little thing. Sunlight kills them too. So they would be only able to go out during the SL night. That would give the rest of us a nice quiet time where we would not get Bite requests.

I know this will never happen, but boy would it be fun for the rest of us..

Lizzy

That's why since 1991 the TCPA has let thousands of people sue telemarketers in small claims court and collect up to $750 for each unsolicited phone call.

http://www.ucan.org/telecommunications/landline/how_to_sue_telemarketers

Right, let's add yet ANOTHER facet to our sue happy society ....

I'll be blunt here yet again: In the case of a telemarketer .... an individual suit is simply not an option, nor is it worth the time and effort.

Gathering a lot of people together may make it more worthwhile ... but it is still too big a hammer for the problem.

Personally I wouldn't bother either, but a guy I know did and wrote it up here...

http://www.panix.com/~eck/telemarket.html

My point is that people really DO "a bloody thing about it".

so if they removed you from their system, then you start getting bite requests you will be upset because you do not want to be targeted by their "system"

you just can not have it both ways

come on, really, what is the big deal if your avatar's name is in someone's database?

do you even think how many databases our real life names are in (both willingly and non willingly)

why do you think people have to request to be added to do not call lists? because they are in a calling list (ie calling database) do you think they asked to be put in there? doubt it.

*sigh*

lots of to do about nothing.

Again, yes you can; they can patch the script to not bite others who are not wearing the HUD, and sent this out as an auto-update.

Their current system requires you to eiither be in their database, or be a prime target for biting. Neither of these is "opting-out" and therefore, they currently fail to offer an "opt out".

Oh, but I think I CAN have it both ways - if they make a relatively simple scripting change.