Visual effect of banlines on neighbours - a demonstration you can visit inworld (?)

Come up with something constructive? You got to be kidding.

It dosen't matter what you say as I've seen many legitimate responses on ban lines. Responses to those who continually whine and moan on a daily constant basis and nothing has changed. They continue to come up with dumb ridiculous excuses as to why the ban lines should be taken off.

As I already seen a few times, you don't need to fly anywhere. Use your tp the way everyone else does.
Many of us don't have nor have we ever had any problems with ban lines as we don't go around flying into places, we use the tp like it's suppose to be used. No one should have a problem with them.
Why should you fly around or even go walking around RESIDENTIAL AREAS in the first place? There's no reason for you to be there, period. If you're there and you run smack into a ban line or are ejected off the premises then good for you. In shops and shopping malls it's understandable you flying around because they don't have ban lines there. But in residential areas you should get whatever comes your way so handle it and shut up.

Another laughable idea is the one where some say to ask your neighbors for access to their lands. Say what? This is sooo stupid.
1. If your neighbors wanted you to have access to their land, I'm sure you wouldn't need to ask, you would of had it already. Yet, with a straight face you're going to ask for access into their property? It's so dumb it doesn't deserve a response.

2. Why is it necessary to step into your neighbors land? You shouldn't need to step outside your land unto the adjoining land for anything, period. Isn't your place enough?

3. For the most part, people when in their homes and land don't want to be bothered by neighbors or strangers so why go there in the first place? Especially, if you're not in their inner circle.

4. The word 'exploration' is so commonly used as an excuse for wanting and needing to run around unrestricted.
You don't and aren't suppose to fly or run around other peoples land, especially as I already stated, in residential areas. And you have to be really blind or an idiot or both not to know a residential area from public lands or and shops.

5. There are many places to explore and very easy to find and accessible where you won't have any problems with mean ole' ban lines that seem to have some in a frenzy.

Nor should using the forum search be recommended to newcomers, it would drive them away

No one should use forums search.

Lets be honest here .. how boring would the forums be if people DIDNT bring up these topics over and over?



The forums search is only for finding historical information when you need to post it to a topic that someone has started back up

Just a note, Cole.

While I agree with some of the content, not neccessarily the tone, but the content *grin*, I gotta clear something up.

The "Ask your neighbors for access" thing was in response to the OP's stance, and a valid one, that banlines in neighboring parcels are an eyesore because of alpha problems.
This, to me, is really the only valid argument brought up against banlines and, before the "OMG! I SHUD B ABUL TO GO ON YUR LAND 'CUZ TAHT'S TEH WAY SL SHUD BE PLAYD AND UR SELFISH IF U DISAGREE WITH ME" and "OMG! U SHUD BE PUNISHD FOR USING BANLINES ON UR LAND 'CUZ I HAV 2 SEE TEHM WHEN I'M TRYING TO GET ON UR LAND" folks dragged it off-topic, progress was being made in finding solutions for this problem. One of these possible solutions was to ask the neighbor to put them on the access list, not to allow access, but to get rid of the visible banlines.

Where are these 'residential areas'? The grid isn't zoned (apart from private islands which most don't allow ban lines anyway).

This thread is about ban lines where the neighbours in small parcels can't get away from having to view them. If you live on a small plot surrounded by ban lines, you are entitled to be there and should be able to enjoy your home without the lines intruding into your space, which they do.

My banline plan


1- No one should be able to see banlines at all (solves the eyesore problem)

2- they should remain 50 meters tall. Owners should be able to move the Z start location of that 50 meters though. Since if they have a sky box they would rather put banlines up around that than the empty ground. (eliminating the need for over the top security scripts)

3- someone should start up a chain of cheap by the hour hotels around second life (solves the sneaking into your house to have teh sex problem.)

4- Explorers should be encouraged to tour private islands that are open to the public.

5- maybe the NEXT continent should be made with no banlines, the feature disabled. People that buy land there would know ahead of time. That way they'd be agreeing to people intruding. (since theres already SO much land, I think it could work.)

all very clever ideas. i especially am intrigued with your #2.... the adjustable Z proposal is the best thing i've read in this thread so far! great job!

absolute user controll over the visibility of everything in SL is the best solution.

if i want my land private. then i and only i can see what's there(this excludes cameras and everything)

Avatars coming on my land? I don't see any.
Ad farms all around? where?
Lag from loading everyone elses 1024x1024 textures? NOT!
you're not age verified? so what?
(ps. everything so visimuted is phantomed too so no collision prob)

no banlines needed at all, no security problems at all, no privacy issue at all, plus free flying over all SL, all with less lag to boot, and best of all....
an end to this debate.

Come on folks this is THE issue. get on jira and vote.

Thank you! Before reading this single example, I was very much in the camp of "make them visible on both sides" because the arguments against it were so "MY land, MY banline, MY agreement with LL." (Huh? Where in the ToS does it say we get to use banlines in return for our payment?) And the "punishment" thing is just bizarre: if it's punishing to the landowner to see her own banlines, how is it not punishing to enforce their visibility on the neighbors and their guests? Does the landowner really mean to be that hostile to all who surround her?

But the Wedding Scenario makes it clear that not all arguments on that side have to be purely childishly selfish.

So, I'm coming round to the view that banlines just don't have to be visible at all. It would be nice if they were reliably detectable by script, and if they showed up on the minimap perhaps depending on whether they're in-force at whatever level you're flying/walking. But practically speaking, there will be banlines, and however they're designated, innocent folks are gonna bump into them and suffer the consequences once in a while. (They used to be really, really nasty, landing one in deep negative coordinates just for brushing against them, but I haven't seen that effect recently except when the sim was in such desperate lag I may have ended up there with or without banline contact.)

FWIW, I do think banlines are used inappropriately way more often than they're used for what they can actually do. I've spoken with countless landowners who are using banlines in the vain hope that it will prevent land griefing, for example, and then are surprised when their property fills up with spinning, spamming, particle-spewing prims. I'd really rather if banlines automatically disabled after a couple hours, say, but could be kept alive by script: I think this would reduce their very frequent use for purposes to which they're woefully unsuited.

i'm not going to rehash my position, and this wedding scenerio is a valid arguement... worth consideration.

but i do ask, wouldn't most wedding situations take place on a plot of land large enough that the picture area wouldn't be on the plot border anyway? i mean, what's behind the couple that's going to be included in the picture? wut if it's an ad farm, or mall, or dance club, or trailer yard? just a thot.

Many, many people leave their homes and lands open for visitors. As long as they are treated respectfully as an earlier poster said, the owners welcome and socialise. Caledon to mention just one, is if you needed to 'zone' the place, 'residential' but if you depended on tp-ing every which way but loose, you'd miss a lot of its charm and appeal.
Some of the buildings there, whilst residential looking, on investigation, turn out to be content creators or resellers, something not always evident from 100 metres up.

Oh! I forgot! we aren't supposed to fly in residential areas!!! For the life of me I cannot understand why you find others wish to explore, so deplorable .... and frenzy? Only sign of frenetic behaviour I see is coming from one source. Yes, the debate is a little hot, usually is on this subject but boo hoo-ing and whinging and whining, we are not.

Have a nice weekend folks.

added: oh, and good suggestions Colette

You need to get out more, Cole. You're making statements about what "many people" and "most people" think - most of these don't match up _at all_ with my experience.

If you went out and wandered the grid some, you'd probably find lots of cool things you've never seen before and find lots of nice people. Some will obviously be busy, some will ask you to move on, many will be happy to chat for a few minutes. Or at least that's been what I've found.

It's your choice if you don't want to do this but it's not fair to take this "I don't want it so nobody else should either" stance.

Clarifications:
The visibility of neighbours ban lines while standing on your own land is the issue for me.
The alpha issue is just a bonus whammy that lets/makes you see the lines even when inside your own build on your own land.

Having a neighbour add to the Access list only solves the visual problem for the landowner. It does not solve the problem for the landowners visitor/customers.

The quick fix for the visual issue would be a View option to suppress visibility of ban and pay lines.
The whole security thing is another topic.

Cole, you really need to relax and read/think a bit more.

The reason that you would ask a neighbour to be put on the Access list is NOT so that you can go onto their land.
It's so that when on their access list, you won't see their ban lines.

Many, many people equally prefer not to have to deal with the constant bother of people intruding either.

Both are valid but there's a whole different mentality behind it as well. If someone drops in on me (whether I'm alone or not) at my house, I'm going to think they're being purposefully rude no matter what excuse they come up with for walking through the door uninvited.

I did meet a now close friend because she happened to pass by, but she remained outside initially and initiated the conversation from *outside* which makes a world of difference when it comes to being courteous. She wasn't "exploring" but simply wanted to ask about my experience living and renting there.

With neighbours it's been mostly the same thing. A shouted hi when we happened to both be outside on our respective parcels and in line of sight as introduction, or an offline IM simply saying "Hey, I just moved in next door".

That stands in stark contrast with all the people who dropped by claiming they were "simply exploring" and waltzed in, beaming with indifference to how I might feel about it and most of the time berating me when I pointed out I don't appreciate blinking and suddenly finding someone standing next to me.

I don't really agree with all of Cole's post either, and my personal experience doesn't necessarily reflect the general situation, but I have no trouble understanding why someone would equate "explorers" with snoopers and squatters.

My bad for not being clear, Sling. Right you are.

And I agree (and have before) that the ability to turn off visibility is the best way to go about this. Hopefully this can be dealt with.

I can understand it, but I would just say that it isn't always a good assumption to make. I met very good friends when I rezzed in-world to find them exploring my house when nobody was there. (My fault for building irresistible houses. ) I'm sure the likelihood of this depends on whether one lives in secluded backwater sims like me, or right next to Freebie Paradise, but I just wouldn't want folks to always assume the worst of "trespassers."

Since I'm one of the exploring advocates, I just wanna make it clear that I'm not talking about exploring other peoples houses here - that would be criminally rude, IMO, especially if they were home. I just like flying around the grid, pausing to look at interesting builds or chat with people who are outside.

It really doesn't take much thought or effort to behave politely and I don't have a lot of sympathy for those that can't manage it. If you walk into somebody's house when they're home, I think it's reasonable to expect to be shot.

I don't mind seeing them, it's the effects of hitting them because I couldn't see them that is a major problem for me. A toggle with a draw distance option would be awesome for this.

I don't like the idea of moving the z start location of the banlines, as that will make it 100 times more difficult to fly around "above" the banlines. The whole reason they leave the airspace above your parcel as "unbanable" is so people can fly over it.

LOL Now THAT is a great idea! lol

The mainland is open to the public. Banlines only go up so far so that people can fly over your land. With the exception of "no object entry" (which is a heavy handed response to griefing... topic for another thread), there is limited control over what happens above the banlines... unless you use a security script.

Most people who are effected by blanket bans are not intruding... they are just passing by. With the exception of PG and M ratings... there really aren't any zoning laws on the mainland, so commercial and residential parcels share sims. I don't understand why people are so against other residents being even remotely close to them. I mean, if someone is harrassing you, that's one thing... but if you ever see my blimp floating by, you can rest assured that I don't care what you are doing in your house. I'm just sightseeing, looking for interesting builds and cool places to visit.

I am with you 150%. To me, that's what SL is all about.

Errrrrnt, wrong.

I don't understand why it's your business.
What people do on their own land is their business.

You are mistaken, I am afraid. The whole purpose for limiting how high the banlines go, is to allow other residents to pass through. Your land does not dicate the behavior or ruleset for the rest of the mainland.

Sure, do what you will on your land, that's fine. Nobody is saying you can't do what you want with your land. What people are saying, is that the banline feature as it is right now, causes issues for other residents by interfering with advertised features of Second Life. As part of a community, I would think you would approach this from a more objective and productive manner. Your sarcasm and personal attacks do nothing to prove your point.

This "I own the land and all the sky over it" argument comes up every time.

Can we leave that discussion to one of the many other existing threads? The topic here, which even I've strayed from, is the visibilty of ban lines.

/me, still not having heard a good argument against it from either camp, again pimps her idea to have ban line visibility be tied to avatar speed.

I would love to be able to set the draw distance client-side... then I won't have as many issues with them when ballooning around.

Er..

Is that an argument for or against having ban line visibility automatically increase as your avatar starts moving faster and decrease down to near-0 when you're not moving?