When is ARing really Vigilantism

Feeling a little irregular? Switched to a new fiber supplement? I do hope you cleaned up after yourself!

The Nazis WERE the community.

Did you IM your group to come help AR the facility? That boarders on abusive ARing.

I fail to see the diffrence. This is NOT a real street so neighbourhood watch is not required to protect children and property. This is adult disapproval of adult themes in art or entertainment.
In reality I completely support neighbourhood watch programs as long as they ar eNOT taken to excess so every stranger is reported to authorities.
I do NOT support a system that imports a neighbourhood watch program in to a adult game system to create a false moral police system.

Oh nonsense. All Germans were Nazis???

Individuals were cowed, bullied, and propagandized into that kind of mob reaction. Of course there was antisemitism in Germany; there was EVERYWHERE. But not since the pogroms of the middle ages had it reached the kind of crescendo it did under the Nazis, all carefully nurtured and, in many cases, quietly organized behind the scenes, by them.

Of course not - but a majority were.
We are on dangerous ground and we should end this topic. I lost family in Nazi Germany. I am Jewish. 'Nuff said.

Well, we've godwinned the hell out of this thread anyway.

Jig, I hope I don't need to reassure you that I am not making light of the atrocities committed in Germany and elsewhere in Europe during the 30s and 40s.

If the community actively seeks out "perps" to bust, they're vigilantes, and it doesn't matter on whose behalf they're doing it.

I agree absolutely.

I understand. YOU never had to apologize or explain yourself to me. YOU are a good person.

I think my Last Post is about ready now. Forums is just about at an end. I feel when it metapmorphizes into what is planned by Linden Labs, I will prolly start the endgame process.

I don't wanna go on a sour note.

I'll post a few more threads. I'm off now. Be back later.

It's gonna be something about me, isn't it?

I have a fundamental problem with this. The whole "no snitching" idea that has become prevalent in our society (at least here in the US). It hearkens back to the times when mafias controlled whole neighborhoods - and I fear we are quickly heading back to those days simply because of this misguided notion that "snitching" is ethically wrong. It is the very reason why fewer and fewer neighborhoods can be considered safe anymore - why violent, established street gangs have moved from the inner city, through suburbia, to even rural America (there is a farming town close to where I live, population 1500. If you walk outside wearing the wrong color, you *will* be shot, and your family will be targeted as well).

How did we as a society come to this? "No snitching". It starts with that kid hanging around the street corner acting suspiciously, but nobody does anything about it because it would be snitching. Later, a small group of people sitting at the curb smoking dope. Again, nobody does anything about it because it would be snitching. A car that does not appear to belong there drives around the neighborhood, it's occupants looking around at people's houses. Still, nobody does anything because it would be snitching. A group of shady-looking people move into the vacant house next door. The music is always loud every night, arguments can be heard at all hours of the day, and vehicle traffic in the area skyrockets - usually really late at night. Still, nobody does anything, because it would be snitching. By now, most of the people in the neighborhood who used to live active lifestyles outdoors now sit in their houses behind locked doors, and rarely talk to each other anymore. But one day, your own daughter happens to be playing in the front yard when a car full of thugs pulls up and opens fire on the house next door - and your daughter is struck and killed by a wayward bullet. Still think "no snitching" is cool? Especially when taking a more active role in the policing of your neighborhood and challenging or calling in that suspicious-looking kid standing at the streetcorner, even though it would have been "snitching", could have prevented the entire chain of events?

QFT

On the topic of snitching, I'll just reiterate something I posted here a couple of days ago: somebody who positively demonstrates a lack of regard for written rules he's already agreed to follow, has no business expecting me to follow some unwritten rule he suddenly wants enforced so that he can stay out of trouble.

Somebody wants to run a casino? Fine, whatever. But if they set up a casino and it creates so much lag that I can't even walk around in the sim? Of COURSE I'm going to AR the thing.

Jig, I have no idea what happened in your case. I can only assume that someone reported you for something and LL took action against you for it - otherwise you wouldn't have even known you got reported.

The problem is not with the reporting mechanism. The problem is Linden Labs' complete failure to adequately and *consistently* define and enforce its community standards.

Just because the police department is incompetent does not make it the 911 service's fault.

I think the real reason "no snitching" becomes the norm is when it's against the law to do stuff that many people, even most people, don't think is wrong. In the US this was really promoted by Prohibition, and it's been maintained by drug laws, gun laws, sibboleths of the so-called "left" and "right" alike. And that's what's happening in SL, now.

In REAL, if there are clear violations of the law as we know them to be, and if they warrant a call to the local police or authorities then by all means phone them.

In the area where I live for part of the year, (very "Cape Cod" to those who know the place) people sit at the window and call the police for "children playing in the street", a "suspcious car" or "car passing with windows down and a loud radio". Hardly worth reporting.

BUT this is NOT reality. This is a gameworld. There are obvious laws that no one argues with. Arrest any deviant who harms children by all means. I will race to the phone and be the first to report it. BUT ...

For the most part, here the laws are corporate and not federal or state or county or provincial. Some poor av who is naked or has a "picky" up of a nudie and who forgets they are in PG (which has NO bearing in this world since we can assume we are ALL over 1 should not be brought to task for that. Nor will I ever consider a brash hard-faced av worth AR-ing for giving me sh*t when their real day has prolly been sh*t.

It's a question of compromises and responsibilities. Too many choices are now to be considered. This place isnt "fun" anymore; it's a moral and political and gender and consumer Venus-Fly-Trap.

Ha.

I AR people who declare themselves underage. I AR clear policy violations (like the one the OP mentioned).

Other than that, I mostly just Mute the rude person.

Or if I'm on build enabled land, use them for target practice.

(And I'm the SWEET one in our family. You should see what Eveline does to them.)

Snitching only happens when one person squeals on his partners in order to save his own skin. Three men rob a bank. One gets caught and turns the other two in to get a reduced sentence for himself, that is snitching. You see the three men rob the bank and tell the cops what they look like, that is being a good citizen.

Personally, I would call not turning in gun or drug violations being a good citizen as well. But then I think there has to be a victim for there to be a crime.

Maybe it's different in the US, but to an Australian school kid if you tell on someone you see sneaking out of school during Assembly, that's snitching, no matter whether you've ever snuck out of school yourself.

I would label that more as being a suck up and beat his ass during recess.

It's lots of things, but one of the things it is, is snitching.

So is roaming around ARing art prints that show half a nipple.

Is vigilantism wrong? By definition "A vigilante is someone who punishes a criminal or conspires to punish one, and breaks the law in doing so."
AR is not is not a punishment.

Vigilantism is being police, judge, jury, and executioner. ARing people, regardless of whether they are directly affecting the reporter by their actions is hardly vigilantism, even when said reporter is seeking out violations to report.

Some might consider it odious, but there's little real harm in it. If the AR is appropriate and applicable, and the violation is real, it needs to be addressed; it doesn't matter who actually reported it or why.

This is where that fine line between doing one's part to police his or her area and vigilantism comes into play; however...

Which is smarter: Waiting for a crime to take place before you take action? Or taking action when the elements start coming together for a future crime to take place?

When a significant enough number of people in your neighborhood start doing drugs, it invites a very criminal element into your neighborhood. It invites drug dealers, which invites gangs and turf wars, and invites property crimes as people look for ways to finance their addictions, and a whole lot of other things that contribute to the breakdown of the neighborhood. I personally don't think drug use should be criminalized as it is; but regardless of where I stand on that issue, I still don't want the increase in other crimes in my neighborhood. Drug use may be a "victimless" crime; but the ancillary crimes are not.