Where do I report a vendor?

Best I could suggest is dropping him a notecard POLITELY explaining the situation and asking him to not judge all of you based on one person.

If the situation is as you described and he's level headed then he'll lift the ban. If he doesn't then he's a jerk and people have a right to be jerks so there's not much you can do.

You just folded to a check? Can we PLEASE get a forum poker game going? PLEASE?

Raoul:

1 - Are the scripts transferrable? If so make an alt and buy away. If not, I have no suggestion.

2 - It makes more sense that he was upset with a particular group that you were in - thanks for the clarification

3 - No, you have no such right.

4 - Nobody here judged you, and if what you say is true, don't worry about the vendor judging you based on something stupid. It doesn't matter whether he's an idiot or whether its residential or commercial land. He can ban you if he wants.

In RL, there is a distinction, of course. Banning someone from commercial establishments if they are a member of a protected class, for example, a racial minority, will get you in a whole eap of a lot of trouble. Goreans are not a protected class, though, so it doesn't apply.

Lexxi: Adverse Possession.

Is this when a slave doesn't want to be owned?

No, it is a way for someone to take over your land. Has to include knowledge of the land owner, has to have hostility (as in landowner does not want you using that path you created), must occur over a period of time (differs in different jurisdictions). If all the right things fall into place, this person can end up owning your land. The funny thing is, though, that if the landowner said "Sure, use that path" then the adverse possession falls apart.

It is my understanding that you did get a picture from Hate.

lol - I wasn't staking a claim to Lexxi. She said when you use a piece of land long enough in RL, you can acquire a right to continue to use it. She mentioned it as being an easement, but said she couldn't remember the name of the theory that gave you the right. It's Adverse Possession, and it can result in either an easement, which is a right to use someone else's property, or actual title to the property.

I was just helping out with the words, although I wonder if I steal someone's slave, what the elements of an adverse possession claim would be.

OMG you people are so freakin literal. It was a JOKE.

You think slavery is a joke? How insensitive of you.

I am not 100% sure, but I am roughly 199% sure that slavery is illegal in the US of A.

Yup.

Was that a picture of Hate? There was a little snafu with the delivery and I talked to her about it this morning. I'll check again tonight. I think we got it straightened out and as much as I hate to admit it, it looks like it falls into the "Trout is a lot dumber than he thinks" category. My fault.

Lexxi - Adverse possession is certainly an unexpected way to derail a thread. If the person gives you permission to use their land, then adverse possession falls apart because it is no longer adverse. It's just possession, which makes it a license and subject to revocation. It's generally a common law theory, but the basic elements tend to be the same in each state. Some require payment of taxes, some don't. The time period is usually 10 years. The difference between easements and title is generally the exclusivity and manner of use.

Chattels can be adversely possessed as well, but I haven't the faintest idea how. I'm assuming a slave falls into the category of "chattels". I've never seen it actually happen. It's one of those things you memorize, like the Rule Against Perpetuities, but never actually use in real life. I wonder if you can grant a secured interest in your slaves. The UCC is silent on the issue. I'm guessing that the whole "consensual" nature of the ownership would make it a pretty risky collateralization. Funny to think about, though.

Heh, the differences that I was talking about was the length of time the land has to be held "adversely" not the Nonconsent/consent thing As you note "usually 10 years" Not always 10 years.

Nope. The ethical situation might be different if in Second Life there were actual necessities that could be denied you (like water, food, etc. in real life), but SL itself is not a necessity and you need no goods or money to exist here and interact with people.

Animations, scripts, objects in SL, all of them are, in many situations, merely props. No one really needs them for role play, we know that simply because RP thrived long before Second Life appeared. Yes, the props can make the RP more engaging or enjoyable, but that still doesn't add up to necessity.

What you do have the right to do, is to solicit builders, scripters, animators to offer substitutes for the items you want. Maybe the results will even be better than the stuff that other vendor doesn't want to sell you.

Faker. You're not that befuddled... yet.

I want to go be a female assassin on a hardcore Gor sim. I have a right, do I not?

Nope, apparently not, because sex discrimination doesn't break the TOS unlike doing exactly the same on race or religion grounds. Or maybe it's just the money that does it.

A few weeks ago we banned a guy for spamming sex room ads at our hub to anyone who TPed in, people had complained in the past about the person but I tend to like to see things first hand before doing something like that, he protested quite loudly and I have to admit I felt a bit bad about not warning him first but in the past when ive warned, people just wait until none of us are online and I come down in the morning to a load of IMs complaining about the person doing it again.

The above is my account only, I could be lying or leaving out important facts, no one knows, could be if you asked this person he would have a very different story.

In this case without the shopkeepers side of the story its hard to judge, most would think there must be more to it, as banning people for no good reason when you own a shop has to be bad for your business.

When you only have one side of a story some will take it at face value, others will feel they need to play devils advocate simply because the other side of the story is missing, people have complained about the "no naming names" rule but its there for exactly this reason, people who feel agrieved will sometimes tell half a story to incite an "angry mob" against the person they have had a personal disagreement with.

Dont get mad at people here, when you go to a forum with such things this will always happen, in the absence of both sides of the story all people can say is "perhaps this" or "perhaps that"

I have no idea what "trial abuse" is, did you ask the shop owner?

But one thing is reasonably certain, LL will not entertain an abuse report on a land owner banning a person from their land for any reason, my wife once wanted to rent land next to her Dutch friend and the landlord refused on the grounds she is not Dutch, I asked LL if this was ok and I was told in no uncertain terms that a sim owner is perfectly at liberty to do this.

But then thats half a story too isnt it....

Hmm, I'm a furry owning a furry store and wouldn't a ban a Gorean unless they're practising Gor ideals to the detriment of other people's experience within my store (in which case I would ask them to stop then ban if they refuse or kick up undue fuss, since after the warning stage I get very, very lazy about dealing with crap =)
But that's the case with anyone that is being intrusive, or judgemental or whatever to visitors to my store. I've banned a customer before for trying to 'seduce' female avatars that visited my shop, despite being shown no interest. My shop isn't a place for harassing people in the hopes of one of them being up for a pixel grinding.
I have however had a number of perfectly nice human players visit, and there's a Gor store near mine, though I haven't met the owner but the customers seem nice enough.

However, I've been banned from two Gor areas (or entire sims, I don't remember) which I found very unjustified. In both cases I was looking for medieval locations to explore, and in both cases it wasn't clear that the place was a Gor location until I arrived, at which point I got banned before I could decide if I wanted to switch avatars and explore anyway, or open up search to look for some-place else.

I don't know what the whole Gor/Furry hatred thing is all about, anyone care to fill me in? I can understand not wanting furry avatars wandering around a themed simulator where furries would not be expected (though I find it annoying that so many RP sims are so strict as to discourage exploring entirely, when many are very well built), but I was still in the welcome area where it had the rules telling you to change and what to expect etc.

While I do like Star Wars, and some of the simulators are really good, I would like to be able to wander around more as I like just to enjoy the work that's gone into them and the finished result. However I do recognise that land-owners have every right to be total fuds =)

Just when I think I know what's what in SL, somebody makes some oblique reference like that. Now I gotta go ask the husband what the G word is and why the furries and G-words are feuding.

Is there at least a good RP story behind it? Some G word killed a furry village and the surviving furries seek revenge?

Actually the origin is far simpler

The Furries don't like the Goreans because the Goreans wont allow Furries on their islands. Becuase there are no furries on the planet Gor in the books.

They require them to either wear a human form or else leave.

Yeah and all those Gor sims follow the books oh so closely, LOL. I'm slogging through the series now; just finished "Assassin of Gor" and am about to start "Raiders of Gor" (or whichever one is next.) Yes, I know, it's a thankless and possibly suicidal mission, but darn it I'm not a quitter. So far as I can tell the men in the books wear a lot more clothing than they do in SL, and it's more sort of Roman or Greek (togas n tunics n such) unless they are Wagon People. And the buildings are completely different; they're all cylinders and towers and bridges and colorful, clean looking buildings, not these "midieval" sorts that I've seen in SL. Oh well, I'm not a Gorean here and don't plan on doing it, so each to his own, I suppose. I just think it's funny that some Goreans claim to be all puritan, but they don't even get the basics right.

I stumbled upon an in-world copy of "Captive of Gor", and am half way thought it. Even the D/s RP seems off in SL. For one thing, the slaver and guards more often than not called Elinor by name, as opposed to "girl". I don't recall them once insisting that she use third person to refer to herself. Perhaps we'll get to that in a latter chapter.

Also, the Panther girls are real bitches.

Great point. All true.

But its still why they don't allow furries.

After "Raiders" is "Captive" .. which Ironically introduces the Kur (a "furry" Alien Race!) and the Panther Girls (the closest things to feminists on Gor)

I don't see why one group hates another...they both wear collars, right?

/me swears she's not a troll!!

But I had to say this

hehe

/me hides the collar he was sneaking up to put on Oryx