How have you been griefed?

Hey, I'm just telling the truth, you know. I am glad we agree on the confirmation of that fact. (the "pathetic little life" part, that is)

A few poops short of a PINCHED loaf, perhaps. <.<

Sounds like you have been on the Sam Smith's Original Yorkshire Ales (brewed in Chiswick) and think you are being witty and original.

Pep (You'll be embarassed in the morning.)

Enough now.
Seriously.
Enough.

ENOUGH!
You dont realize how all this is reading to the world!
Have some sense!

You poor deluded pap. I wasn't being witty at all. I was stating the truth, intending it to be accepted as such - but not by the person who is a few slices short, of course.

Oh Jesus! Listen you doorknobs, this is teh kinda thread that gives ammo to the Lindens shutting down Forums. Disney peopel read this kinda bumstrosity and we all gonners!

It's like holding back a tidal wave with a broom, isn't it?

Well, maybe like a lahar of sewage.

It's no good, Jig. Pap brought it on himself very early in this thread - and he enjoys showing himself up for what he is. It's what he does in this forum.

Too late for that. The forums have been doomed for quite a while now, and it has nothing to do with any of this.

Actually, everything said so far is nothing worse than you will find in a PG movie. Disney makes PG movies. Hell, maybe Disney will make a movie out of it! Imagine it! Pep on the big screen!

One little rule of thumb here...

If Talarus and me are in agreement throughout a thread, then what we write in it must be true

I find that view entirely inconsistent with what I know of our previous dealings. <.<

Nonsense. We've never been in agreement before this thread - have we?

So, Jiggs, the Skinfair, have you been to it?

No, but it helps a lot. It would help if more people put him on ignore.


That does conjure such sweet images.

My knowledge of scripting is limited, but I believe the problem is that if one gives an object permission to animate, that object keeps the permission to animate indefinitely. Clearing active animations does not clear the scripted object's permission to force a new animation on the avatar.

So clearing the current animation is only effective until the object gives its next animation command.

What is missing (to my knowledge) is a mechanism for an avatar to revoke an object's permission to control the avatar, without needed to "ask" the object to please release me from your control.

(Re-logging breaks the object's control, of course.)

If my theory is right the priority level of the animation shouldn't matter. The act of getting a new permission and then releasing it when you stand up should fix it. Particularly if the poseball script cleared all animations before starting its animation.

Between animations with the same priority (priority 4 being the highest), the most recent animation wins.

So the greifing hugger gives you a malicious animation with priority 4. You override it with a more recent priority 4 animation. The griefing object still has permission to animate you, so it sends a new priority 4 animation, and now that is the animation playing on you.

Plus, a higher priority animation does not cease the lower priority animations from playing. The animations just stack up on you- you can have a potentially infinite number of animations active. What you actually see depends on the priority. So you start a priority 3 animation. You then open a priority 4 animation without ceasing the previous animation. The priority 3 animation is still active. As soon as you cease that priority 4 animation, the priority 3 again rises to the top of the stack.

By the way, I watch this in action every night at my club. We have a solo dance ball and a couples dance ball, both of which default to changing dances at random periods. Someone will come in and start dancing on the solo ball, then find a dance parter and get on the couples ball. However, they forget to type the command to have the solo dance ball stop animating. Then you can watch as the two different dance ball systems override each other back and forth throughout the night.

You're quite correct. A couple years back, I scripted a "proof of concept" of this very problem as a "soul-stealer" gem. Unlike the silly little "I got your key, NEENER-NEENER!" soul-stealer weapons, if you were subject to this one, the owner of the item can make your avatar do whatever he/she wished (animation-wise) any time he/she wished while you were in the same sim.

To this day, the Lindens are aware of the need for avatars to be able to revoke permissions granted to scripts, but there appear to be some technical hurdles to overcome that they haven't quite figured out yet. Not surprising, since they can't even give us something as stupidly simple as llTeleportAgent/Object, even though there have been workarounds based on bugs and hacks for years.

Well, it might work if the forums were a closed system, where no new people showed up who didn't know to put him on ignore. Generally, this type of situation is handled by moderation, however, you know where we are with that here. <.<



Sometimes, the strangest things are balm for the soul.

I am not at all sure it does, at least if whoever wrote the script intended to be nasty. I put in something in the chims and dance balls I write, for example, to check every now and then to see if the avatar is still somewhere near the dance ball and release the permissions if this is not the case -- I am very aware of this because of an unfortunate experience I had as a newbie when I tp-d off somewhere from a club without stopping the dance anim first.

But, at least as far as I understand it (and I would welcome confirmation or correction on this point), if I didn't do that, relogging wouldn't do anything to the permissions held by the script. Just as, for example, people's affiliate vendors keep on working, even though the affiliate who's given permission to debit his or her account may have relogged multiple times since granting the initial permission.

Relogging has always seemed to clear the permissions from scripted objects I use. But none of those were griefer objects, so I got curious to find out what I could find out.

According to the Wiki http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlStartAnimation : "Once the PERMISSION_TRIGGER_ANIMATION permission is granted there is no way to revoke it except from inside the script (for example, with a new llRequestPermissions call). Otherwise, the script will only lose the permission if it is reset or the object is derezzed (deleted, detached, or taken). "

Except even the last part is wrong; a bug allows the object to retain permissions even if taken back into inventory and pulled out again. There is a JIRA open on the issue, but apparently it's not on Linden Lab's priority list because it's unassigned. http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-13228

So it looks like you're right. Give a griefer object permission to animate you, and it has it on you forever without cure. (And this is not an important bug.)

SkinFair?
Errr... no, I havent. Can I spend money there?
My sl'aughter is a compulsive skin-shopper, so I never know what she'll pop on to please her mood.
I'm more of dark-skinned lusting beauty myself, with occasional forays into the countryside for bikini tanlined scruchy-skin, and an odd Geishan appearance that puts Hal's blood pressure up.

Thanks for checking that. I would think that the reason the permissions normally clear -- and possibly this is what misled the writer in the wiki -- is that the script's obviously going to stop working while it's in your inventory or, if it's in an attachment, while you're off-line, and it's a pretty basic safety precaution with this sort of device to release the existing permissions (or reset the script, which amounts to the same thing) every time you attach it, unattach it, or rez it.

But if don't do that, then I can't see what would make the script release any permissions (or even, in fact, realise that it had been in your inventory or that you'd been offline).