Cut That Barbedy-Wire!

Yes, I've been on a tube train with a pigeon. It got on at Hammersmith and got off at Earl's Court. (Honest)

After all I've seen and done recently, I can believe that.

I seem to recall a really nice curry take-out at Earl's Court. That's probably why it got out.

When I went on sl tonight, my land had been so badly griefed my neighbours were IMing me and complaining. I had to remove 514 prims of various objects. I guess some people thought I deserved a lesson? Or I was an easy mark?
For the first time ever I will erect banlines on my landholdings in sl.
I think I will have to do a complete ban on my very personal places.
Thanks. Whoever did that is a true griefer.

Auto return, Jig.

And a great big fu&king wall.

May need to re-designate your land as Adult for that, if the wall is in public view that is

arrrggghhh

Jig - make sure you have auto-return set to a positive value and if you still have any other griefing problems set the "Buy Pass" option on for a few days - worked for me.

Yes.
Two years plus of owning mainland parcels in all of the continents bar the Gaetas, and build-for-all with an autoreturn of 5 has kept those parcels clean.

My visitor logs show that my 'private' skyboxes sometimes get visitied by strangers - but only very, very occasionally. I always had the option of IM and individual ban if someone ever started repeat visits.

I really don't understand the 'maximum security by default' think.
I don't think that I just happen to have had land in areas that are somehow magically safe from griefers. My First Land was just up a Linden road from Bear. Lots of born-today/recently passed up and down, but nobody in the sim was plagued with intruders.

Only twice in two years plus I did a right-click / eject&ban on an idiot who did not stop the nonsense after right-click / freeze and a chat.
Once in that time I turned off build-for-all on a parcel for a period when there was an active replicating incident going on in the sim.

Travelling around Mainland, ban lines are more the exception rather than the rule. How is it that open parcels all around a ban-lined parcel can sit there untroubled by abusive intruders?
Is any real up-side of ban lines for landowners actually warranted in the light of the down-side for the vast majority of others who have no particular interest in being abusive of the land?


I'm pretty sure that most people with ban lines up have no appreciation of the problems they cause.
I've had the experience of neighbours taking down their ban lines after a chat. Very occasionally, the chat had to be illustrated with ultra-temporary ban lines aimed at them or me reconfiguring a build to put some of the prims right along the ban lined boundary.


It's the minority who are aware and still use the maximum firepower option that leave me gobsmacked.
Are they really under continuing attack?

They might be. How would anyone else know?

One option they might think about is to put up ban lines only when home. But, it's their land, bottom line.

Ban lines won't protect you from that. At all. They'll just fly over them and drop physical stuff on you. What you do to protect yourself from those kinds of people is autoreturn.

Ban lines won't protect you from that, neither will "buy pass". At all. They'll just fly over them and drop physical stuff on you. What you do to protect yourself from those kinds of people is autoreturn.

Putting up a worthless barrier will just make you a target.

"How would anyone else know?"
By looking at activity over time.

Which of these is not under ongoing attack?
Which of these very probably needs no form of security whatsoever?
a) Ban-lined parcel that has 0 traffic day-after-day for months on end
b) Ban-lined parcel with owners cowering inside and zombie hordes of griefers lined up along the boundaries with their noses pressed up against the ban lines



Landowners share the overall space and landscape of the virtual world with others.
They may have rights, but they also have responsibilities.
It is really worth, for example, zapping the journeys of boaters who happen to clip half a meter into the jaggie boundary of a channel? or flyers who are trying to stay over Linden land?

Nobody in RL has absolute rights over what they do on their land. Their rights are always constrained by actual or potential effects on society around them. It's no different in SL.

Pretty much sums up how I feel on the subject. If someone shows up on my property while I'm there and I don't want them there I kick and possibly ban temporarily. If someone goes there when I'm not there... why would I possibly care?

That is my approach...after all I never stopped you from showing up and peering through my window. I don't use ban lines and stuff, and i would love to see a better alternative. But I don't get to apoplectic over those who do. I merely shrug and move on.

Exactly. You didn't mind at all. In fact... you invited me in for tea and strumpets.

I read that as "tea and strumpets", then laughed at myself, then realized that's what it actually said. Is that a "triple-take"?

It's a stunnilingualism.

In all fairness... I stole that line from a movie. I think it was Dumb and Dumber.

Unless you have something scripted keeping track, just looking at the parcel while you are there too is not a good measure. And even then, they could be going to their skybox. But the whole thing about ban lines when they don't use the ground has been covered in these multiple threads.



Some people, many people, obviously think that it IS worth it. That's not in question. What some don't seem to understand, and I'm merely stating an observation btw, but what some haven't understood in these threads, is that that is not going to change. Not everyone will look at this the same way. And one side insisting they are absolutely right is missing the point a bit, I think.

Your own argument can be used against you - with slightly different wording. But regardless, people will just end with, "It's my land." Not everyone agrees that all land should be open.



*SL is not RL*

No matter how silly some people might think it is, or even insist it is, or insist REPEATEDLY that it is, and stomp their feet...a lot of people will still opt for 'limited access' measures to keep out everyone they did not invite. There is not a whole lot anyone can do about it, even if they mock that choice til the sun burns out. Doesn't anyone arguing against ban lines, see that?

Personally I am for "letting" people keep the current permissions to limit access to their own land. Because it IS their land. Yes it inconveniences me too (if I am boating - I might have to choose another boat path. Oh no!), but this isn't a commune as someone else said. There are public places and private places in SL, and people have to accept that. Because that's how it IS.

Also I feel that someone's simulated feeling of privacy is as valid as someone else's simulated feeling of uninterrupted boating or piloting a plane.

But if the word "rights" bothers some, I've used words like perogative and privilege. Because it's true that LL grant 'rights' to its subscribers. Then again we also agree...(to the rules they grant.) Some of us might fuss about it from time to time but if we stay, we have agreed.

You can't know what many people think. It's just as likely that they have ban lines as a form of griefing or a need for a sense of power over others.


It is possible that if enough people complained about it that changes would be made. I know.... HIGHLY unlikely... but I'm a dreamer


Yes, but that doesn't mean to a certain extent we can't apply principles from RL in SL.

You won't get to choose another path because you won't see it in time, your boat crashes... you end up at 0,0,0 on the sim, stuck in a sitting position and you have to relog.

It doesn't matter what you call it, rights, privileges, or glowing red turnips. The point is that they have deliberate practical limitations, so simply arguing that you have them (under whatever the name) is moot. Yes, you have them, but how is it meaningful and courteous to use them?

A traffic count of zero, for months on end is very convincing that nobody is on the parcel. Owner absent. Not using. Needs no privacy because they are not there to be private.




It's very much in question. There are some people in these threads who say that know about the effects on others but do not care. Their land. Not an inch...
I really have to wonder if they represent "many".

On more than one occasion, neighbours have taken down their ban lines after a chat. They never needed the 'protection'. Some didn't even realise that it was on or what the effects on others were.
They never made a concious decision to impose negative experience on others.
It was only when the down-sides were pointed out to them that they had an opportunity to weigh up the pros and cons.


Say someone is doing a voyage of 20 sims or so, trying to stay on Linden water. Part way through they suddenly get kicked out by a ban line that they couldn't see in time to avoid.
That time spend on a voyage and the anticipation of completing it is very real. It's happening in a simulated world, but the enjoyment and the time is not simulated. It's real.
The frustration and inconvenience is real.
Do those ban lines really have to be there. What is the clear and present danger that they are defending against?
I've seen a lot of ban-lined parcels and the vast majority of them have been empty, with zero or one-digit traffic.








Everything changes even "the way it IS", "priviliges/rights"
We had traffic bot runners banging on about their not contravening the TOS - about their right/priviliges.
By your line of argument, everyone agreed to the use of traffic bots - and to ad farming. There was no need to ban them.


Use of ban lines in the absence of a clear and present threat should be a TOS offence. It's not, but it could be. Just because a feature as been enabled by LL does not mean that use of that feature is appropriate in all cases.

Alternatively, LL could change the sim software so that parcel restrictions operate like security orbs.

"Do those ban lines really have to be there."

Yes, they do.

"What is the clear and present danger that they are defending against?"

Not your call to make.