Are some people really so stupid as to expect privacy in SL?

I was talking to a resident on my estate yesterday; she's also on the estate manager's list, because she's there so much she helps when I'm not there. Anyway, she is one of those people who do not mind people on her land, even walking into her house, or anywhere on her property. She has no types of controls up. She'll talk to anyone and doesn't get upset about them being on her land. Well, yesterday this guy shows up, walks into her house, starts walking around and refusing to speak to her when she spoke to him. Refusing to respond. She's a SecondAbility mentor and so is used to people who don't speak English, but per his profile, he's been here for a year, and his profile was done in English. He just refused to speak. Then, he froze her!! On her land, in her house after refusing to respond to 'hello'. That's when she got mad. Eject and ban. People like that give the rest a bad name, and cause the negative feelings some have. Now she's thinking of a security orb, where before, anyone was welcome.

I've got no objection to ejecting and banning bad apples. I've done that twice. In four years.

And everything can be answered here.

If everyone is owed respect, then respect the landowner and keep your vehicles off their property if they don't want you there.
If you can't navigate because the banlines aren't visible until too late, you're going to fast.
I live on an island in the Atlantic. There are reefs all around. You can't see them until you're right over them. You know how we get around them? We go slow until we're past them.

Now, as to your "You can't buy respect" argument... it's bullshit.
Another RL analogy that's been used before.
If you're at someone's house and they tell you that the rules are "No shoes in the house" or "No smoking in the house", do you abide by these rules? One would assume so (unless you're Rick James), no? Why do you do this? Because you respect the rules. Why? Because it's their house. Right? Stop me if I'm wrong.

Now, it's admirable that you keep your land open. I applaud you for that.
Surely you have rules, though, no?
And surely, you have the occasional person that thinks your rules are crap and they shouldn't be subject to the rules? (Lord knows I do on my land. We have a "No Weapons" rule in our sandbox. Simple enough to follow, no? At LEAST 3 times a month, someone has to start building a 30 foot bazooka or come in wearing guns, then cause a scene when asked to take them off.)
How do you deal with these people? Should they be allowed to do whatever they want on your land because it's how they have fun? Or do you deal with them?

What's the difference between YOUR rules and the rules of a landowner who says "Rule 1. I don't want anyone on this land. Period."
And what's the difference between saying "That's silly" and saying "Sling's Rule 3) is silly, so I'm not going to abide by it" or the naked idiot with the Colt .45 attached to his crotch saying "The No Weapons thing is silly and I shouldn't have to take this off"?

It occurs to me that although banlines are a certain bane to vehicle users, that may be a small price to pay to protect wanderers from landowners who really shouldn't be allowed visitors.

LOL !!!

This.

It is impossible to drive slow enough that you can see banlines before you hit them. Impossible. Not possible. There is no way to do it. 20MPH is too fast.
OK, pretend those reefs were everywhere, including in the middle of the town, and they could pop up anywhere, even in places where they haven't been for a century.

Several years back I had a similiar experience in Manila which caused me to buy an orb. I haven't been without one since.

Yes, all it takes is one asshole.

I had an experience similar to that in my first rented home when I first began SL. Someone walked in, I said hello...no answer. They kept walking all around. I asked if I could help them...no answer. I finally asked "Would you mind telling me what you're doing in my house?" Still no response. They finally left. I told the estate manager about it the next day and he showed me how to use the land controls that he had fashioned into a push-button system on the wall.

Yep...when my partner and I owned our own land...orbs installed. (We lived about 650m in the sky at the time so it didn't affect anything on the ground. Apologies in advance if we cut one of Argent's flying outings short.)

20mph is pretty darn fast when navigating, isn't it?
If you can't go slower than that, it's not the banlines, it's the vehicle.
If you're doing 20mph down a narrow waterway, you're going to fast.

Tell that to Donald Campbell

I don't know who that is.

A British hero.

Donald Malcolm Campbell, CBE (23 March 1921 – 4 January 1967) was a British car and motorboat racer who broke eight world speed records in the 1950s and 60s. He remains the only person to set both land and water speed records in the same year (1964).

On 4 January 1967, Campbell was killed when Bluebird K7 flipped and disintegrated at a speed in excess of 300 mph (480 km/h).

But if they changed it so that they showed up on maps, well in advance, wouldn't that allieviate most of the problem?

Similarly, if there were proper flight paths/waterways/roads put in that did not encroach on existing land ownership, wouldn't that also make the point moot? It is true that may be in many cases may simply be impractical, but where possible why would it not work?

And regardless of RL flight regs, I can't remember the last time I saw a hot air balloon over the city, or much more than traffic or news helicopters or planes. There used to be a lot more in the way of small float planes, but they seem much less common than they used to be.

In a CAR?

I'm talking about driving down Linden Roads.

There is a legitimate case for ban lines not extending over linden roads... why aren't they considered public land?

Dekka,

I'd bet that if Mr. Campbell was NAVIGATING down a waterway that he could safely assume there were hazards on, he'd slow down.

Either that or he'd accept the consequences of hitting an impediment.

________________________________

Argent,
as long as you're on a Linden road, you should be fine. It's only when something hits someone else's property that it's a problem, right?
Now, you have made it clear that you are aware that there are areas that these "hazards" are prevalent, or a problem, right?
If you're going into an area where banlines encroach, slow down.
My RL home has a speed limit of 35mph. That's the MAX you are legally allowed to go here.
The reason? The roads are narrow. Why are the roads narrow? Because people's property is on either side of them.
When navigating a narrow street, highway etc, where you know there are hazards, and you come up on these hazards too fast for you to see them? You're going too fast.

No. You can't always even see parcel boundaries in time, let alone ban lines, when network lag, sim crossing lag or simple SL control clumsiness leads you to drift off the road. It is not possible to avoid drifting off the road at any realistic speed. Period. Anywhere on the grid. Period. If you think otherwise, take a test drive.

Because some Linden thought it funny to parcel up the land and accidentally set part of the road for sale?
Or alternatively, some Mole was told to lay a road somewhere, and he though it funny to take a shortcut across some residents' land?
Both have happened.

How the hell did he manage to freeze her on HER land? She should've added an AR to her list of actions, since something is not right if random people can walk around freezing people on their own property.

One example I recall... may have been fixed by now. North of Jernberg, the north-westernmost parcel protrudes into the Linden road... looks like the parcel layout for Jernberg and Steamboat didn't quite line up right.

I'm assuming Treasure meant caged.

That surprised me too, when she told me, and, I don't know the answer.

She still should have ARed his ass.

As I've posted before, I've 'Right-click/eject&ban'ed twice in two years plus.
The first incident was not some sort of trigger that unleashed a constant stream of assholes.
It never occurred to me that one incident was a call to get some SERIOUS SECURITY installed. Neither was the second incident about 6 months later.
Your resident has been fine without any security other that ejecting that person.
The idea of slamming the gates shut on all those interesting people who turn up simply because of one isolated incident is just a teensey-weensey bit insane. Alternatively, it's farking bonkers