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

/me wishes she could see what Maggie wrote

me too

ETA there it is!
ok it ate half my posts >_<!!!

LOL

zomg i was censored! i said a$$hat

Well, the powers that be obviously consider that unneighbourly language!

darn Jones!

lol im gonna get some sleep now the excitement has died down outside.

Well it might help some people learn respect for other people's property and 'space' but I'm a bit pessimistic about it eradicating the problem to any significant degree. Today's culture is one of "me first" and "right now."

A lot of kids have been 'raised' by tv and/or computer, and simply haven't learned to care about anyone else, let alone their virtual property.



And we've seen several in these threads!

It sounded almost reasonable until:



So, the people choosing NOT to allow public access on land they pay real, hard-earned money for, are "jerks" - not the people who see it as a thoroughfare. Scylla deems them not "neighborly" and you deem them "jerks," apparently.

Well if I took that same attitude with my real life neighbor's land I'd be taken to jail, most likely, but then America especially big city America isn't quite as "neighborly" as some places, I guess.

"Hi, I'm in your living room, being all neighborly. I even made you a sammich."



I know you were talking to Dana, and also being facetious. But, to answer you seriously. Any time I am home longer than 20-30 minutes, I get 'visitors.' Almost always less than a week old, but not every time. Some, as you've stated, "just do not care" about other people's property.

It's amazing how often those who are older than a month or two even have things listed in their profile about their right to go on anyone's land and in anyone's house. So this tells me they do so often enough to make a 'statement' to all, about it.



Don't ban lines look the same whether it is due to not being in a group or not being age or account verified? Also, some such things do already exist. You can ban anyone under a month old, or who isn't age verified; also anyone who isn't account verified, too, I'm pretty sure.

This wouldn't help Argent and his plane travails or Mickey V and her banned horse laments.

No one likes my idea of places specifically meant to educate and inform people about different types of SL travel, and also to make travel easier, AND give a rez point and starting point? It seems so logical to me. And so obvious.

hmm...


food for thought:

- strangers on your land can not damage any of your possessions, nor can they steal them.
- modern security devices have a setting that makes them inactive when you're not home.

Yes I think that only using ban lines when at home is a decent compromise, Lance.

But some have said they do not want competitors sniffing around their workshop for instance.

Other people may have a stalker/harasser in SL and don't want to think they are wandering around their home/things, either. Still others get ooked out by someone using their virtual bed/toys while they are offline.

Bottom line it's their land, and there is SO much land to explore in SL I still cannot see why this is an issue. Does EVERY lot have to be available to all who wish to walk around in it? Why?

Clarissa, while i did say the jerk line, that does not change my stance on their rights to do as they wish on their property. yes some people can be jerks about it. i also said that many use them for personal reasons. i even listed several times in my posts why they chose to do so. please do not take it as an attack. i am trying to find a happy medium to benefit ALL, instead of placing the solution on one group or another. Scylla came up with one i liked( the cam-panning idea). We have been saying the same thing all along just for different POVs. we all agree Education is the key, i believe it should focus on Property Rights and what to expect. with aside class on when to use ban lines and orbs and how to use them. you said basically the same thing and i agreed with you then.

Just FYI: The price of a vehicle has almost no correlation to its maneuverability; many of the most expensive are still using scripts made obsolete by Havoc 4, and whose main claim on any market share is pretty sculpties that won't rez before the vehicle has passed beyond drawing distance of onlookers. Or they're packed-full of separate special effects scripts and unnecessary assets like sound files and textures, making border crossings extra treacherous. Some even come with scripted HUDs to wear, just in case you weren't already overloaded with handoff-slowing attachments. Very silly indeed.

For terrestrial vehicles, different designs and scripts differ in their sensitivity to surfaces (e.g., some need a paved road whereas others bump along fine on the long stretches of not-yet-completed Linden right of way). Some behave better at higher or lower speeds, too.

Given a well-scripted vehicle, however, and an interesting stretch of road (the Atoll is full of them) it's a lot of fun--except at border crossings and banlines.*

And so, back to banlines. I honestly believe that the banlines that are doing anything like what the landowner intended are a small minority of the ones in force, so if we could just get rid of the "accidental banlines" the whole topic would arise less often. I've mentioned before that a big advance would be a "banline certification program" such that residents could only use banlines after successful completion of a short training course and exam on what banlines do--and at least as importantly, what they don't do. (Not that I harbor any illusions that such a thing would ever happen.)

It's not that banlines could never be useful. I imagine that if I owned and spent a lot of time on a parcel in a "bad neighborhood" (cue Repo Man)--maybe next to a public sandbox or somewhere--I'd probably use banlines some of the time, myself. As a practical matter, however, on balance across the grid, they probably do more harm than good. And even where they're beneficial, their effects are inferior to any of many alternatives that would take some amount of development.

They're primitive and mostly ineffective at their intended purpose, but they're what we have. It would sure be nice if somehow they were more consistently used more responsibly until we have something better.

_______
*They're also a bit of a technical "rush" because there's nothing else in SL that interacts quite so intimately with the physics engine, and yet (usually) has a very minimal effect on sim performance. Of course the downside is that they're also affected by every eccentricity of Havoc--plus the mess that results when handing off between instances of Havoc.

Sorry Maggie. I did not take it as an attack at all. No offense meant. I've liked what you had to say.

I was saying it in a teasing way actually but I guess that can't come across very well in text.

However, it does seem that the entire blame here and the entire responsibility, is being laid at the landowners' feet.

From LL's point of view, landowners pay bills, roamers don't! So I doubt landowners' rights including ban ability is going anywhere any time soon.

What I've tried to say in response to the education, courtesy, etc., points is that of course it's true. But it's a bit idealistic. Nor can wishes change the public at large. Unfortunately! Or we'd all be in Utopia.

it's ok.

so where is the happy medium? how many are willing to give a little bit on each side of this issue without giving up the rights that they paid for, or giving in to those who feel those same ones are interfering in their enjoyment of SL?

Most people seem unable or unwilling to compromise, unfortunately.

I think the answer is instead to give alternatives. Somewhere for people to boat, drive and sail that they actually can DO those things.

More options for home/land owners so they can possibly set ban lines to only activate when they are home, for instance.

Also, I think every resident, to some degree, sees SL as 'their' SL. So, perhaps town meetings...those work so well in RL!

I'm putting the land I have been living in up for sale, because I do not want to put up a ban line (despite parceling it just around my house, so it would not hurt anyone boating, or block access through the surrounding bits; I decided to just sell, instead) and because I get too many uninvited guests. I like home to be a place I can exhale, in RL and in SL. My idea of heaven is the phone NOT ringing. To me socialising is when you go *out.*

I think that can be very hard for extroverts to understand. Also introvert does not mean a dislike of people. It means sometimes one must escape from them. There is a difference - Lol.

An extreme extrovert would be happiest with all of SL in their lap. It would be a nightmare for the other end of the personality spectrum. I wonder if a lot of this debate is tied into Meyer Briggs types?

....... you quoted somebody else while implicitly (and accidentally I accept) attributing the quote to me. It's helpful to always put the name after the "QUOTE=" when editing of a post that does multiple quotes.




So again, the "you" you quoted was not "me".

Can we be clear that I would see "Hi, I'm in your living room, being all neighborly. I even made you a sammich." to be just as as intrusive and abusive in SL as it would be in RL?

To me, at least, there is a massive difference between
- someone going into a place and abusing it by harassing people, using poseballs, leaving prims, using it as their own and being an asshole in general
and...
- someone passing by, with no intention of stopping and clipping the edge of the space.






That is amazing. Truly!
I'd love to see some research done on the actual number of people who have such an attitude. I've never seen such a profile, but I accept your word that you see it often.

I've met a goodly number of people over the two years plus I've been in SL, but neither they nor myself have had such problems.
Are you near some newbie gathering point? Or could it be that your place used to be landmarked arising from previous ownership? Are they TPing to green dots, or are they following LMs I wonder.
If you had a visitor list device, you could check if the rate of visits continues in your absence. I can drop a script on you if you want.


....


Anything to educate people about the possibilities of SL would be good.
More rez points would be good.
The most intensely annoying part of being zapped from a vehicle by ban lines is not so much the actual zapping but that there is usually nowhere nearby where the vehicle can be re-rezzed. It's the journey that's the thing - not the movement. Hit a ban line and it's all over. Go back and start all over again and hope you make it next time...until you hit a new one you were unaware of, or lag slams you into one anyway.
That's not to say that recovering from being turfed out in a sitting pose to some far corner of a parcel is a minor irritation, but it's the broken journey that is the most major pain.
Hey! I'm educated about the different types of travel in SL. I do a lot of it. I adjust my speed to the conditions and the varying standards of sim crossings. It's still possible to wander off-track.

There's the thing.
A badly-designed quick-fix tool that must surely have been created to keep abusive assholes away is so indiscriminate that it zaps everyone on the presumption that they are abusive assholes.


A thing to consider is that following Linden routes is far more than the mechanical process of simply driving or sailing. It's a fantastic way to appreciate the builds and landscapes along those routes. (Just looking you understand! - and not going inside to go through the underwear of the owners!) This is the aspect that has Jack Linden making supportive noises in Lias' thread on the topic.

The landowners I'm talking to have no doors, no walls, no locks, nothing but an empty field with a few trees or a handful of prims.

The thing that keeps me on the Mainland, in fact, is the grand scale of the thing, which you can really only appreciate by traveling through it. (Some of that is evident just by walking or flying the avatar, but somehow it's even more compelling on a vehicle--when it works.) I think LL finally realizes that it has a unique asset in the Mainland, and that's why it's working hard on cleaning it up and adding infrastructure features, long neglected.

There are Estates that approach a continent in scale, but those mega-Estates tend to be disjoint and incoherent. And there are other, somewhat smaller Estates (such as Caledon) that are designed to a compelling Estate-scale plan. But you really need the Mainland for something like the Great Wall or Route 1 or the Blake Sea / Nautilus City complex. And there sure isn't anything like those on any OpenSim grid, nor is there likely ever to be.

To me this summarizes the problem. I think a lot of people utilize the feature of ban lines out of spite and an "F U" attitude.

When I talk in specifics you don't read them. For example:

I know exactly what you're referring to, and I don't know if you just skimmed it or just read half the messages or what, but it's pretty clear you didn't actually read and understand the proposal. Which had nothing to do with ban lines... deliberately so. It didn't address physical access at all, you would still need to control physical access some way... including using ban lines... to make it work.

The idea was that, if you can't get into a private parcel (or some other protected region... parcels are easy, because they're already implemented in the server), you wouldn't be able to see anything in that region that the object's owner hadn't marked public. That is it would make things that people wanted to be private really private. You could build a house, put up walls, and let people admire it, but they wouldn't be able to look inside and see what you were doing or what stuff you had.

What's wrong with that?

Because when you write that you are not referring to "my vision", you're referring to some imaginary extreme position that you've seen other people in this thread attacking and then getting pissed off at me when I decline to defend something I didn't actually say.

If aircraft in RL were like aircraft in SL: perfectly silent, perfectly safe (for the pilot, passengers, and bystanders, and their property), incapable of causing harm to man or beast, they would be driven from people's garages and parked in the street. My point was that you can't simply extrapolate from real life to Second Life, because the situations are not the same.

Even if there's no house, no people, no buildings of any kind there? I was referring to an actual, concrete, specific instance, not a generality.

First of all, let me repeat a point I made earlier, on the subject of privacy. When I say "you can't expect privacy on the mainland" that doesn't mean I think that's a good thing, it means that's the way it is, that's the way Linden Lab set things up. They are unlikely to change that, because it would reduce the demand for private islands, and cut into their income.

This is another situation where I'm trying to describe the way things actually work, and you're interpreting it as something I'm demanding.

I said, to be precise, that everything not otherwise obstructed* above ban lines is available for free flight because that IS the status quo. That's the standard Linden Labs has set. It's not an accidental limit: when they increased it to 100 meters, there was an outcry, and they reduced it again. If they decide to restrict flight to certain zones and make them actually marked and documented so you can see them instead of only finding out about them by being crashed out, then that would also work. But that would be "less official airspace", not "more".

To get "more official airspace" you'd need to do something like, oh, banning security orbs, or reducing the height of ban lines. I know that's not what you meant, but if you're going to say "we need to reduce the airspace available to fliers" then you need to say that, instead of implying you're granting something new while taking away most of the grid. Can you see how someone might find that, I don't know, kind of like a politician?

* Obstructed includes blocked by prims or scripts.

I was landing on my own landing field built and in operation long before the person with the empty field put up their ban lines. I wasn't (no matter how much you want to twist things) doing anything wrong.

You can't "vote something into existence". It doesn't matter how many votes a proposal gets, if Linden Lab doesn't want to do it, it won't happen.

Tell you what. Go to Abbotts Airfield and tell the people flying and selling planes there that you want to make most of the grid a "no go" zone for aircraft, restricting flight to protected Linden "flying islands" and official glide paths, and see if they are against it or not.

Ban lines provide little protection against that. You don't need to manifest your avatar on a parcel to see what your competitor is doing there.

I never said that. Sheesh.

This would be a new island, I never said a thing about banning air travel to only there! However it would provide a viable alternative.

Although for what it's worth, other people's opinions in and of themselves do not sway me. They have to have something more to say than "because we demand it" and something more to evince than bullying.

The point some of us have been making is this:

How exactly are we to determine which 'type' of visitor will be joining us at any given moment? Lol.

I didn't misattribute a quote if there was no name included in the quote.

More later, I'm tired...

How do you know what I read or don't read!?



Yes I did and I understood the convoluted concept as much as anyone could, I think.

What I replied with at the time was that, if people could still see the *visitor* then that is just as bad. It doesn't give actual privacy, in that case. Also, I think someone asked about chat - whether that would also be unseen by the person 'visiting.'

I understood and I wouldn't want that. Okay?

You guys did say something about clouds, though, which I think is the part I was a bit unclear about. You said unseen, and you also said 'clouds' when someone else used the word unseen/invisible. But in the end it doesn't matter to me because NONE of it sounds in any way appealing.



I know that, which to me is yet another reason it's useless. As I said at the time, you'd still have some uninvited av running around your property - unless you used ban lines and then we're back at square one. Where is the benefit?! To me there IS none.

Okay maybe more thorough reply later, but I'm tired. I just wanted to come in and reply to that bit since you KEEP saying I don't understand or read what you say. That's really not a very nice insinuation to make, frankly.