Protection of Residents II

HI

I could not stay away, but I is startin a new career

I'M GONNA BE A PIRATE!

arrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

1 User Agreed.

Yeah umm, that's just because I love the idea of being an emporer hehehe.
But back to the topic, you didn't see the fine print There is a group I happen to be the owner of and the group purpose is to protect our sims from griefers. You can find the details here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Adoption_Agency_Coalition

The group works quite well because:
-it's members share the same interests
-we do provide evidence in an anonymized (CS-compliant) way
-we don't publish a list but send out a warning if an incidence happens right after writing an abuse report (and the copy of the abuse report is a good way to exclude at least some of the drama)
-we do have clear definitions what we do like on our sims and what we don't

However, there has and will be abuse of the group as there has and will be abuse of estate managers and sim owners by providing false information. So that's something to be aware of.

There are several groups out there that try to deal with griefers and some of them got in serious trouble including being banned from SL so it's a good thing to comply to the TOS and CS and not become a griefer group.

@Peggy
Can't wait to read your constructive ideas on this topic, maybe my group can learn!

@Jojogirl
That's a good question. I guess you can always contact an owner or officer of that group and complaint...

I, too, can recognize crooks and scammers........very well, in fact. But, not everyone can. Some are just born to be trusting of others. As a human being in this real world that SL is mimicking it's up to the decent among us to do what we can to help those not quite as callus as us to recognize and avoid the traps and pitfalls. You can tell people about the dangers until you are blue in the face but, you sometimes need to actually do something concrete to help. Most people know how to take care of themselves.........yet they still get burned by some enterprising criminal. There needs to be some protection. I happen to think a program without the enthusiastic support of LL will never work.....but, in order to get that support we have to show them we want it bad enough to try doing ourselves.

Obviously you don't think that way. So, go shut your blinds and eat your ice cream as you watch "As The World Turns" while Susie Newlandbuyer gets her plot taken away from her along with all her prims she purchased to build her "dream home".

I guess I wouldn't want you "heading out to Peggy's 'Better World'" anyway. So just stick it out here in the jungle.

How about an open discussion without trashing the idea from the very first response?

If everyone didn't immediately jump the OP's of threads like this it's possible some good ideas could be brought to light.

I guess I don't really care one way or the other.......afterall, I can take care of myself. There was a time when I cared a great deal.......sort of changed when I got to know some of you here on the forums. You attack anyone who wants to try to help. You accuse them of being worse than the problem they are attempting to address. Keep the grid like it is now........it'll do quite well for the less than honest among us. And Second Life will never shake it's somewhat negative image in the virtual world. And everyone will be "happy".

I'm not sure if I can recognize scammers all that well but I can recognize a situation where almost anyone *could* be a scammer - or might just have an evil roommate get hold of his passwords or what ever. I would never turn over more money than I can afford to lose to anyone in any situation where it was even remotely possible it could go wrong.

I'm pretty sure none of this is Brenda's fault.

I totally believe in resident protection.




I disagree with vigilantism though, especially self-appointed sheriffs.

Just browsing through my junk email folder, I have mail from wassim dongo, Mr. Karrim (twice), Mrs. Omar and Ali Adama, all telling me heartbreaking tales, all asking for my help, all promising me a huge financial reward if I send them my bank details. Now, which is more helpful ...

1) tell people not to trust emails from wassim dongo, Mr. Karrim etc.

2) tell people not to trust emails from anybody with a hard-luck story who is offering a great reward in exchange for use of your bank account (even if they are a Nigerian prince)

Here's what I hope is a constructive suggestion ... don't bother to name the scammers but educate people about the scams, either inworld via your group or on an external forum. That way, nobody ends up on a blacklist (or grey list) and nobody benefits from coming back as an alt not on the list to try the same scam again. This won't work for every random griefing attack - that's what mute, eject, ban and ultimately AR are for, but it will provide useful information for new residents on the sort of things to beware of.

You knew I had to say it.

McCarthy WAS right. He was just 50 years too early.

I have no ill will toward the OP or his idea. I just don't think it is a good one, and would not participate in it. Disgreeing is part of discussion , isn't it? He asked for opinions. Or is this one of those "I just want to hear opinions that agree with mine" conversations? Let me know. I have to get to the store and get some more Ice Cream before ATTW starts.

Can you think of any?

Unfortunately a good many of them are masquerading as honest citizens, running SL police forces, selling worthless security gadgets, even renting sims out, ...

They may even think they're honest citizens, as honest as the next man, anyway...

Peggy...i have not said i am against people supporting each other. In fact, I promote that in world and here in the forums at every opportunity. My experience is that i have been griefed and stalked by some folks who were accusing me wrongly. That is why i simply asked what the recourse is if someone is wrongly accused and then added to the op's list.

I have not shot down anyone's ideas nor have i trashed them. Can't say the same for everyone responding here....

OK, how about the OP answering a few questions...

1. Would you be providing verifiable RL identification for yourself and any others responsible for managing this list?

2. What qualifications do you have for acting as arbitrator when people challenge the information on this list?

3. How will the evidence be obtained or presented to prove the allegations of wrongdoing?

3a. Chat logs? Sharing of chat logs in-world or on Linden Lab forums is a violation of TOS. Would those then be posted on a 3rd party site? How would you validate that those logs had not been altered without access to the Linden Lab servers?

Without some sort of validation to ensure the accuracy of the evidence provided, it is then simple hearsay. In which case, my statement in post #2 of this thread stands.

I am not unsympathetic to the problem you are trying to address. I just don't believe you have any chance to succeed in the manner you have proposed. There is no reason anyone should trust your list to be fair or accurate.

What steps would you take to ensure that the person filing the complaint exercised due diligence prior to engaging in the transaction?

People need to stand up and take some responsibility for their own actions.

If you really feel that you have been a victim of fraud then file an abuse report with LL. If enough people report the same problem then maybe LL will take action.

Most situations like this are two sided. Will the OP be obtaining input from those who are being put on the list? If not, anyone who has a grudge could easily put a person on the list when it is not warranted.

Sorry but unless you get both sides of the story, I would not use the list.

Also, as someone else asked, why do you need land?

This is an EXTREMELY dangerous suggestion. But I am not surprised given the recent attitudes in sl environment it is being suggested.

Read "The Crucible" by Arthur Miller.

Trouble is people might be asking to be put on the list - kinda fame. Being "sent to Coventry" was always a relief for me in boarding school. It meant people who kept such lists ignored me on purpose and I had peace n'quiet.
What are we gonna call these vigilantes? Oh, by the way, arent vigilante associations illegal in most countries? Especially in USA where SL as I am repeatedly being told on teh forum is based and derives it codes of moral behaviour and rools?

you cant make a viable list from one sided stories..... I been in SL almost 5 years and cant remember any of this happening to me simply because common sense is far better than any so called list.

Don't you mean codes of *immoral* behaviour?

Pep (The ToS is a business document, a completely different thing)

To the OP: This sort of thing has been tried before. Everything from "vigilante" groups who supposedly were formed to combat griefers, to an SL "Better Business Bureau".

Every single one of these efforts failed, for the same reasons people have been putting forth here ... lack of accountability, inability to verify allegations, anonymity of both the complainer and the accused, and gaming of the system.

Your best bet is to keep your own "better dead" list. Share it with your friends if you want. But don't try to make an "official bad boy" list and publish it. You are asking for trouble.

Let's take a concrete example. As sweet and sunny as I am, I have still managed to annoy one or two people in Second Life. Let's say one of these persons submits my name to your group and I find myself on your list. About ten minutes after I find out that I'm on your list, three things are going to happen:

1. I will send you a very nasty IM.
2. I will ban and mute you and any of your group I can identify
3. I will file an AR against you with Linden Lab.

Now...multiply my reaction by however many names you have on that list. And have a nice Second Life!

(Seriously...I'm not mad at you. I am just trying to illustrate what'll happen the moment you start publishing stuff like this).

You know what I mean Pep - don't split hairs - for once we may be on same side. (It feels like "sleeping with the enemy"

Oh - I didn't notice it was you.

Pep (I thought it was another Jig after the other one had deserted the forums . . .)

I wish I would have caught this thread from the beginning. Lots of interesting debate I would have been interested to participate in

Anyway - a couple points:

BanLink (http://www.slbanlink.com) is still alive & kicking. Membership is restricted to private-island & mainland venue owners, but completely free if you meet the size requirement. About the only advertising we currently engage in is word-of-mouth.

BanLink is transparent, in that anyone is free to lookup their own information. Additionally, bans are peer-reviewed proportional to how widely honored they are. Bans honored by lots of locations get lots of peer review, bans honored by few locations get little peer review.

BanLink offers the accused the opportunity to provide their uncensored side of the story, in the form of a dispute. However, we encourage people to try & work out their differences first before resorting to logging a dispute.

BanLink is not perfect or flawless. Our website is slow & frequently busy. If someone is bound & determined to grief you, no system or method will stop them. However, despite its flaws, subscribers report that the tool is immensely useful, and actually encourages people to be responsible for their actions because there are consequences.

Often, people are much more willing to apologize & correct their behavior when they realize that a ban from location X may affect them at locations Y & Z. Likewise, Venue operators are much more willing to work with the banned individual & resolve the situation when they know that their bans are seen by others, and value judgements are being made on how trustworthy they are.

Personally, I think its a fantastic system that gets poor press because its a form of blacklist, which most people generally regard as 'icky'

Where to begin? There are too many 'showstoppers' in the blacklist idea for us to take this beyond a philosophical discussion. I can see why LL would go with a hands off approach. It would be too difficult even for them.