Corsica and Nautilus joined by Open Space sims

Oh, you've just gotten me started...

You know what really chafes my girdle? When someone tries to defend their amoral conduct by saying "but the rules allow it", therefore it is proper for me to do. Did you cite any adversity brought on by the boaters? Or is this a "just because I can" kinda thing? As far as I know, there are no rules that keep me from drooling on you on a public conveyance, does that mean I should?

I suppose this means you won't be putting out channel markers, then? Can I still be your friend?

Why don't you rant about it some more? It's sure to change my mind.

Aww Steven, why'd you have to do this to me just when we are off to a beautiful relationship. You aren't a landholder, you're an Alty Troll with no payment info on file and don't even own any mainland.

I'm devastated, and no longer want to be your friend, and am keeping my concrete ramparts all for me. I'd still drool on you on the subway if you wanted me too, I'm pretty generous that way.

Why would I want you to change your mind? You're a right-thinking, rugged-individualist in my book! It is rare that someone is such a good caricature as you.

I'm currently living in London where me and a few friends rent a house. We have a drive-way out the front but none of us has a car down here (we're only here temporarily on work-placements).
However, one of the neighbours keeps parking their car in our drive-way, without asking us. It causes us no inconvenience really, but it is OUR drive-way, not theirs.
So we popped into the police station (just down the road) to find out what we can do, and the owner has been fined for it. We were within our rights to report this (apparently they'd done it before too but that's not the point).


If I were to own land next to a waterway I would likely leave a big chunk of the water untouched and try to build something that fits well. But nonetheless, should I have need of the extra space, then I would have no guilt in building across the water and blocking boat access. If I pay for 1024 square metres of land then I can and will build wherever I want within that 1024 square metre plot.

If you feel the Linden water-ways are too small, then maybe you're trying to sail a ship down a channel better suited to a narrow boat; get yourself a smaller boat.


Don't get me wrong, I'm all for building scenic builds that fit the land and allow people to enjoy the area, but if I need the land for myself, then I'll use it, as I'm the one paying not them.

Well that's certainly the first course I'd take. It is always better to use force against your neighbor instead of talking to him. That will ensure continued good relations regarding an act that is "no inconvenience really".

I hear that micturating repeatedly on the borders of your property can help too.

You could have let out the space to him, as it seems to have value to him and none to you. That would have been both amicable and mutually profitable. This anecdote was in support of *which* position?

p.s. I don't boat nor park in other peoples driveways nor put up banlines in SL. In RL, I even let people drive down my 100m private drive and should I happen to be outside, I'll even ask them if they've become lost and help them if I can. Yah there are pinko freaks all over the place.

Channel markers are a "good thing" for people to put down - particularly if they *must* (???) have Ban Lines.
The very worst ban lines are those on the jaggy edges of a plot bounded by a Linden channel going through a sim. I normally have Land Boundaries enabled in View, but with a camera following the boat, and water of varying depths, it's very difficult to gauge where the boat is exactly in relation to parcel boundaries. A few channel markers to give the line are invaluable.

I had a plot where I put marks that also doubled as a sim-border crossing - another very handy thing
I didn't have ban lines, but the next plot in from the sim border did.
Further down the channel, a landowner on a jaggy bit did have channel markers (and no ban lines). This was invaluable as the person on the other side of the jaggy channel had ban lines.

Maybe there needs to be a movement a bit like the Arbor project, but aimed at educating people to mark channels and/or mimimise/eliminate ban lines.



As for building on the water, I think that's fair enough if the build is marine in nature. People have to pay 2 or 3 times more for a Linden-bordering plot than they do for in interior plot. If they arrange their build to allow passage to people from interior plots then that's pure generosity and not a duty. Allowing passage can be easy in a large plot, but less so if it's a 512 or even a 1024.


Making what looks like a rectangle of 'land' on the water does jar the sensibilities. Being realistic about peoples' building abilities, I suppose it is only to be expected.
My group just bought a 1024 on a sim corner with Linden water on two sides. It came with a build - and the thing is sitting on a 32x32 megaprim!!
In some ways however that's a bit less offensive than someone banging down a huge prim or rectangular prim group to make a flat platform on a hillside.

I live in Southern Islandia, which is chock full of channels. Some have opted to build over the channels, but any of our land preserves 'em, and we have jes bridged over it at times. I actually prefer the notion of people travelling by if they wish to, an feel it adds to the overall charm of the area.

Likewise, I also do my share of boating. Usually jes on Livingtree, thoguh I did have the pleasure of rezzing my Tako in Mohrr the other day, an sailing it over to Clementina. It's a nice way to travel, an I'm glad the wayerways were clear there.

To me, it's not too much to ask to have *some* access.

Marii

That quote interests me, I had considered at one point buying granite slopes to build on them to rent properties, seeing as I assumed most people think they are in themselves a eyesore. My plan would not be to completely eliminate the granite but to build platforms on pillars so a building could sit on it and depending on the gradient, have steps and pathways connecting the properties, ie the granite with appropriate foilage would be visible under the house. However, I can imagine that in a few spots I might blank out the granite slope all together, for a green park area or a 'pond' probably. This would of course actually depend on the site itself, the varying gradients etc. I would hope to do it in the best possible taste, would that be considered offensive, in your opinion?

Now now
I was thinking more of the *huge* rectangular blocks that some people put down.
A hill/mountain build done with terraforming and platforms can be wonderful. It's a pain to try and terraform paths in a steep slope, but well worth the effort.

My point was intended to be that the "big ignorant rectangle" is actually less offensive when it's just poking above water level than it is on top of a hill, with huge vertical faces and square corners.
Both are done by people who don't have the skills necessary to blend their build into the environment.

k, thats fine for me

I did the opposite with the former ad farm land, I sank it as far as it would go, and now it is underwater with coral and stuff.

I'm not sure what the two have in common?

Ad-plots are about land owners in the neighbouring area who have to share the sim with the ad plot. Water access is about passerby's who demand access to land when they don't own any nearby.

Anyone can start a group and donate tier or money to it to buy water access plots, but I don't think most of the ones complaining are willing to bear the cost. Or start a petition to get LL to sensibly cut sims that are a mix of water and land.

I though it was a bit dangerous to give an example of an existing group
The only 'common' aspect would be to find a way of spreading the message that ban lines are very antisocial.
Perhaps one way would be (as in Arbor) to blacklist people who for instance run ban lines beside Linden channels without marking the channel - and who are not open to either channel marking or withdrawing the ban lines.

The first line of approach should be friendly/educational.
I have seen plots where the build is surrounded by clear water (in the parcel). The build is really what they want to keep others out of. That could be solved with a security device. If they really want the easy option of ban lines, then maybe subdividing the parcel into the central banned build zone and a surrounding unbanned water zone would do.
Both security devices and subdividing involve some inconvenience, but the parcel owner should be in a position to balance the levels of inconvenience.

I was just wondering why you mentioned it, the two issues just seemed unrelated to me .

Those tend to cause far more harm than an access restriction though?

"Banlines" get unjustly targetted as well: for boating there's no pratical difference between an access-restricted parcel and one that doesn't allow object entry except for the fact that you'll just bump into it without any visual warning at all (and it restricts any kind of prim air travel as well).

There are many good reasons for access restriction even if you don't happen to agree with them.

Although physically impossible to keep updated in any meaningful way, I'd lovve someting like dis:



But giving an idea of places to watch out for, shallow areas, ban lines, etc.

It might work in a small area, but any large chunk of land would seem impossible to keep updated.

Mari

Ah, but with land, you can fly over the banlines.

Personally, I firmly believe that one should do what one wishes with one's own land, but as someone who LOVES boating in SL, I can also see why it can be so frustrating to encounter blocked waterways.

It's like fighting for free speech so someone can make fun of you... lol

We're not paying 400 pounds a week to be someone else's parking space. After several weeks of this car appearing in our driveway we had yet to find out who owned it, short of breaking into the car and looking for documents with their address on it.

Just like I don't pay $30 a month tier to be a virtual litter-bin, skate-park, or have people hanging out in my home without my permission, or expect to be able to.

A badly set up security system can reach outside a parcel to harass passer bys. I've experienced it.
A well set up system can restrict its activity to the bare necessary. Such a system is much preferable to the more easily implemented ban lines - although a hyperactive system could introduce lag issues.
Setting up a security system properly might be less taxing on someone than would be subdividing a parcel to achieve a mix of banned/unbanned.


Don't get me started on No Object Entry - when it's not done temporarily to stop an ongoing griefing incident.

When sailing, I prefer to stay out of other peoples parcels. It would be nice if there was some marking of the boundaries other than the sudden appearance of red lines or failure of the boat to move.
Banned areas on the edge of a sim are a particular pain. You can't see the ban lines from the sim that you are attempting to leave. "Cannot cross.......into a banned parcel".




The issue is one that requires education more than it requires retaliation.
I've met people who didn't appreciate that their neighbours were having to erect barriers to hide the ban lines. I've met people who had ban lines around a parcel that was empty on the ground, but had a build in the sky above the ban line height.





However, if nothing else works, I'm all for an organised banning of people who run ban lines.

There's already a bunch of bots datamining and publishing parcel information, including access restriction and object entry settings.

All you'd need is a script that queries it for the sim you're on and the surrounding ones and it could give you a rough idea of where the problem parcels are as you move.

Yes. Via bridge or tunnel if necessary, but yes.

So the southern part of nautilus is now connected to the old continent ... at Horrorbag... right next to my sailing and surfing place.

6 void sims all sailable and with rez capability and auto return on 15 minutes..

THANK YOU LINDEN!!!

This is great news..all the Eastern continents joined by access corridors. However; time surely for the same to happen on the Western continents. In fact I believe there should be corridors allowing travel between all the continents, obviously this would mean a rather lengthy corridor linking the Eastern continents to the Western Continents..but hey why not.

I also believe there should be an ‘altitude access level’ from any point within SL to any other point. What do I mean by ‘altitude access level’..?..simple..at a certain altitude (let’s say between 700 - 800m) you can fly – unrestricted – to any point in SL, above any sim, including estate, continental or even invalid. This would mean that no matter where you are in SL you could travel to any other point by flying. Okay I hear you say..”but we can do that now by teleportation”..and you’re right..but let's be honest..teleportation's so boring!! On Laurentia..you want to get about..you walk!!

Imagine how great it would be to build yourself a launch platform at 700m..take off and fly anywhere in SL..all the way to N. Corsica if you wanted to.

Ooops I've woken up..day dreaming again!!

Perre..