What about Bots?

I beg to differ. Someone who owns a full sim - mainland or private - is free to use all the av slots in it.

I beg to differ. Someone who owns a full sim - mainland or private - is free to use all the av slots in it. However, someone who owns a particular percentage of a sim is not necessarily free to use that percentage of the sim's av slots as that wouldn't be right. For instance, someone who has a home on a 1024 would not be able to invite someone round if the rest of the sim is owned by one person who fills the av slots pro-rata. Nevertheless, someone who owns, say, half the sim could comfortably use 1/4 of the avs most of the time. It's a matter of common sense. Suppose there's a club in my sim that has events where, say, 20 people turn up. I couldn't use 3/4 of the av slots during the events just because I own 3/4 of the sim, or it would be against the ToS. Common sense should prevail at all times, as it does in the sim I am in.

The point I made when this bit started is that, as long as such common sense prevails, whether or not the sim has lots of traffic bots in it, it is not the business of people who can't get into stores because the sim is full. If the traffic bots fill a sim that is owned by the bot runner, it is nobody else's business. If s/he has a store in it, and the bots prevent customers from coming, it's his/her choice. On the other hand, if the bot runner doesn't own the whole sim, then s/he must leave room for as many people as want to get into the sim, regardless of how much of the sim s/he owns. The sim I'm in rarely gets close to being full and, when it does, bots log out to make sure that, if the sim is going to be full, no bots are using any of the slots.

This is true, but there are increasingly problems that:
a) based on the recent lockouts, it appears that there are "login slots" as well, to which land ownership gives you no extra right;
b) the original example was somebody who owned an island, (apparently) rented part of it to someone else, then (presumably without telling the renter) took up all the avatar slots on the sim. That's both amoral and against CS.

Wrong, read carefully the ownership rewards of a paid account/land owner.

Avatar slots are not part of it. you're claiming that you have a right to something that isn't part of your land ownership. You can change the number allowed... but with the changes to the opensim regions... well it's obvious that the sim owners don't have the right to slap as many avatars as they want on a sim (because it impacted the performance of other sims and the grid... ).

Plus you ignore the fact every avatar uses networking resources of the grid in addition to sim resources. So every bot online is using resources of the grid in addition to the sim resources.

Sorry, Mort. If you don't understand, I'm not going to try and help you.

there's no reason to automatically accept either of our arguments, but on the other hand there's no reason to automatically accept either of our arguments.

Try I dare ya

Show where is says landownership guarantees you access to X amount of avatar slots on the sim where you own land

I believe Phil was talking about owning a sim.

If I was told by LL that, in spite of paying for a full regular region, I wouldn't get the full 40 avatar slots that go with that, I'd be kinda miffed!

The trick is LL doesn't guarantee access for you to that sim with any avatar. only the pim and land use (as well as support options)

...they owned a good portion of the sim...

...And you can take a look at the fact LL can change the avatar limits on a sim due to performance issues (again see the homeland/openspace sims).. including private sims

Linden Lab markets the avatar caps for private regions as a feature, same as prim use. It is as guaranteed as any other feature that is advertised.

https://support.secondlife.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=4417&task=knowledge&questionID=5721

What part of owning the ENTIRE sim didn't you understand?
That was a gridwide policy decision not Linden Lab singling out any one particular sim. I've never heard of an instance where Linden Lab every intentionally denied the owner of an ENTIRE sim the use of the full hardcoded avatar cap.

A good example is a certain individual who had a problem with an info hub being more popular than their venues. they owned a good portion of the sim, but had their camp pads and the like returned by LL due to using resources that the crowd at the info hub wanted to bring in other avatars.

And you can take a look at the fact LL can change the avatar limits on a sim due to performance issues (again see the homeland/openspace sims).. including private sims

Show where is says landownership guarantees you access to X amount of avatar slots on the sim where you own land

A good example is a certain individual who had a problem with an info hub being more popular than their venues. they owned a good portion of the sim, but had their camp pads and the like returned by LL due to using resources that the crowd at the info hub wanted to bring in other avatars.

There is nowhere that I know of where it says that. You didn't read the posts very well, or you didn't understand them.

You mean where you say "I own This amount of land on the sim so I should be able to use that amount of avatar slots" isn't saying that owning land means you have rights to those slots?


Even with a sim supporting any number of slots... you are going to be using more than just those slots. You will be using network resources of the grid (even when you keep saying it's a minor thing) so it affects the grid as a whole (along with manipulation of search results through traffic)

Nevertheless, someone who owns, say, half the sim could comfortably use 1/4 of the avs most of the time./QUOTE]


hmm... seems pretty cut and dried that you are saying that owning half the sim entitles you to easily a quarter of the avatar slots.

If every avatar that is logged at peak concurency didn't move or do anything at all, then the system would be capable of a very much higher concurrency because the database system wouldn't be being hammered.

OK, suppose you could get (say) 300,000 bots in, instead of 80,000 avatars. That would be a hell of an increase in concurrency, and I'm not sure it could be done, but let's say.

That would mean that an avatar has the same impact on the grid as 4 bots.

So if you have 20 bots sitting in a skybox, that's keeping 5 real people from logging in at peak concurrency.

If you own a full private island or mainland region, you have a CPU core of your very own, and you can't affect performance of other regions. That's why island owners can set their av limit to 100 if they want their sim to be highly populated treacle

You misunderstood it, or you put an interpretation on it that wasn't written. Your, "I own This amount of land on the sim so I should be able to use that amount of avatar slots" is not the same saying that 1/4 of the avs can comfortaly be used buy someone who owns half the sim. Have you read the post I pointed you to? You should read it. It will explain this conversation to you.

In case you have difficulty finding it, I'll quote the relevant part for you:-

Notice the last sentence.