The Question of Land Cutting

There actually IS a way to stream more than one video per parcel using scripts; I know because the CSI:NY HUD did it. The technique is to use PARCEL_MEDIA_COMMAND_AGENT in llParcelMediaCommandList(); that parameter says to apply commands in the list (which can include PARCEL_MEDIA_COMMAND_URL) only to the specified agent (i.e., avatar).

I enthusiastically endorse this new policy. My answer to your questions #1 and #3, in both cases, is "yes".

I do have some concerns, however.

I own one piece of property that has a 16 sq m "hole" in it. Your support people tell me that the land is not "abandoned", yet I can't even get any communication going with the owner to see if I could negotiate for the purchase of that parcel for something less than the L$9999 that the owner is asking. (current market value of property in the sim is about L$5 to L$7 per sq. m.

I am wondering, as a result, whether LL would be willing to rule that such "holes" be automatically ceded to the owner of the land surrounding each such "hole", say for a fair price of L$5-7/sq m (or whatever the region average is [excluding micro-parcel pricing]) to the current owner.

I also have another piece of land, which is currently 384 sq m. There is a strip of 16 sq m parcels along its southern border that I'd like to buy to restore this parcel to 512 sq m, but not at the exorbitant prices asked for some of those micro-parcels. 48 sq m of that strip is now owned by Governor Linden. I would like to buy those for a fair price. I am wondering, again, if LL would be willing to mandate a certain price per parcel (based on current land value) so that I, and people like me, could finally reassemble land parcels that had been previously cut by others.

Note that in both the above cases, I did not do the landcutting. I bought the land for prim count and would very much like to reassemble both parcels so that they're usable for structures (I'm a builder).

Now there's a third situation I would like to see addressed. I own three 16 sq m plots that I bought for prim count and to stop the ad-farmers from using them. I would gladly trade them or give them to LL in return for being able to reassemble the first two pieces of land that I mentioned above. Could some sort of policy be set for situations like this?

Ultimately, I think no one *really needs* 16 sq m plots; I'd like to see them go away. I'm wondering if LL might be willing to force 16, 32, and 64 sq m owners to give up their properties in one of the following ways:

* sell their properties back to LL for fair market value
* sell their properties to the landowner who owns the property in which their property constitutes a "hole".
*sell their properties to the landowner who owns the property from which the micro-parcel was originally cut.

And if those micro-parcel landowners stubbornly refuse to sell or if they ignore any communications with them, treat those parcels as "abandoned" and give owners of the land from which those mini-parcels were cut the first option of buying the micro-parcel for fair market value. If they don't want to or can't buy them, cede them to Governor Linden as caretaker.

We have had to build up a mainland ownership of 16k by buying every small bit of land as it became available and when we come to sell it we intend to return it to the original pieces or we will have fragmented land we have to sell in a one-er which no one would ever buy. We have bits all over our sim bought just to get the prims.

I REALLY DISAGREE WITH THIS AS WE ARE JUST ABOUT TO BUY AN ISLAND AND NEED TO MAXIMISE OUR INCOME FROM THE CURRENT SIM.

ADDITIONAL EDIT: I am hoping I have misunderstood the problem. When we sell our 16,000 we will break it down into its original 2,048 1,024 and 512 plots. If the problem is only plots small than that then yes, I don't see a problem. But if I cannot turn it into plots then it could take ages to sell a weird shaped fragmented piece of land.

Clarification please. Also cutting land for management reasons, not sale reasons, into tiny plots is valid for all sorts of reasons, but selling plots smalller than 512 does not seem necessary.

Hi, there

The main problem for me about this kind of cutted land come with the few quantity of objets the new owner can create. I saw in-world a large region in Mainland where the owner takes half parcel, and put the rest for sale in small peaces. And that small peaces, has almost nothing prims to be used cause the parcel of the owner tooks over the proportion.

So, I agree with the mimimun size since it comes with avaible quantity of prims proportionaly.

If that will be respected, I sse less problems with lags too.

There are legit uses to land cutting, however this has definitely been abused over time by amoral people who want only to force others to buy land at outrageous price (particularly true of the "reverse auction" scamming scheme, where parcels never reach a reasonable price during the reverse auction).

My solution to this problem would be:

- Forbid to sell new parcels under a minimum size (let's say 256sqm).

- Force the selling price of existing parcels under the above limit to a maximum price (say L$10 per sqm)

on mainland u cant landscape...

I have some land that I cut into the smallest units to create space for me and my friends to put prim servers on. Islands come and go, so it has to be on the mainland. The land is highly unlikely to be resold though. But in this case it's not a crime to cut - it's not for profit (ie. I don't charge for the use of my prim server land to my friends), it makes it clear to eachother what space is theirs to use even though we're in the same group. Yes, it's all clumped together and frankly a little ugly - a bunch of server prims lying on the ground in a 512. But I could spare some prims to make something cover them over and make it looks like lawn or something. Perhaps even move the servers up to 4096m (but that would annoy pilots).

I dunno, maybe LL could designate some mainland sims that are specifically zoned for prim servers with a "data centre" feel to them?

move ya servers into the ground

I am so thankful that this issue is being addressed and support these ideas:

* Limit the minimum size of land plots to 256 m sq. (or higher).

* Limit the price of existing parcels less that 256 m sq to the average of land in that sim.

ONE LEGITIMATE REASON for smaller parcels is that I have a corner where I have been buying back small parcels when the price is reasonable. But I refuse to pay extortion prices ($5000 for 16 sq m) to be able to connect the pieces together. I would happily join these pieces together.

Again, THANK YOU for addressing this issue.

Something I bought up a long time ago...

First:

If you build Mainland sims with roads you will have oddball sized parcels that do not fit into the tier structure and that lead to cutting. Since a 2064 pays the tier of a 4096 for example. Typically on previous sim auctions land had to be divided to give correct area size so it could be resold. Roadside fringe parcels got cut for mini malls, signs and to keep parcels within correct tier pricing.


This was a direct result of poorly planned mainland auctions as well as sims. In fact with the old auction system most sims were purchased and cut up into smaller sizes. I hated that. All the sims I purchased in auctions are still in tact today. So my question to you is are you no longer going to auction sims in this fashion?

Second:

Maybe the days of complete mainland sim auctions are over and the future of new sims should simply be controlled parcel sizes with double prims such as what happened with Nautilus.

People got protected parcels in Nautilus and from the auction results, LL made more money and people still made money on resales.

This also makes older mainland more valuable because of the larger or smaller sizes compared to the fixed sizes of Nautilus for example.

Third:
Leave the old Mainland as it is. Parcels will have to be cut to resell because of what I mentioned above. People also use small parcels for mini stores. None of this cut up roadside land is selling much and sadly it won't be reclaimed by neighbors because of tier increases. What could be a benefit is just make certain parcels under a certain size have a sale limit of what ever you'd think is fair.

I use small parcels for signs and mini stores and do quite well with this business model. I don't want to sell these parcels. I have purchased parcels that were odd sized say a 560m2, kept 48m2 and resold the 512. I get roadside advert land this way. I'm not cutting up a bunch of parcels for resale. So in my case it would not effect me if I had to sell this land at a price that had a cap on it. However, I do like the freedom of the Mainland and the business's that evolve from this system. You have a handful of people that have made a problem for 1000's. Let us all not suffer for it but plan wisely in the future.

Blaccard Burks

* Do you agree in principle that land cutting needs to be a violation?
Yes but it's highly subjective.

* Are there any legitimate reasons for land cutting (excluding profit) that we should consider when setting policy?
Yes even 16m. Many media/music links in an area. Small plots used for a group home spot, some malls.

* With land that is already cut up, but still mostly owned by the resident that cut it, should we ask that the land be joined back together?
It should be judged case by case.


Setting a maximum price on plots 128m or less would be amazing, especially on 16m, make them $1 max ! If the really small plots couldnt' be sold for more than a few dollars, but they were still allowed, then people with a need for them could do it and the jerks extorting with tiny plots would have no reason to do it anymore.

There are many large plots where a tiny 16-128m plot is used so a different group than the main landowners group can use the area as home.

Yes you can.

dont allow visual signs on plots smaller than 128 sqm

oh thats new to me, i can change the land on mainland? i can build a cellar or a mountain there?

This has come way to late, Last night I sold all my land for about 1/10th of what i purchased it for because thats what its worth now, and I also downgraded my account to free, honestly If i did not have several 100k worth of inventory i would have canceled my account too, Secondlife is no longer a fun place to be, between every avatar I see is grey and 1/2 the textures in the sims I visit not load, pretty much all the fun has been sucked out of Secondlife, and now its nothing more than a portal that allows you to try to scam as much money away from your friends as you can, feels almost like 1 big Multi-Level-Marketing seminar. I pretty much think its game over for Secondlife at this point, i dont see it ever recovering.

I had to build my sim over more than a year to 16k and when we come to sell it to contribute towards our island tier, we will split it back into its original 512k and 1024k plots.

Is this fuss just about tiny 16m plots or am I going to be in trouble too?

I have no problem with a plot size being a minimum of 512, that is exactly what I started with.

There are many legitimate reasons land owners might have for small lots. For example, a 16m lot next to a rented parcel is useful for positioning a rent box in a place that prevents it being cleared or deleted by the tenant. Landowners need to be able to transfer (sell/buy) such lots between a group and the primary owner.

I would therefore support a cap on sale price rather than a ban on sales.

Funny how I havent seen any of the groups or people that caused this to all happen post a reply in here lol...guess there to scared to lol

There is a 1248m2 lot in Miramare for sale at L324k. I won't pay that price for it, but someone else might be thrilled to get it so 'cheap'. Some people think L10 per m2 for any land is 'extortionate'. Value is subjective. What may be 'extortionate' to you is not necessarily 'extortionate' to someone else.

is someone walking onto your parcel and threatening to break your arm or leg if you don't buy thier small parcel for 9999999L$ ?

i agree that owning small parcels and then pushing thier elevations to the max one way or other can be a form of griefing if the person is actually sitting at thier computer and laughing thier butts off saying something to the effect of "now i got you. after i elevate this tiny little parcel of mine to its max and mess up this side of your land, you'll be forced to buy from me. MUHAHAHAHA! "

if this happens to you, report them.

and if someone happens to step foot on your land and motions for you to come over to them and whispers in your ear something to the effect of ' hey bub, see that small parcel over there ? yeah that one. the one marked for 16,999L$ that is bordering your land. i'll expect you to buy that off me tomorrow or something bad might happen to your prized horse. get what i'm saying ?"

if that happens to you, report them.


but to sit there and accuse someone of extortion just because you don't like the price they have thier land set at is wrong. you're not being forced to buy it.

Jack,

I operate the Second Life campus for an RL state university. As a state institution, it is not-for-profit. The campus is in the Dootorak and Dasom regions of the mainland. The choice of a mainland location was intentional. In RL the university is in a small college town and in SL the surrounding area is reminiscent of a college town with residences, small shops, a mall, and fields with rolling hills. The ocean is nearby east of campus as is the case in RL.

Two great things happened last year -- the ad farm rules and a better focus on parcel media.

We had huge ugly ad farms surrounding the campus. Over the past year, I have been buying as many of those little 16, 32 and 64 sqm parcels as possible and absorbing them into my land. That's been great and I have appreciated the assistance of Linden Lab employees in this endeavor. However, here's a fear I would have for the land cutting rules.

On our campus, we have some 50 buildings and activity spaces (meaning places to do educational things that are not in a building, such as outdoor classrooms, an amphitheater, outdoor auditorium, sandboxes, etc.)

Because you still have not provided true media on a prim, a technique in which media can stream directly into an object rather than merely to the land beneath an object, I have to subdivide the university campus land into numerous small odd parcels to accommodate individual classrooms and learning spaces, and these subdivisions change from time to time. From talking with other educators working in Second Life, I believe this is common practice.

Please don't arbitrarily penalize all who use what you call "land cutting" to separate small land subdivisions within their property.

Here are my answers to your questions:

Do you agree in principle that land cutting needs to be a violation? NO

Are there any legitimate reasons for land cutting (excluding profit) that we should consider when setting policy? YES

With land that is already cut up, but still mostly owned by the resident that cut it, should we ask that the land be joined back together? ASK YES, REQUIRE NO

Should price control be used for parcels under 512 sq? YES

As others have pointed out, it seems like Jack is trying to keep this pretty focused. I don't think he's talking about the kind of parcel division you're doing.



edit: and I don't say that to pick on you or discourage you from posting. Just trying to make sure people are all on the same page..

I agree that land cutting for ad farming should be a tos issue and applaud LL for the efforts on limiting ad farming. However, there are some legitimate issues that have been mentioned here in this thread that I would like to echo.

#1 If you own a piece of land and choose to sub-divide it into anything less than 512 it must be rejoined before any piece can be sold. Another words anything less than 512 cannot be held solely.

#2 Ad-farmer's previous 16sq plots should be sold to someone who can lay claim to them for fair market value (linden exchange) to clean these up. If you have one running through your property then you should have claim.

#3 Continue to allow residents to sub-divide in small 16sq plots for uses of Xstreet Atms and rezzing areas as long as the original lot containing the 16 plot is held (refer back to #1)

Ad-farming is gone and so should those separate little parcels (16sq and such) be. LL should step up to the plate and finish it's ban on ad-farming by taking this big step.

All eFarmers use the available "tools", ban lines, donut holes, yard sales, spinning signs, etc. will continue to do their business weither it is on-grid or off-grid. They are smart just like the rest of us and are out to "make a buck".

The problem with land-cutting has little to do with the actual size of a given parcel. It has everything to do with where the plot is and the effect said parcel has on the surrounding area.

If you wish to have a real impact on Extortion Farming (eFarming), aka adfarming, you will need to address the reasons the eFarmers are able to thrive and make this kind of practice unprofitable. I believe the following suggestions might have the largest impact while not harming legitimate uses of micro-parcels.

** Change the tier rates as the current system is outdated. A more granular scale or, preferably, eliminate the scale and change the rates to a per meter level. This allows existing land owners to purchase smaller parcels without a huge increase in monthly fees. (If I grab that 16m it'll raise my tier to $125 US / month. I'll hope someone else will get it instead.)

** Place a price cap on micro-parcels. This would remove the financial incentive that has encouraged the practice of eFarming. Since we all know some areas are actually more desirable than others I would suggest something simple such as the highest of either the mainland average price OR the average price of all parcels greater/equal to 512sqm in the same sim and the adjacent sims. This allows for local land pricing to have an adjustment on the value, like the coastline, while preventing the micro-parcels from becoming obscenely overpriced and distorting local land values.

** Existing micro-parcels and "donut holes" should be consolidated either in the corner of the surrounding owners parcel or moved to an unused or abandoned section of the sim. This allows legitimate users, such as Blue Button and Universal Network, to continue their operations with minimum impact on their neighbors. (BTW--My dealings with both groups have always been positive. Nice neighbors with an unearned bad reputation.)

Any change to the ToS in regards to "land cutting" will only serve to make governance of this kind of thing extremely difficult and likely to be ignored through the AR process. The best long-term solution for Extortion Farming regardless of form is to change how tier is calculated, per square meter instead of huge jumps would be best, and pricing controls on micro-parcels. This not only discourages the practice of eFarming (including land cutting) but also encourages existing owners to consolidate parcels.

How about this

1 set rules so that plots under 32sqm CAN NOT BE SOLD (but can be transfered for say L$1)

2 create a "plot options override" prim and a Standard Vendor Object
with both of these the sim owner can give them to a renter and then have them do what they need but not require them to cut a plot (hint the search thing would be keyed to the SVO not the plot)