An Open Response to Robin's blog entry

Robin, major props to you for coming back with a reply to this.. a lot of the community is downright pissed about the recent changes.

I really like the sound of these new tools, anyways. (Especially being able to turn off push scripts on a land wide basis!)

Please answer this though:

With no CC verification or any verification, how can you assume to keep adults and teens separate? I see much talk about "Any adults on the teen grid = banhammered, any teens on adult = deported", but your options for enforcing this are slim to nil unless someone actually tells you their age.

This scares the living sh*t out of me.. its only a matter of time until somone who hasnt been watching their kids catches them on the adult grid engaged in something M rated, and decides to sue LL for endangering their child.

Every second you wait to change this is another second that the unthinkable could start.

Yes please!

...

Oh, also, could we do anything to keep the griefers and teens from getting onto the grid in the first place?

Well, this roadmap looks pretty exciting!

Though, I have to admit, this all makes me think of the phrase: "Ready! Fire! Aim!"

Robin, I certainly welcome the changes you propose. But it would be immensely simpler to just admit that you screwed up royally, and go back to the old registration system!

When, and IF, you get around to implementing the changes you mentioned, I will certainly welcome and use them.

But NOTHING in your response indicates that you give a D*** about the problem of un-identified children accessing the main grid! Oh, you say you'll 'deport them' to the Teen grid... Oh really? Even if they are only ten years old? Even though all they have to do is to create a shiny new account and walk right back in? How many THOUSANDS of staffers do you intend to hire, to keep searching for them and kicking them out? How many lawyers do you have ready, with multi-million dollar cash reserves, to fend off the lawsuits that WILL be coming at you for allowing minors unrestricted access to SL?

If all I get from LL is the changes you proposed, I'll ensure that NO ONE who is unverified may access my land, or my business services, or anything else that I have any influence over. Because that is the ONLY protection I am being offered to limit my own liability for unknowingly contributing to the delinquency of a minor!

Robin,

I appreciate the detailed response, but it does not address the one fundamental question that has been repeatedly asked of you. Why not put these sweeping changes in place before changing the registration system? We are suffering through this RIGHT NOW thanks to the choices LL has made. The anger and distrust is quite tangible, moreso than I have ever seen over any issue. The laundry list of features is beautiful - they are common sense improvements to make. However, LL in no way has ever delivered in a timely manner on promised features. Your reputation in this area is quite poor, and these are not features that can slip to a year from now while you try to get it right.

Additionally, a lot of these are comprehensive and wide reaching changes. They should not be rushed, yet they are deperately needed because, again, LL chose to proceed without any safeguards in place. We have recently seen what happens with rushed features - broken inventory, blinking prims and 200m access list barriers.

Why can you not forgo the open enrollment until a future date when a significant amount of these core features have been implemented, and a solution to the problem of unrestricted minor access to SL has been worked out? Until then, it is unconscionable for you to continue forcing this new system upon your customers. I have lost a significant amount of my trust in LL because of this. I have not agreed with some decisions in the past, even strongly, but I have never seen you show such reckless disregard for all of us before.

The fact that in the face of so much opposition you press blindly forward with this system that no one except your marketing people seem to want shows me that collectively, our voice is meaningless. Feature lists are great, but actions speak a hell of a lot louder than words, and your actions regarding this issue speak volumes, and it's deafening.

Please bear in mind that lots of good people dont have credit/debit cards, not just due to bad credit but because they aren't used in every country. Or their local cards are not compatible. Also, some people are still very reluctant to enter card information on the net. The SMS alternative gave a good alternative. Others are needed. Some places you can get a Visa debit card at 14 anyway.

Quoted for being a kick-ass idea!

-Felix Uritsky, clean rap sheet since 2004

Translation = basic accounts

Translation = premium paying accounts

But putting that aside, back to the issue at hand.

A very detailed response Robin but you've still avoided answering the question.

If you are not using credit cards or cell phone #'s or even so much as a library card to verify a person's age, what are you planning to use? Anything at all? Or is this just on the honor system now?

I am under the impression that Robin is stating this feature will be implemented so that we, as the community, can discern wether or not someone could potentially be a minor. This will allow for some discernment when engaging in exchanges with these people. My primary concern (and I'm sure many of yours) is it does not stop these 'unverified' members from viewing or engaging in adult activity.

Some of the most immature, positively ridiculous behavior I have witnessed comes from adults, so age and griefing I do NOT see as synonymous at all. Creating a push script is not nearly as offensive as trying to strongarm people using aggressive tactics to impede on their enjoyment of Second Life, which happens daily. Kids play and giggle, some adults who weigh their personal worth on their Second Life existance cause far more damage and go to absolute extremes to remain visible in the community. Greifing and abuse is secondary to this issue, exposure to adult content is a far more pressing matter that I'm sure Robin recognizes.

I, from experience, know this has always been high on her priority list for a LONG time and remains so. She has gone to great lengths to protect all parties involved from the exposure issue, and this needs to be noted in this thread specifically. I have complete faith in Robin and the staff at Linden Lab and am certain they are going to put into place something that defines the main grid from the teen grid.

Phaylen

I understand you feel that way. In the past I've defended LL as well. I just don't feel it anymore. Actions speak louder than words and their actions have come across loud and clear to me.

I no longer have any faith at all. I don't believe them anymore.

What noone at LL got so far is:
We of cause find it good that there'll be the new anti-griefing tools and measures, tho don't underestimate the griefer's whealth of ideas to think up new methods to bypass them. Right now, it's rather easy to bypass.. simply create a new account, continue what you do. And all the tools you mentioned won't stop them from having that option.

And.. people here are pissed because you still just evaded the basic, underlying question:

Why did you change the registration procedure on such short notice?
- Are you so in need for new accounts? If yes, why? Most won't pay you a dime, ever. You just have more server load, more people to support, but I doubt the economy will boost, especially since the new ones will have no stipends.
- Are you just having a competition with those other MMO game designers who you talk about so eagerly about definitions of "Number of registered users"? I saw it in the blogs.. hilarious.

Why are all those changes done before you have the tools to properly deal with them, not _after_?
Before you can do such a step, you MUST have implemented the following:
- proper privacy tools for the people
- scalable server architecture (See Gwyneth's last blog about monolithic architecture of the SL server/client system, and have a look at your own Asset server, who gives me 5 minutes loading time for a texture, lately)
- A 100% way to link accounts to each other. You said you can do that. Well, I think I should run Sysinternals one day and see what parts of my hardware config SL reads from my registry, what kind of files it accesses, so I get an idea what's so unique and what will be transmitted. People decoded the protocol SL uses to log in. They can also find out how you link accounts, as it can only be a clientside tag of some sort. So.. not secure. I think, in the end, we HAVE to go back to account verification. Every single, basic, puny 20-people-only forum does that. Why is it so unacceptable for you, then?

So, in short: We don't wanna know what you plan for the future. Right now we just wanna know WHY you did what you did. And right now, everyone thinks you hide the why, because you just KNOW it won't be accepted.

You'll say "We want to ensure a growing, rich community, and as such we felt it neccessary to open up SL to everyone."
We'll say "Sure, we'd like that. But why without any verification?"
You'll say "Well, we could veryfy email, but it's easy enough to make 50 accounts somewhere, so we just leave it be.. and not everyone has a trusted paypal account or a credit card, and we don't wanna lock people out who just happen to have no credit card."
We'll say "Well, they obviously have a PC. They have to fulfill the minimum requirements needed to play SL. You lock out everyone with an old graphic card."
You'll say "Yes, but that's a technical neccessity."
We'll say "And account verification is a SOCIAL neccessity. Besides, why couldn't you wait for the change until some of the in-world tools to increase people's security and privacy are in place?"
And there you have to stop dead.. because you'd have to admit that the tools won't be ready anytime soon, or because you have to admit that one department just decided it and your internal comms is crap, or you have to admit that you made a mistake, and, obviouly, LL can't make any, right?

So.. we're angry and disappointed because you shun the discussion. You give us answers to questions we didn't ask.

Come on.. TALK to us. Else you'll end up with a civil war in SL, because this topic just won't die.

Yours,
Sheila.

I cannot the belive the fastest rising vote has just been brushed aside!! What is the point of the voting system if the votes are just ignored. LL have made a mistake and are refusing to do anything about it.

As I posed on Robin's blog:

Sorry, but thats a cop-out. Put CC verification back on signup and give newbies 250 start up funds.

The current system simply encourages grief and fraud and a tag in somebody profile isn't going to do a damn thing to stop either from happening.

"Oh Joy, I just got robbed and blasted across the sim by an unverified user."

Its also demonises all genuine newbies as until they do register some payment details they will be immediately distrusted.

There is nothing wrong in admitting a mistake, its wrong to continue pushing a mistake long after its proven to be one.

Yes, another virtual world I was on had 'experience points'. These worked, in the sense that they were seen as very desirable, and conferred some status.

Yes, it's a long time since we've had a rating party.

What I really find it difficult to get my head around is this:-

Since I have been in Second Life, residents have been asking for effective ban tools.

We are now, it appears, going to get them - just at a time when they are no longer of any use.

If a resident can create an infinite number of alts, then banning them from your sim will be as effective as telling them they are a very naughty person.

Do you ever get the feeling that you are being played with?

Well, the way the two votes about unconfirmed accounts were casually brushed aside has certainly confirmed my opinion that the forums and voting systems are little more than a complaints department designed to allow reisdents to vent steam in ways other than stopping their payments. Phil, I hope it keeps working for you.

Is the voting system mute?
/139/be/115896/1.html

Will scripted objects be able to identify a person's verification level? I can see it being necessary for vendors that sell mature products.

As for landowners being able to disable push scripts - it'll be useful, but it doesn't quite go far enough. People on Sandboxes and in other public areas will still be sitting ducks. I have to confess, restricting the anti-grief tools to landowners does strike me as a rather cynical way to sell land - although I'm actually fairly sure that's not what LL intend it to be.

Also, it doesn't deal with all forms of potential griefing. On Wednesday, somebody decided to attack my Show and Tell event at the New Citizens plaza by throwing bombs into the plaza and then walking around attacking people with a gun and flamethrower. NCI has a very strict policy against weapons, because new users may not realise that they can't be hurt in no-damage zones, nor will they necessarily want to see or experience their av getting blown up/shot even if they aren't teleported home or pushed as a result. Disabling push wouldn't do anything; they weren't push weapons. Unless you're going to disable llParticleSystem as a potential grief generator (!!!) I don't think a command-based ban would have helped.

Equally, what happens when a griefer starts to push people via having objects collide with them? When I was first learning to script I nearly orbited myself by making a follower that I forgot to set phantom so it gradually bumped me upwards and across the sim. And again, you can't really disable any commands to prevent that... hmm, so "no grief scripts" disables llSetPos, llMoveToTarget and llSetPrimitiveParams? What scripts do we have left?

It is a shame that SL has now lost the best anti-grief tool it had: accountability. I will add, however, that I was discouraged from signing up to SL earlier than I did by the need to enter billing information.

(Bold added for emphasis)

This is my main concern. I've suspended my daughter from playing Teen SL until this is resolved. I've talked with her about online safety, the computer she uses is in a public area of the house, we've taken every reasonable precaution we can think of for her online safety, but we don't let her use open chat rooms, and this is what all flavors of SL have now become.

Robin, I will always be a member of your fan club, but I have to say I'm disappointed in your responses on this issue. Griefing is only one of the problems (albeit a very significant one) of eliminating any form of identity checking. All these anti-griefing tools you are talking about don't address the basic issues of trust and persistent identity that people are concerned with. Credit card usage was a limited identity verification tool, especially as LL had a policy of not banning alts on the same card (for sometimes legitimate reasons, e.g. two spouses using the same CC for account verification), but I can't see why it was eliminated before an alternative was implemented. I really don't want to believe the cynical theories about LL hoping for an artificial inflation of membership to some arbitrary number, but given the lack of meaningful explanation by LL of this change, I'm beginning to wonder.

neko

I was initially discouraged for the same reason, which was just due diligence about who the heck LL were. Once I joined I was glad that there were some checks, and noticed how SLers also looked out for each other and the environment.

This change in registration... this changes the social landscape. Sure I love the wonderful builds, but it's the random meeting of intriguiging people of all SL ages I've enjoyed the most.

And I'd hate to have a sign above my head/in my profile saying "I pay to be here" or whatever. Almost like a kick-me sign

sigh.

Robin, thank you for noticing and responding to this thread. I appreciate your comments (and I'm not just saying that ). If I may:


This is the main point that needs to be stressed. Opening the registration process turns out to have not been a zero-sum exercise. The change wasn't even announced or tested ahead of time -- most of us residents were caught completely unaware. Daniel's comments on the blog about how griefing hadn't increased, posted only 1 week after the change, went a long way toward making residents wonder what he's been smoking.

That said, the points of concern are two which may or may not be related: One, the access teens now have to the mature grid; and two, the increase in griefing due to the ease of creating unverified accounts. Not all teens are griefers, and not all griefers are teens. (In fact, some griefers aren't even new residents but just alts).

Of equal concern is the possibility that certain adults may enter the teen grid to prey on children -- something that would draw unwanted law enforcement attention to Second Life in a heartbeat (Fox News at 6:00). Your response was somewhat vague on how the verification process would be implemented, and it remains a concern of mine.


This will be a great help in and of itself, and while I understand that new LSL calls to verification might create some situations where decent, law-abiding but unverified new people are prohibited from entering certain areas or buying from some stores, I also think it is an essential piece of the tools that should have been in place before the registration process was castrated. For example, the "adult communities" will want to alter their security scripts to prohibit unverified individuals from entering. This will be a welcome feature.

I would like to point out, though, that none of this would have been as much of an issue had Linden Labs not decided to remove all restrictions to creating a new account. That will remain the heart of the problem, and one that is costing business owners and community managers valuable time and money -- and will, in the long run, cost LL additional time and money in managing the ARs and implementing tools to cope with the problems.


Mute tools are nice to have, but I don't consider them a solution to the real issues here: mainly, that immature kids are breaking into the adult grid as we speak, partaking of adult content or behaving like ... well, like kids ... in areas where adult activities are going on.


Robin, please, if LL does this, PLEASE test it. There are some good uses for llPush which have nothing to do with griefing. Some teleport and elevator scripts use it. Some poseballs even use it to help the avatar climb off and stand next to the sofa or bed. I use a personal security device that has an anti-push shield, and I can't even use a simple sailboat or hot air balloon without first disabling the anti-push. Testing on this feature would be an absolute must.


I'd like to see this one promoted as a bug-fix rather than an enhancement (if there's a difference). It never should have been this way to begin with.

[...skipping some good bullet points...]


I particularly like this one. I can't pull my Seburo sim-clear shotgun on these nincompoops, but it won't matter if I can just TP them home. This is scheduled for next Tuesday's update, right?


A major MAJOR issue right now. I have never seen ban lists as long as they are now. 50 sounds like it was arbitrary, but like Bill Gates once said "Nobody will ever need more than 64k memory", the time has come to increase it drastically.

Meanwhile, I hope that if some landowners and club managers appear to be over exuberant with our parcel security and ban lists, the investigating Lindens will take the current climate of SL into account before they mete out punishment to people who are only defending ourselves. After all, we didn't create this situation, we're just trying to cope with it.

Yes, exactly - and also the fact that (even when it cost money to sign up for a Basic) they didn't just ask you to pay that one time, they also asked to hold your card details in case they wanted to charge you later. Which seemed kinda risky for a firm that (at the time) I'd never heard of, and that wasn't using an external card processor.

Agreed. Right now there's no way to tell the Premiums from the Basics unless they tell you. Creating visibly second-class second-lifers is going to be a huge change in SL.

Argent: If I'm doing my mindreading trick right, this new field/icon/hamster isn't "Basic" vs "Premium" - it would (I hope, and expect, and believe based on what we've been told) merely display if you've successfully completed *a* real-world financial transaction with Linden Labs in your account's history. This would (I expect, hope, presume, etc.) include simply purchasing some L$ on Lindex.

(Not that I necessarily think that the apparent policy of pushing new Basic members towards Lindex is a good thing, merely noting one side effect it may have).

The problem is, that unless you want to own land (and not everybody does) there is no reason to go premium - the stipend alone isn't worth it, you can buy more L$ on the Lindex

The biggest problem is it will create a massive underclass of people, who will simply be unable to buy and L$ and verify their intent to LL

A social spilt is the very last thing SL needs.