Do You Think LL Is Too Easy On Griefers?

Yes it does indeed.

Course it took the combination of this thread (and said poster's trivialization of the holocaust to a forum debate point/tactic) and the day before's thread (in which she trivialized sexual harassment to a forum debate point/tactic) for me to finally add that particular troll to my ignore list.





Valid points I think, I'm not at all sure color tagging would help, but it is a thought. Maybe best brought up as a proposal for voting? In any event, I think you are also dead on to think that the underlaying solution is within LL's own internal policies with regard to enforcement and policing of their own CS and TOS on the mainland. Maybe with the sudden boom in mainland sims creation (due to the bulk land deals) that will come to pass?

I don't underdstand why it is wrong t make a repeating offenders criminal past obvious. I'm all for color coding, or some other social sanction that will indeed make repeat offenders obvious to all.

Many of you act like it's wrong to publically punish those that do intentional bad deeds. I can't understand this logic. You do the crime and you should do the time. Countless times in RL society, public punishments and/or public markings or sanctions have been used so that EVERYONE in the area will know that the person committed a crime. And it works. People know and are cautious about dealing with obvious troublemakers.

I wouldn't want to see it happen on someone's first offense, or maybe even not there second, but I sure as hell wouldn't mind a flag showing if they are three time losers or habitual griefers.

That IS a detterent. To some it may be a badge of honor, but it still warns folks and tells them something about the griefers character.

As to public details of crimes, I'm very fine with that to, although my biggest concern is the person that filed the AR getting the info about what actions, if any, were taken.

A virtual society that is concerned more about how a fucktard is labeled, or hurting their feelings, than they are about the victim of the fucktard's antics is a virtual society that is asking for a whole lot of grief.

This would only be rewarding them. They would be proud of it, and I would expect many would be griefers would go out of their way to get this coveted title, or color code.

The problem with the color coding system I see is that it would allow people to get to Red in the first place. It's too lenient for my taste. If someone proves that they can't go 6 months without deliberately griefing, do we really want to keep them around to see if they can get past Red to Brilliant Angry Fuschia? I don't.

If they've already proven they're repeat offenders, and their mini-vacations in the Cornfield or out of world didn't "redeem" them, ban their asses and let the rest of the paying customers enjoy what they're paying for. I don't see any reason to coddle these little shitheels while they titter about how much destruction they can cause. I'm not concerned with their poor wittle feewings or how they may suffer self-esteem 'issues' from being punished. They chose to break the TOS and to be assholes, treat them as such.

I think LL is too hard on griefers. No, seriously, for reals. By griefers I do not mean people who are actively trying to crash sims, to me, those people are vandals, and LL isn't hard enough on them. Griefing, from what I've seen, really can (CAN not ALWAYS IS) be in the eye of the beholder, and I think that some authority figures in Second LIfe take the view, much like the current trend in RL, that the "right" to not be offended has superceeded the "right" to do what one likes. I have witnessed people suspended for expressing an unpopular opinion, though it was not in voiolation of CS.

I expect this to be an unpopular opinion.

Yes, agreed. But making thier criminal past public would warn those that are dealing with them. That's the point. If you see someone that is an obvious repeat offender, you can add them to the ban list on your land, or just keep an eye on them at an event so you can freeze/eject/ban if needed. You also would be better informed if you are about to go into some sort of business/money transaction with them.

So while they may wear it as a badge of honor, they would find many more doors closed to them as well as people being more cautious when dealing with them and not willing to show much trust. Some griefers wouldn't care, and will never care until banned (if even then), but many would care.

I'm all for banning as well. I'm for any strong punishment that makes it harder, or impossible for them to continue griefing.

If a real world analogy is necessary for this discussion, I think ZsuZsanna's is the most appropriate one we have seen so far.

While most Ohio plates normally look like this:


Drunk drivers receive bright yellow plates like these:


Is this practice "ill conceived?" There are as many opinions as there are people and it's a matter worthy of discussion! While the analogy is not perfect, these plates apply nicely to the topic of color coding our online names to warn others of people with a history of diciplinary problems.

Actually I agree with most of what you say, Taco. Our difference is in how we define Griefer. To clarify, my Griefer is your Vandal, which is probably a better term for it. I'm not talking about the person who puts up a Penis Shrine, (or an Upskirt museum ) but rather the person who bombs events, continually harasses, and goes out of their way to make SL unenjoyable for other paying customers. People who deliberately victimize others.

Ahh Jonquille, but with a color-coded system, the people you are not talking about and the people you are talking about would both be painted with the same brush (I rarely actually use a phrase that applies accurately, let me smile at my luck for a minute......k thanks). This, to me, is the inherent problem with the system?

Well, I think most of us, or at least I, am of the opinion that griefing involves causing trouble, or actively "assulting" or disrupting another person's SL time. I'm all for freedom of expression and actions within Second Life, as long as it doesn't purposefully and intentionally disrupt another person's Second Life activities.

A person's freedom to do what they wish in SL is wonderful, as long as it isn't taking the same freedom away from others. Having fun at the expense of others just isn't the right path to take in SL.

As far as opinions go, I have no idea why anyone would be suspended for expressing one, unless it was bigoted or very slanderous, or was disruptiong another person's event purposefully.

From what I've seen in my two SL years, everyone is very free to express opinions that are within the CS or ToS.

I really admire the ability of everyone here to blame this issue on other consumers instead of the company you are paying for a service. Do they send the Koolaid Fed Ex or UPS?

I'm not the one suggesting the color-coded system. I objected (strongly) to it being compared to the tattooing of Jews in Nazi Germany, but that doesn't mean I supported the system itself. I think it's far too lenient. I don't think LL should bother with it. I think they should just be harsher with the punishments they're doling out (or not doling out, as the case may be) to people who deliberately try to ruin the experience for other people. The bombers, the harrassers, the ones who are here for no other apparent reason than to cause destruction. I don't think it takes a rocket surgeon to spot them, especially for LL who has their history. My suggestion is not to color code them, but to get rid of them entirely.

this is my new favorite phrase!!

Stole it off a commercial, though I can't remember what the commercial was for. Made me snicker every time though.

No offense Aimee, but to me your "two main debates" are just minor side elements to the actual debate about whether LL is being too lenient on griefers.

The second point especially, about the Nazi reference was just one (admittedly ill thought out, off the top of her head kind of), statement by coco that she apologised for the second she was called on it.

If it was let to die at that point it wouldn't even be an issue IMO. Not every stupid thing that a person says is an intentional insult.

None taken. I wasn't talking about the topic of the thread. I was talking about the discussion that is actually happening here right now, which largely coco's use of the nazi analogy, and the color coding scheme. But yes, your point is well taken, this thread is about how easy LL is on Griefers.


Not exactly. She apologized to ME for my taking it all personally. Perhaps a better apology would be something to the effect of "I apologize to the thread participants for my innapropriate evocation of the Nazis to bolster my forum debate."

This thread is now about AIMEE! <3

HAHAHAHAHAHA. OK Eggy <3 Thanks for that.

Time for me to drag myself out of this thread and emotionally prepare myself for a weekend of having a loinclothed adonis feed me grapes and rubbing my feet (or maybe I will just get drunk and pretend that's happening)

It is if wasnt off the top of her head and if it happened more than once.

/108/5b/83375/1.html#post853847

/108/5b/83375/2.html#post854062

/108/5b/83375/3.html#post854126

ad nauseum

Not to mention she offered the exact same sort of tripe the day before in regards to sexism and sexual harassment. Trivialization of such issues, in a effort to make a jab at another's point or suggestion is beyond the pale of poor taste to me, and shows a marked pattern with her in regards to some posters posts here.

That said I've come to my own solution, ignore her.



Now back to the colours, and license plates, thats an interesting point as well, but again I'm not at all sure how effective it would be in this environment given that both Ingrid and Eboni raise very valid points and questions as to whether it'd be seen as a badge or more importantly whether LL even bother policing itself in the first place.

Well, I'm not a loinclothed adonis but I would be happy to feed you grapes and rub your feet
Especially after you sent me that picture yesterday...

K. sorry.


I just think a lot of people are too hard on coco lately.

No offense to coco, but I see her as someone who doesn't always think so much about what she's saying and says tons of stuff right "off the top of her head." In this particualr case, she admits to having quickly grabbed for an analogy that was basically the reverse of what she wanted it to mean. I just don't think that the majority of her "abusive remarks" are actually intentional.

I read pretty much everything I post three times before I post it and sometimes 20 or 30 times (literally). Sometimes I don't even post it after reading it that many times. Other people seem to be completely unaware of the "preview post" button.

I am not saying that coco (or a variety of people) hasn't also driven me insane with rage in the forums, you only have to look at some of the crap I have posted in response to see that. I am not trying to be "holier than thou" and am pretty far from being any kind of "turn the other cheek" angel myself. I am also not above hurling abusive language at people, I am just tricky enough not to get pasted for it (yet).

I do think that sometimes it seems like people go out of their way to jump up and down on every dumb thing she says though. Sometimes when people say dumb things its just... well a dumb thing they said.

Well.. see, this kind of stuff is very difficult to deal with in SL, because SL has the "platform" and "capitalism" elements, something which most other MMORPGs don't have at anywhere near as high a level.

As I mentioned previous on the thread about the TOS, there's a difficulty in getting a definition of "griefing" that doesn't wind up covering driving someone else out of business through strong competition. It does limit the other person's freedom, the other person probably won't enjoy it, and it does purposefully and intentionally stop someone else doing something they want to do in SL (since after all, they know how competition works and that they are doing it), yet considering it griefing would immediately ruin any attempt at a competitive capitalist economy within SL at all.

Now, that's an easy judgment to make, but the problem is that it then becomes the example that creates the rule that hurting someone else's enjoyment is okay if.... well.... if what? If it makes more enjoyment for others? If it helps bring SL as a whole towards some particular goal, which is...?

She is pretty cute. I think we need more threads about Aimee (with pictures).

Even if you are being sarcastic, Ima hit you with a less-than-three

<3