Do You Think LL Is Too Easy On Griefers?

I think there is some utility in flagging potential troublemakers that hasn't been addressed.

If you make the window 60 days and assign a threat level according to how many infractions occurred close to today's date, and decremented that threat level as the offense moved further into the past, dropping off the scope altogether after 60 days, that would be very useful. Assuming we are also given

llGetAgentThreatLevel().

Easy. Security scripts can auto-eject individuals with a high threat level, weapons systems can auto-disable themselves if the author is concerned they may be used for griefing... the possibilities are truly endless. I was on the fence about the idea, but if we can tie it into LSL, I'm definitely in.

SL isn't a game it is a business platform, so labeling like this is some MUD from the 90s doesn't make much sense. Or if we label people like l33t griefers, is it a game? Just curious.

Why the heck shouldn't it?

In your house, you have a doorway that is too low for your heigh, so you bang your head against a doorframe, and it hurts. You do it again, it still hurts. You do it 3,000 times and it keeps on hurting. You get ready to cross the doorway another time. Why shouldn't it hurt now?
Humans learn from experience. Things will only change if we make them change. If the current situation is a pain, maybe, just maybe, we should follow tried and true techniques that were successfully applied to SL's text-based predecessors?

You're missing the point. I don't like the idea any more than you do. It is one thing to say "it's an invasion of privacy", or to say that it is punishing someone after they have already been punished, which are valid criticisms. It is quite another thing to evoke Nazi imagery and make any kind of association whatsoever with it. That goes so far beyond the scope and reality of anything even being talked about. We are talking about disciplinary issues in a virtual world with avatars, we are not talking human rights and branding people. To bring the discussion to that level and try to make any association between them cheapens the entire debate, not to mention just makes it irrelevant because once you invoke the Nazi's, all civil discussion goes away. To add further insult to injury, you claim that those who would even consider this idea are demeaning the Holocaust. You brought it to this level, no one else.

This simply doesn't work as a comparison. A doorway is a simple thing. This is a complex situation and though you claim in your previous post that nobody has ever complained, at least one person is complaining now. Additionally, it is one thing to agree to enter into a something under a certain rule set and quite another discussion to have that rule set altered midstream.

In the case of SL, which is not trying to duplicate its text-based predecessors, there really is no reason NOT to seek out alternate solutions. While what you are suggesting MAY be the end result, simply reverting to "tried and true techniques" is lazy and lacks imagination.

Eboni, I know Mike Godwin, and I know Richard Sexton (the guy who really came up with Godwin's Law), and neither of them meant it that way. It's an observation, not liberty nor license.

Well, I've had an asshole drug dealer threatening me in my back yard, and when I pulled out my cellphone and just started dialing the cops... he was gone. I didn't even have to hit send, because it just wasn't worth the hassle to him even if he thought he'd end up talking his way out of charges.

You can't stop crime, no, but you can reduce it. You can reduce any kind of bad behaviour by giving it bad consequences. But people have to be convinced that there's a chance of the consequences actually happening. Right now, that's just not the case.

But you CAN NOT solve a social problem JUST by tweaking the technology. You can change it, you can reduce it, sometimes, but unless you have social controls as well all that does is create a challenge. Anarchy doesn't work. Honest.

If the defrauded party doesn't push them, yeh, they are. Linden Labs would have to press charges, they couldn't just depend on the bank to do it for them.

Half agree.

I think that repeated offendors should be avoidable in some way. But you don't need to be able to identify them to do that. Just add a checkbox or two in the "Ban" tab in the land controls.

[X] Ban residents on probation.

Ignoring the simpler creation of an account with a cell phone, is it fraud to use the credit card without charging anything to it? How is someone to know if there is no charge and how likely are they to be charged with fraud for $0 damages?

Maybe in combat MUDs, but not in builder MUDs or social MUDs. SL isn't a combat game: if you want Evercrack you know where to find it.

Because SL is different.

There you go again, confusing SL with Everquest.

CEO's with their names in RED because they got pissed about lag in a pg area and let the f* word slip. Hmmm I might have to change my position of being against this

Could we get past this and as Gabe said, come up with some new solutions please. Ya'll slapped Coco on the wrist already. To continue on and on about one statement is in affect labeling her in the forums the one thing I think we are all trying to avoid doing as per this discussion. Seems counter productive tbh. Since I gather the majority is in agreement here, are we not?

So anyone have any more ideas on how we solve the griefer problem?

Cat

lol you see agreement somewhere?

REPORT IT!!!

Think of ways to make parents raise thier children as caring and considerate human beings?

Sounds good but we cant ban them from land if we dont know who we are.

How do you feel about including the name of the offender in the police blotter entry and allowing members themselves to keep track of repeaters if they so choose?

Sadly, I think that ship has already sailed.

And sank.

And been found by greedy vultures and sold piece by piece to collectors and museums, to look at with curious eyes as a relic of a bygone era.

I think Argent means that if you checked that hypothetical box, no resident in 'probably' would be allowed on your land... But it wouldn't tell you who specificly.

I know there is bias in every system, but we only have the SL framework to work with, and I do share your discomfort about public branding by way of titles over heads etc. But, I think including the name of the offender in the police blotter is fair and allowing a comment by the accused could allow him or her to address the other concerns you raise about judge, jury, accuser etc.

Protecting the interests of all members is a delicate balace really. We can see just by reading all the divergent opinions posted in this thread that people view it very differently.

Its fair to know who the repeat griefers are so that we can ban them from events and land to avoid future problems, but Eboni is absolutely correct that most of the repeat griefers, or extreme case griefers, are on throw away accounts and they can return easily.

Precisely. Let them into your Weapon Shop but not your home. It might even be amusing watching people come up with excuses for not going into the griefer-free area.

We need transparency in the system, so that we know what conduct is being punished and who the accuser is. LL has said they will not do that, because LL is an innovator not an administrator. Thus we have no rule of law in SL. Its a platform, not a game, and the intention is that each area be self regulating. Or at least I think that is the party line. If some one greifs you, ban them from your land. Better yet, buy an island and only allow those who resiter with you and accept your terms visit you.

LL is comminted to privacy, they have made thet clear. Therefore I think it unlikely that anything will change. The besto sloution in my opinion would be to investigate every AR in world and hand out 3-days suspensions like candy. Three strikes and you are out. But everyone has to be subject to it.

Right now I think LL just doesn't have the resources to meaningfully investigate and enforce things. And the lack of transparency means that any and all conduct is subjected to thier arbitrary review, so there is nothing to guide us in our conduct as a community. And of course every incident will raise the typical hue and cry of thats griefing, SL is better off without this person, whether the actions are in fact griefing or not.Thus we are left in the holy state of capitalistic anarchy, and well griefing is what ever harrassment you can't get away with.

I think a big part of the problem is that the virtual frontier is populated with many cyberutopian idealists who have these copmplex notions about group regulation and coming together as a community to discourage improper conduct. Thus the wolves run about the henhouse while the hens preach "lets get together to protect our eggs as a group, our voices will be heard."

One thing that people forget is that the internet utopia is being backed up with some very real legal enforcement, and that the net is (suprise suprise) a tool that humans use, and thuse still needs to sort out problems with human institutions. SL seeks to be a platform not a game, thus it needs to open the door to these instittutions or LL needs to administer it themselves. SL is like a commubnity built on the cheap, and the fire and police services are where all the costs are cut. You can't create a community without administration. Anarchy is merely throwing the lambs to the wolves.

Sounds about right, on that note, I unsubscribe .

I don't play boring treadmill RPGs sorry. The place I used to frequent was geared towards simulating a world, emphasizing crafting and roleplay. Combat was possible but strongly discouraged - the admins would grill you if you initiated combat with random NPCs without having a valid in-character reason. Even if an admin didn't notice you, you got an agressor flag and guard NPCs everywhere would kill you. Also, death was permanent, so it was quite a big thing.

This really is a non-issue. Ebony has hit the nail on the head, griefers couldn't give a shit about being labelled as such. They'll either wear it with pride or just create the next in a long line of alts. Anyone who actually cares about this issue is unlikely to fall foul of it; that is assuming that speaking one's mind doesn't result in being colour coded.

How do we deal with griefers? Let's face it, there is an endless supply of people who enjoy upsetting others in SL, too many for LL to deal with. It is more sensible to provide us with more tools and permissions.