200m BanLines!

You're confusing Linden policy, which is as confused and contradictory set of guidelines as I've ever seen, with rights. You don't even have a right to your own body or (second) life, so don't go all Libertarian at me about your property rights.

How about this:

Fact: I can eject you from my land at any height.

Its proven in game.

I could say the same about 'right of access.' No matter how many times you say it, it doesn't make it fact. But theres still that pesky bit of you can be ejected at any height that takes away that access OPINION.

Then lets not go libertarian about 'right' of access, k?

How about this:

Fact: I can eject you from anywhere at any height.

It's proven in game.

I can crash your client in game.

Proven fact.

I can also orbit you, fling you twenty sims away, trap you, or any number of other things.

There is no existing linden ruling on this one way or another yet, so, no, it's not "fact".

Um, yes. Actually, it already has. Now, we can actually keep people from coming right back and landing on our gathering spot. Before, when we put them in the "ban list", it did nothing.

Why is this so tough for you to understand?

How long have you been running a highly populated mainland area?

The passer-by (plural is "passers-by", by the way, not "passerbys" may be the landowner next door. And his enjoyment of his own land is more likely to be significantly hampered by the proximity of your paranoid security script than any possible hardship you'd entail from having someone approach a couple meters closer than you like when you're not even there.

I had a paranoid neighbor in SL for a while. I'd rather have daily C4 attacks for two weeks with no security or oversight if that's what it took for LL to straighten things out.

Actually there is. Lindens call that greifing, and state its a violation of TOS and their rules. Unlike ejecting from land you own.

Boohoo. You act like I care.

Fact is the neighbours TWICE moved their box beside mine. Directly beside it.

As has been pointed out, just because something is possible and proven in game does not make it legal/right/courteous.

From now on I'm considering any instance of ejecting me without warning as griefing. After all, it causes me grief to lose my aircraft and have to restart my client when I was going about my business and was not adequately warned not to approach a parcel. If you cause trouble for me and try to squirm out of the fact that you caused that trouble by making up some lame excuse and expecting me to have prior knowledge of something I can't possibly know before it happens...you're griefing me.

Great, an hour's worth of observation. Clearly I can't think of *any* way I might grief a sim given these restrictions, and even if I could I wouldn't come back tomorrow or later on because... um....

<edited out - blaming each other is not going to be productive>

The right of way is a real world right for good reasons that make just as much sense in the context of second life as they do in the real world. Absolute Libertarian Property Rights don't make sense in SL any more than they do in RL.

If you want to claim you have a right, then support it. Show me how it works in RL, or explain how infringing that right... even casually, accidentally, and innocently... causes social problems in SL. Or RL. Support your thesis the way people poking holes in your arguments have supported theirs, if you want people to respect your opinion instead of treating you like a Unabomber clone.

Actually. SUPPORT TAXES in order to protect other bonus incentives. You can also INCREASE SINKS in other ways to avoid taxes but I've become kinda partial to taxation. Simple and effects everyone equally.

Go ahead. Your flying by my skybox is greifing me. Have fun filing the FALSE report.

I say bring back prim taxes, make barriers 1000m high and have all griefers and free residents publically castrated. Young people today don't know they're born. Why when I was a young SL'er we had t'lick road clean with our tongues...e.t.c.

No, I act like I think you're interested in making a case for your position. I guess I'm mistaken about that.

Ah, some actual explanation. Can you elaborate?

Hyperagressive security scripts are considered griefing too, and will be treated as such, and has in the past. So clearly your "rights" are not as absolute as you think.

Let me highlight the important notes.

If you want to have a right of access, support it by giving me examples within secondlife, ones that matter. NOT by referring to the real world.

That is, if you want your position to have any merit.

Yes Jonas, please explain to us why you can't possibly put a 10 second warning on your security script. Just enough time so that if I stray into your property I'll know that you don't want anyone there yet will still have time to turn around and leave. Anyone else who uses such extreme measures is welcome to jump in as well.


Jonas, I, for one, am not demanding full right of access. What I'm asking for from you (and everyone else with a security script) is a short amount of warning time before being bounced! You speak as if we're demanding that we be allowed to come hang out at your skybox for as long as we want! Can you not comprehend any state in between all or nothing?

As for a SL example, we already gave you at least one. Ejecting without warning is not right because it causes problems for those who were just minding their own business and happened to be so unlucky as to unknowingly choose a flightpath that took them through the airspace above your land.


Okay, and if I'm flying along to a destination and your land is between me and it, what is wrong if I just fly through?! How is that three seconds so horrible? I'm not stopping to watch you...in fact, if your land is that small I can watch you from outside your land boundary if I really wanted to!

A security script that simple ejects has never been docked as greifing, so clearly they are.

'splain how, por favor?

Oh, do you know that? Do you have access to all the abuse reports?

Property size. A 10 second warning time will let you rife through my skybox with immunity.

And now its time for Argent to give an SL based argument with actual merit.

Do you? because I'd clearly like an answer on this. I'll ask a linden in game.

Pierterson is a fairly well-known extreme property-rights obsessive - I don't think it's that productive arguing with him in general.