Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

200m BanLines!

Kyrah Abattoir
cruelty delight
Join date: 4 Jun 2004
Posts: 2,786
06-21-2006 18:32
From: Reitsuki Kojima
By that logic, the fact that I pay more than you (probably... maybe not, but I promise you a lot of people do) means I should have priority say over where I fly over where you choose to restrict me from flying.

Or, it could be a bad line of reasoning.


not sure, considering we roughly pay the same amount to LL per tier, in fact the biggest tier holders pay less per SQM so should be less hear than little owners... and.... i... going to bed
_____________________

tired of XStreetSL? try those!
apez http://tinyurl.com/yfm9d5b
metalife http://tinyurl.com/yzm3yvw
metaverse exchange http://tinyurl.com/yzh7j4a
slapt http://tinyurl.com/yfqah9u
Jonas Pierterson
Dark Harlequin
Join date: 27 Dec 2005
Posts: 3,660
06-21-2006 18:33
From: Tikki Kerensky
I wonder if I should send you the inworld snapshot of myself getting run over by a car. :D


I have one!
_____________________
Good freebies here and here

I must protest. I am not a merry man! - Warf, ST: TNG, episode: Qpid

You killed my father. Prepare to die. - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride

You killed My father. Your a-- is mine! - Hellboy
Jon Rolland
Registered User
Join date: 3 Oct 2005
Posts: 705
06-21-2006 18:34
From: Delzo Delacroix
That's a great compromise. It would satisfy me. :)

Any one else?


Acceptable here.
Delzo Delacroix
The Avatarian
Join date: 2 May 2006
Posts: 80
06-21-2006 18:40
From: Reitsuki Kojima
Its actually more obnoxious - its still not high enough to provide any actual privacy or protection, AND is still annoying to flyers-by.


I don't see how less restriction than what we have now for law abiding citizens is more obnoxious.

That's quite a leap.
_____________________
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
06-21-2006 18:42
From: Delzo Delacroix
I don't see how less restriction than what we have now for law abiding citizens is more obnoxious.

That's quite a leap.



Because it acomplishes nothing, while still being more annoying than before. As I said.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
Jonas Pierterson
Dark Harlequin
Join date: 27 Dec 2005
Posts: 3,660
06-21-2006 18:46
From: Reitsuki Kojima
Because it acomplishes nothing, while still being more annoying than before. As I said.


Unless you are banned on their land, it gives you a clear height to aim for that allows a decent view. Security scripts are a different issue. Clear up my neighbours and I'll put put my nice (pleasant looking) home at ground level.
_____________________
Good freebies here and here

I must protest. I am not a merry man! - Warf, ST: TNG, episode: Qpid

You killed my father. Prepare to die. - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride

You killed My father. Your a-- is mine! - Hellboy
Delzo Delacroix
The Avatarian
Join date: 2 May 2006
Posts: 80
06-21-2006 18:47
From: Reitsuki Kojima
Because it acomplishes nothing, while still being more annoying than before. As I said.


It accomplishes giving people a LITTLE more privacy option, while still giving us flyers a height to travel at that we can still see the landmarks.

I'd say it accomplishes something.
_____________________
milady Guillaume
Shhhh, I'm researching!
Join date: 28 Dec 2003
Posts: 696
06-21-2006 18:52
From: Jonas Pierterson
How about access only can go to 100m and bans are to the ceiling? 100m is a compromise to cover most buildings and you still have a decent view of the ground. If you are banned over the parcel, deal with it.


I think this works. I won't be forced to use a jetpack. At least planes have a clear flight pattern. Road vehicles may have to make adjustments on the fly as it were. It's an alternative that is better than 200 meters.
_____________________
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
06-21-2006 18:52
From: Delzo Delacroix
It accomplishes giving people a LITTLE more privacy option, while still giving us flyers a height to travel at that we can still see the landmarks.

I'd say it accomplishes something.


It gives more illusion of privacy. Thats it.

The only way I would support ANY raising of the ban lines is if you tied them to property width. I dont care how high your ban lines go, if your property isnt damn big, I can still snoop on it were I so inclined. 100 meters from the ground is still within almost all snooping, and doesnt help with script-type griefing at all.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
Jon Rolland
Registered User
Join date: 3 Oct 2005
Posts: 705
06-21-2006 18:55
While not bomb proof it does give privacy against casual snooping. Which is good enough for whitelisting. A solution doesn't have to be perfect to do it's job.
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
06-21-2006 18:57
From: Jon Rolland
While not bomb proof it does give privacy against casual snooping. Which is good enough for whitelisting. A solution doesn't have to be perfect to do it's job.


But it does have to be weighed against the downsides.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
Jon Rolland
Registered User
Join date: 3 Oct 2005
Posts: 705
06-21-2006 19:03
From: Reitsuki Kojima
But it does have to be weighed against the downsides.


And it weighs in just fine to me. If you want greater access to my land help me pay for it. Otherwise don't whine about me wanting privacy. And if the privacy is good enough to satisfy ME that's all that matters. I don't pay $100US/mo for you and you don't do a thing to help me pay that bill so your opinion means exactly nothing to me.
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
06-21-2006 19:25
From: Jon Rolland
And it weighs in just fine to me. If you want greater access to my land help me pay for it. Otherwise don't whine about me wanting privacy. And if the privacy is good enough to satisfy ME that's all that matters. I don't pay $100US/mo for you and you don't do a thing to help me pay that bill so your opinion means exactly nothing to me.


Which is exactly why your opinion is not the only one under consideration here.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
Thor Eldrich
Thunder God
Join date: 3 Apr 2006
Posts: 35
06-21-2006 19:26
From: Jon Rolland
And it weighs in just fine to me. If you want greater access to my land help me pay for it...

It's like some wierd, twisted SL version of Who's On First:

Sightseer: We'd like to be able to fly freely through the air.

Land Owner: Land...LAND?!? You can't have my land!

Both: THIRD BASE!

:)

Just in case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who%27s_on_first
Gaius Goodliffe
Dreamsmith
Join date: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 116
06-21-2006 21:25
From: Cristiano Midnight
One of the main justifications given by LL for why the original height was so low was because of the importance of the ability to fly unrestricted at a reasonble height through a sim, either solo or in a vehicle. I just am having a hard time understanding how the principle justification for not raising the height was not even taken into consideration when the height is then actually raised.

Wasn't it? We can't fly unrestricted anymore, not with security scripts around, but the current situation is a heck of a lot better than it was yesterday for flyers. Yesterday, when flying around, when I flew over restricted land I would be forcibly ejected from my vehicle. Today, I'm more likely to bounce harmlessly off some red lines.

Granted, neither situation is ideal, but things are a lot better today than they were yesterday for flyers. We should all be grateful for the improvement here.

Thank you, LL, for helping to make the skies safer.
Sally Rosebud
the girl next door
Join date: 3 May 2005
Posts: 2,505
06-21-2006 23:45
From: Jonas Pierterson
Unless you are banned on their land, it gives you a clear height to aim for that allows a decent view. Security scripts are a different issue. Clear up my neighbours and I'll put put my nice (pleasant looking) home at ground level.


Hmmm didn't you say that security scripts and ban lines etc are all rolled up together? If so, how can security scripts be a different issue...?
_____________________
"I love sleep. My life has the tendency to fall apart when I'm awake, you know?"

~Ernest Hemingway
Blueman Steele
Registered User
Join date: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 1,038
too high to fly over
06-21-2006 23:50
without object assistance I've been unable to fly over some ban lines. Some going way OVER 200m (bug?)
Banking Laws
Realty Serious
Join date: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 602
06-21-2006 23:54
From: Sally Rosebud
Hmmm didn't you say that security scripts and ban lines etc are all rolled up together? If so, how can security scripts be a different issue...?


Because security scripts will always appear around homes. Flight dealing with those has to be 'negotiated' seperately.
_____________________
"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid in posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

- Thomas Jefferson, 3rd U.S. President
Banking Laws
Realty Serious
Join date: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 602
06-21-2006 23:55
From: Blueman Steele
without object assistance I've been unable to fly over some ban lines. Some going way OVER 200m (bug?)


Its 200m from ground height
_____________________
"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid in posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

- Thomas Jefferson, 3rd U.S. President
Ranma Tardis
沖縄弛緩の明確で青い水
Join date: 8 Nov 2005
Posts: 1,415
06-22-2006 04:25
This is going nowhere! Even if the ban lines go down to 100 meters Jonas will still have his security scripts hitting everone with his no warning attacks. I would rather have the ban lines!
Flying is still DEAD!
Banking Laws
Realty Serious
Join date: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 602
06-22-2006 04:33
From: Ranma Tardis
This is going nowhere! Even if the ban lines go down to 100 meters Jonas will still have his security scripts hitting everone with his no warning attacks. I would rather have the ban lines!
Flying is still DEAD!


*cough* Some shouting troll wasn't paying attention when I made it 6 seconds.
_____________________
"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid in posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."

- Thomas Jefferson, 3rd U.S. President
Ranma Tardis
沖縄弛緩の明確で青い水
Join date: 8 Nov 2005
Posts: 1,415
06-22-2006 05:12
From: Banking Laws
*cough* Some shouting troll wasn't paying attention when I made it 6 seconds.


Would rather have the ban lines! At least they are honest and it lets you know without lies. The six-second warning disturbs my wa.

This hold thing is so stupid; Second Life is too small for proper aircraft to start with. A proper aircraft travels at over 200km per hour. That means 3333 meters a minute and 56 meters per second. This translates to crossing a sim every 4 seconds. An airliner travels about 5 times faster. That translates to crossing a sim every second. Military aircraft travel even faster. There is no possible way to avoid those no warning security scripts, none.

200 meters turns into about 660 feet, A thousand feet AGL for general aviation flight is the pattern height for landing.

I can’t see how flying and the disturbed can go tougher then there is the problems second life has with it sims and it becomes impossible. If you want to fly use a proper flight program like fs9 or discover the joy of real flight. You won't not believe what that costs me per hour!



Argent Stonecutter
Emergency Mustelid
Join date: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 20,263
Bring back dwell payments!
06-22-2006 06:54
From: Jon Rolland
And it weighs in just fine to me. If you want greater access to my land help me pay for it.
You know, when they killed dwell I predicted that people would be less interested in putting up with visitors.

It's happening.
Ranma Tardis
沖縄弛緩の明確で青い水
Join date: 8 Nov 2005
Posts: 1,415
06-22-2006 07:22
From: Argent Stonecutter
You know, when they killed dwell I predicted that people would be less interested in putting up with visitors.

It's happening.


Soon I think entire sims will be on the selective avatar list. The new sim to the west of you has enough of them now and that is first land!



I think ban lines should be used in the entire range a security script can be used. It is at least honest and not that false friendliness that so many people like to employ. It a plot of land is restricted it needs to be put into the sunlight for all to see and avoid! If most of second life become off limits then it is too bad.

I don’t think that these measures will “protect” us from griefing.
Siobhan Taylor
Nemesis
Join date: 13 Aug 2003
Posts: 5,476
06-22-2006 07:33
From: Ranma Tardis
I think ban lines should be used in the entire range a security script can be used. It is at least honest and not that false friendliness that so many people like to employ. It a plot of land is restricted it needs to be put into the sunlight for all to see and avoid! If most of second life become off limits then it is too bad.

I don’t think that these measures will “protect” us from griefing.
Security scripts should be banned, period. Anyone using one to "protect" land while not even logged in should be banned, and fined for disrupting other peoples' experience. It's griefing and nothing more.
_____________________
http://siobhantaylor.wordpress.com/
1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17