200m BanLines!

This is assuming, however, that you've been banned. In my own experience, not many people keep the fully restricted access in place. I don't see why that may change now, but I could be wrong.

Thats the thing. You can fly under 200 meters on my land too - the eject is a security script located around 300 meters.

Sorry, Magnum - wrong.

It's rude, but not against the ToS.

More than you might think do. It's just that normally you fly safely over top of them, and so dont notice.

There has never been any difference between so called "ban lines" and simple access restriction, in terms of effect. I see no reason to believe this has changed, until a linden specificly says otherwise.

So you're saying this doesn't affect the newbies who immediately turn on a 1-person access list and throw up boundaries around their precious 512 that they NEVER RETURN TO AGAIN?

God I hope you're right. The primary reason I started buying land was to clear the goddam landscape of all those big red walls. If you're wrong (and I expect you are) this actually really sucks for me, who doesn't grief, but DOES fly around a fair amount at natural flight heights.

I'll second that - sometimes I just want to go touring - how am I supposed to do that kissing the clouds? To stay clear of the barriers, I'll have to use flight enhancements of some kind and stay above the clouds.

And see nothing but clouds now.

On my little patch fly under 200 or over 400. if youfly under 200 you'll see the landscape. Already seen 2 people doingdivesin fighters and playing chicken with my security. Laughed my ass off.

I agree that this should only apply to EXPLICITLY banned avatars.

Though I can see -no- rational argument for the 200m ban to NOT be the case, in the case *of* explicitly banned avatars.

On another note, though, "access" does mean "access". We were dealing with a "ban" that meant NOTHING AT ALL.

I suppose the alternative are the "security scripts" which indeed do, I suppose, increase the weight of the author's cojones, but are actually a hell of a lot less convienient for all those "tourism flyers".

If someone owns land, why should you have more right to show up, than they have right to keep you out?

Even if someone blocked an -entire sim-, that isn't a showstopper for 'pleasure flying'.

In the meantime, the -current- ban is the equivalent of saying, "Go away. Or I'll say go away a second time."

Well, a lot of griefers out there are pretty much the equivalent to the Frenchmen in the Holy Grail.

Fechez la vache!

You don't frighten us with your silly knees-bent running around advancing behavior!

Flying over 700m? You might as well teleport.

If you can't fly low enough to see the ground without setting your draw distance so high that even on my upgraded Athlon X2 3800+ it's too laggy to fly... well, what's the point?

Bad enough that sim crossings have been getting worse, now the world's going to be full of 200m pillars of death.

It's hard for me to describe my reaction to this without resorting to expletives.

Agreed! In fact I'm going to report it as a bug to LL every time I hit a ban box over 40 meters.
Agreed.
It's not one person blocking a sim, it's a dozen people in every sim blocking enough chunks that, well, EVERY sim is effectively blocked.
Hey, I'm in full agreement, I just think that exclusive bans absolutely need to be kept at least as limited as they are now.

Ban Lines != Allow Access

If your referring to the red walls, then they show up wether your banned, or a parcel has no access set on. (Allow Only more or less means "Ban everyone except The red lines will only show up to those banned, so those of you with vehicles need not worry about hitting things every few meters.

Allow only parcels are just plain evil though :/


And why not make the height even higher up? Its easy enough with teleport scripts to end up anywhere in a sim you want, at any height, and commence with bomb dropping. Ban lines should start at the ground and end somewhere about where your avatar starts glitching out and teleporting becomes tricky.

Yeh, I've got a couple of those around the Coonspiracy land on Noonkkot. I spent a couple of months IMing the little beggars and offfering them ludicrous amounts for their land but as far as I can tell they bought a year account and never logged in again.

And both of these situations are treated the same way by second life.

Please provide a citation for this.

You can drop bombs from a sim away without being anywhere near the parcel. Ban lines do absolutely nothing to prevent bomb dropping.

If you don't provide a warning before unsitting and ejecting you're a griefer.

I don't care whether LL considers you one, you're just abusing a loophole in their rules, and in a sane world you'd be treated just the same as someone who C4s a sandbox.

You answered your own question.

If you are banned from a parcel, you see the red no entry lines.
If the parcel is set to access list, and your not on it, you see the red no entry lines.

Both situations are treated the same by the SL client.

Not as much danger there, since from 200m you can't see of hear any of the results, so there's not feedback to amuse the juvinille minds of griefers.

I still standby my decison to go in for a joint partnership on an island though! I'll miss the occasional person wandering in randomly, but I'm in love with the feeling of having control over things. And the prim count.

No I bloody didn't, pardon my French.

You claimed that this change only applied to bans, that not all red line areas will be raised to 200 meters. I'm asking for evidence of that, given that both of these situations are handled the same by second life. Not just the client, the server as well.

Please provide a citation to support your claim that come tromorrow afternoon we're not going to have a world full of transparent (and invisible until you get up close to them) barriers up to the unaided flight ceiling.

i agree access only should be treated a bit differently than ban, but even access only needed to be raised, keep that to say the 200m (still fly over able) and then raise explicit ban to 768

and while they're at it the following would be nice: (all on explicit ban)

1) mute all banned avatars for anyone in the parcel
2) return all banned avatars' objects
3) set the parcel nobuild to banned avatar
4) set floor to cieling noscript to banned avatar
5) banned avatar should not be rendered on screens for anyone in parcel

and mabye

6) all agents in parcel should not be rendered to banned avatar (to prevent further im based griefing)



I would also suggest two secondary things...

1) Ban list should be augmented by a 'land-owner' ban list accessable through group options or profile... all agents banned via the owner based ban list would be automatically banned from ALL of that owners' plots, this makes ban listing abit more effective and eases burden on 'parcel' ban lists some. No script addition to these ban lists would be possible, it would require direct manual intervention as these lists would be permament, and 'unbounded' or at least bounded to a 'really big' number

2) parcel ban lists should remain around 50 elements, but be a FIFO, or queue, you could just keep adding bans but they would roll off the oldest ban still on the parcel... Existing ban script tools would work in this space.

Aka a security system could add people to the parcel ban, bumping the oldest people off automatically... and every so often the actual land owner or land owning group could then go through the list and add particularly bad offenders or repeat problem people, to the permament, owner ban list

This would prevent 'huge numbers of giant walls' from ever being a problem really, as no one would be *permamently* banned from a plot unless the plot owner specifically and manually entered them, in which case in all likliehood, they bloody well deserved it

Access shouldn't be raised at all, unless there's some effective mechanism to discourage people from using access (which is effectively an exclusive ban) controls casually.

200 meters is far far too high. If all access controls go up to 200 meters then the "giant wall" problem will be immediate and serious. Not because someone's being a jerk and building giant walls, but because there's going to be zillions of 16-64 meter columns 200 meters high all over EVERY mainland sim, just about... and it doesn't matter whether that wall you just ran into is 16m or 160 m wide, you're just as dead in the air either way.

This is completely unacceptable. It's far far worse than the greifing problem ever was.

hah... hehh....

bBWAAAAHAHHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA


meh.. heh.. ok...

looking beyond that, mebbe there should be more to discourage access, or just a simpler way of enforcing access, aka just automatically push you to the other side of the parcel along the trajectory you were flying or some such...

but the very idea that you poking your nose around some neighbors plot who wants to be left alone, no longer being possible, is somehow worse than griefing ever was... wow... thats just... precious you could say almost?

most everything that needs to be done needs to be done to named ban, and named ban only, i only mentioned access should be raised, because it currently does not do what it is intended to do, forbid access to the parcel... by in large all it does is forbid access to landing...

In the age of direct teleport, it doesn stop your mainland 'mobility' at all..

not that i don feel yer frustration if suddenly things were bound in irrevocably...

honestly mebbe 'access only' on the mainland should just be removed, or nullified in some way, we've never found it useful, not once, not in nearly 3 years of SL, because it doesn do what its supposed to, and everyone (as evidenced here) would run around like a chicken with their head cut off if it *DID*

so jus dispense with it really
you can't 'cripple' it enough to make it acceptable to anyone without completely nullifying its purpose.

but quite honestly, the 'right' of any SL user to 'fly over' a plot they're forbidden from needs to take a back seat to the right of a land owner, to not get attacked on land he or she is paying potentially hundreds of dollars a month, to mantain, its their space, they're payin for it, and whether or not you, or anyone else, is allowed in it, should be ultimately up to them.

Whats going to ruin SL, is the attrition that unlimited free unverified accounts mixed with uttely useless land tools, does on the overal productive population. the priveledge, *NOT* right, to fly around someone elses land who doesn want you there, is honestly uncomparable to that

but honestly that is another argument, i honestly as i mentioned, really don't think the restrict should matter as much, everything we are talking about here, is in NAMED ban, banning someone by hand, manually, who has been attacking you or your residents/customers/etc

P2P teleport should never be the only practical way to navigate from place to place, nor should it ever be used as justification for restricting free access within reasonable restrictions. 200 meters is NOT within reasonable restrictions - an avatar can't even fly that high in the normal course of things.

again this is all for NAMED personally entered ban, if you attack someone on their own land, yer right, 200m isn't reasonable, 768 might be, heck with physics assited travel, it really ought to go to 4096

you have *NO RIGHT* of passage over land you've attacked, period as to the idea of access only land, make it say the height of the highest structure under 200m plus 10m or something, so if they didn have anything specifically to keep people out of, at 100m, it wouldn keep people out of the air above it