200m BanLines!

Do you own land?

1. Step into land, bring up properties dialog on that land
2. Step out of land border
3. Ban yourself using the land options, hit ok.
4. Wait a second or two - red wall should come up.

again let me re-iterate the point, named ban, if you are on that parcel's ban list, because the land owner has a specific reason to not want you there, you have *NO* right to be there, and the very notion that you 'do' is ridiculous.

Its their land, their portion of the server, they are paying for it, you aren't.

*IF* and this is a big if, this height is applied to restricted access zones as well, they should probably be broken apart, and handled seperately in the future.

Either restricted access should just be removed (because its currently functionally useless) or, the alternative of making it useful, seperately from the ban, should be entertained, as it has obvously struck a chord with people who want access to be unrestricted over things.

When i use the argument of teleport i mean that your access to a given parcel in SL is NEVER impeded by 'walls' anymore.. Its not, direct teleport has eliminated that entire argument as to why 'contiguous airspace' must be enforced.

Now if yer not tryin to get to a specific parcel, and instead yer jus flyin around and exploring, perhaps one alternative idea might be to have some kind of 'explorer' setting, where you go completely phantom, but no agents are rezzed, all chat is muted, and you are not bound by plot boundaries, but may not interact with anyone around, or something..

obvously it would have to be something that couldn jus be flipped on and off etc, aka you couldn go into a plot and then jus turn it off once yer inside, etc.. and it still shouldn't get around named bans, but mabye could go through 'restricted' access spaces or some such...

i fully understand the desire people have to fly around SL and see new things, but that desire *MUST* be given lower priority than the right of a paying owner to dictate the terms of how their paid for property is accessable.

Just like you have RL, a free right to walk around and catch butterflies, but it does *NOT* give you the right to tresspass private property, you are free to fly around SL and see the sights, but that does not give you the right to tresspass on someone else's area, if they have specifically named you as someone who does not belong there.

For a very long time this was a sort of assumed 'right' but it was in reality a priveledge, and one that griefers have been working long and hard to revoke, across all of SL.

Here are my thoughts on the subject:

200m ban line increase. Yay!

The fact that it makes no distinction between Access Lists & Bans - Boo!

No increase to the 50-Avatar ban limit to go along with it: Boo!


As far as access control, not only do I think that should stay at 40m, but a warning dialog should pop up when its being set that communicates that its not considered a 'neighborly' thing to do.

Also, I have a feeling that if 200m ban lines for access control (not ban lists) are as bad as many think it'll be, I'll bet a compromise will be made in 1.10.5. Hopefully the same can be said about the 50-avatar limit on ban lists.

Well, a step in the right direction...

Wrong. If I don't provide a warning before seating or ejecting I'm restricting access as best I can around my skybox.

I could just as easily say anyone flying at that height is a greifer. I'm not 'abusing' anything, I'm using a viable, LINDEN APROVED technique and system. I'm not tping home. I'm not using push. I'm using something that is a LAND TOOL built INTO the system.

You have no 'right of passage' over any land that isn't public or owned by you. PERIOD.

My skybox is at 300 meters..you solution does nothing for those like me. I'm merely controlling access to that box as best I can.

Not many will say this but:

"I fully support everything Jonas has said in this thread"

that aside:


Group Access controls needs decoupled with explicite Ban List controls. Increasing the height limit on GA restrictions is a Bad Thing(tm). But NOT increasing the height limit on Bans was a Worse Thing(tm). We are not yet free of evil but we have the lessor of two evils.

In the War Against Terro^h^h^h^h^h griefers, no means are too extreme.

The mainland was too contiguous anyway. I hear they are going to errect a large wall extending from Ahern to the East and West coasts. I think Haliburton was awarded the construction contract.

How about this spatial visibility (land option):

When activated cloaks the land, making it look like a void to anyone not on the access list. All spatial comunications between the land and the plots next to it would cease to happen. No avatars in the land would be seen outside it.

From within the land, the land owner/friends would see the rest of the world as a void too. Sort of like an instanced space. Land owner then can have complete privacy.

Nice idea, but this requires a little more work than

/#define BAN_HEIGHT/s/40/200/

does.

Personally, if I made vechiles and *access restricted* lines went up to 200m, I'd be having some strong words with LL about it.

We're not talking about access lines, though (though I believe access lines should go up to a minimum of 200m too).... we're talking about ban lines. lines drawn to deliberately excluse people you know you definately don't want on your land.


Agreed, ban lines should extend to 768m. Why build somewhere on your own land when you as landowner don't even have the power using LL provided tools to ban people from that area? Bans are a joke since they don't even cover all the buildable space.

Agreed, except that with regard to #6, not only should avatars not render, but NOT objects, physical, phantom, or anything else, should render.
This prevents spying too.



These are all good ideas. I back them all.

Interesting, but I'd prefer to see "don't rez ANYTHING in parcels you can't access" - as this limits fliers less whilst at the same time keeping banned people from seeing things on land they are banned on (and thus, should not be able to interact with in any way, including see).

In reply to :




I can't put it better then Jonas....




If I own land, I want to OWN it. I want the right to say "nobody may fly over my land AT ANY HEIGHT".
Otherwise, I don't really own the land at all, I just own, say, everything below the height at which I can ban people, and have use rights to the rest of it.
If you can't, with something you're said to "own", stop other people using it.... then I'd doubt you own it at all.

Personally, if someone attacks me on my own land, I'd like to be able to :
1) ban them, and all the alts they ever create, from ever entering any location (at any co-ordinate, x,y and z) on my land.
2) stop them seeing ANYTHING inside my parcel, objects, avatars, everything
3) stop them interacting with anyone in my parcel (none of their sounds, gestures, chat, etc should be visible to anyone in my parcel).

If landowners had those tools, I'm pretty confident the popularity of griefing would decrease quite quickly as people realise that they can't just "create a new alt" to get around the limits - that bans become serious because they're a long-lasting if not permenant restriction on ALL accounts owned by that player.
Ok, you don't care if you get banned by a few 512s.... but you get banned in a few big or popular places and you have little recourse other then to ask the land owner to unban you, which is how it should be. More power to landowners. Landowners pay a lot of money into SL, and the fact that currently they have so little control they can't even stop explicitly banned people from flying over their land and dropping bombs on them is absolutely absurd.



Imho, access lines should go to 200m, ban lines should be infinite (as in, you can't fly over land you're banned on at ANY height).... I know this would be a pain for banned avs and would force them to use p2p teleport, but really, these are people you explicitly don't want on your land or space AT ALL.... and combined with how easy it is to get alts for griefing now, I think taking a very hard line and being able to seriously inconvenience specific named people is a good thing.
The 50-av ban limit for parcels is a joke too. eltee Statosky has some very good ideas in this regard.

The reason I don't support infinite height for access lines is that the vast majority of normal people entering restricted land do so by accident, and it would be a bad thing to encourage people who owned small plots to have invisible lines of doom blocking flying.
We should, however, be given infinite ban lines, and a rotating ban list. That would enable us to do the same thing if we really wanted (just have an object placed every 90m up to 768 that auto-adds anyone it picks up in a sensor scan to the parcel ban list). This solution would enable people who are truly anal about access to have that option, whilst not encouraging its use.

My POV on access is very simple : if landowners are just that, people who own the land, they should be able to restrict access to it how they choose. They own it. They have the RIGHT to stop othe people using it AT ALL (yes, even flying over it) if they want to.
This may inconvenience others, but there has to be an awful lot of inconvenience to justify limiting a landowner's rights over his own property, especially given how much griefing we've seen lately from alts which are difficult to control.

Personally, I don't like the idea of 'ban lines' at all, I think that instead of having ban lines or access lines, objects (including avs) in parcels one cannot access should simply not rez for you, and your chat would not be heard there.... and you generally can't see or interact with parcels you have no access to in any way. That would be, imho, a MUCH better solution then any form of 'ban lines', which are ugly and difficult to balance in a way that makes both landowners and fliers happy.
Since, however, LL has so much on their plate, if makes sense to prioritise the needs of landowners who are paying money for THEIR land and need these tools to stop griefing, over the wishes of casual passers by.

I think this is a bad idea. It will spoil the view even more, and give another great tool for those who want to buy your land by blocking you in on all sides; now you have to go to 200m to get out instead of just 50. Was this voted for?



LL need to prioritise the needs of ALL PAYING CUSTOMERS, regardless of how much they pay. Just because I have "only" 4096 sq m and "only" pay $25 a month for land does not mean I am less important than someone with a whole island; in fact in many cases I would say my little plot offers a greater quality of entertainment than some laggy box club full of camping chairs, dance pads and zombies.

Lewis

If ban lines go to high they'll kill off what's left of aeronautics in SL that hasn't already been ruined by sim-crossing issues.

Its been stated by quite a few posters that general access restrictions need DECOUPLED from ban lists.

So you are telling us that you are such a greifer that you will be EXPLICITELY added to a banlist on enough properties throughout the grid to cause you issues when flying? Now i dont really think you would do that, but for anyone who does GOOD RIDDANCE. =)

Eh? Are you on the ACS payroll? Has it ever ocurred to you the number of small plots where red-tape ban lines are switched on as a matter of course? Or the number of such plots that are so configured and then left for months on end because the player lost interest / gave up? When was the last time you visited a 'first land' sim and counted the proportion of plots with global ban / exclusion enabled?

Nothing of that in any way adressed what he was saying.

Again, as far as I've ever seen indication of, "ban lines" and "restricted access" lines are, so far as SL is concerned, the same thing. That's my whole complaint. If this turns out to be false, then fine and dandy.

I put in a question about that, though I expect they're all busy at the moment so it may just be quicker to wait for the update. But I agree, I don't think there'll be any difference between the two, nothing *else* is different.

Griefers can grief using linden aproved techniques and systems. The effect, not the method, is what defines it.

The so called "linden aproved" techique is also coupled with a linden suggestion of a warning, too.

Says who?

The lindens haven't said one way or another - and clearly by limiting the height of banlines, they have suggested that under normal circumstances, there should be.

And in real life, this is absolutely not the case - for the good of civilization, you don't own the sky above you. This is why we can actually have airlines and such.

I disagree with your assertion that owning LAND == owning the AIRSPACE OVER THE LAND to infinity. In RL, when you own LAND you don't control the AIRSPACE OVER YOUR LAND to infinity (or even 768m). However, you are given protections so that others won't violate the airspace over your land below a REASONABLE ALTITUDE.

To make it so that I could not fly AT A REASONABLE ALTITUDE would seriously undermine SL for me. Yes, I know I can TP anywhere I want to go, but I LIKE taking my helicopter there instead. Being forced to TP all of the time, because people were able to set barriers all the way up to 768m, would make the game very unenjoyable for me.

I also think Jonas' stunt of ejecting without warning FROM A REASONABLE CRUISING ALTITUDE is not good at all. The issue here is twofold. The long term issue is the same as in the paragraph above...if enough people do it then it makes flying impossible. The short term issue still gives us pilots grief because WE DON'T KNOW WHERE NOT TO FLY UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE! We're basically being held accountable for knowledge we can't possibly have until after we need to have it. I'd have no trouble adjusting my flight path to avoid Jonas' land at certain altitudes...I don't go looking for trouble. The problem is that I don't know where Jonas' land is! And even if I did, the only reason I know the acceptable altitudes at which to fly through his land is because I read them earlier in this thread!

I'm a landowner. I also have flying vehicles.

I would not agree with restriction (not ban) lines going to infinity. I am also not for absolute ownership of the airspace to the point of restricting pass-through travel of anyone (except banned individuals).

iRL Planes and helicopters fly over our houses. As Freyr pointed out, there is something called "reasonable altitude." The problem in SL is that we have skyboxes so where our "floor" is changes from location to location. Skyboxes notwithstanding we have to allow that reasonable altitude because, yes, aeronautics would be pointless, all the vehicle functions will be rendered useless. It's bad enough we don't have ROADS to drive on.

iRL pedestrians have government-created passages (roads, sidewalks, bridges, and tunnels) to get around. SL does not have these. Plots are all abutt and there is no way anymore to go everywhere just by walking. Just two plots with buildings up to their corners is enough to stop any walkabout.

THUS the only viable (non-TP) sidewalk available is flying. Now most people do not wear jetpacks so general travel height is stuck at somewhere in the 200m area. Causing general flight restriction to this height makes SL un-traversable.

Please remember that not everyone likes an all-teleport universe. SL has given us feet, flight, and functions for vehicles. Let's not make that pointless.

And it is NOT FUN being thrown out of my vehicle without warning and losing my vehicle in the process when all I'm doing is going from point A to point B.

Barriers hamper recreation. It happens on land, on water, in the air. It happens to me all the time where I will want to fly somewhere and out of nowhere I'm jerked off my ride and it continues flying on and I'm falling to the ground (if I stay connected to begin with).

When this happens, I consider myself griefed by the property owner. Especially when they have the property locked down or security system on and THEY ARE NOT EVEN THERE!

WTF is wrong with you people (who do this shit)?

your every bit as griefer to me as someone dropping push bombs.

What is the salution?

To start I don't think a general fence (not counting BAN only) should be allowed to be ON when the land owner is NOT online. It doesn't make sense to have it on when you are not even there.

Also, Lindens can help too! they should make airspace that's off limits EASIER TO SEE than just tape that you almost never see when flying or boating 'til it's too late!!!! If locked down land were easier to identify it would be that much easier to avoid!! Hello?! Lindens? Hello?!

Ok so people are going to read this, take it so seriously they'll call for my death and particle burn me in effigy. SO be it, have a drink on me =P


*huggles*
Savonah

"Can you feel ... a little love ..."

If it helps with griefers then so be it. We had a lovely peaceful sim till about a week ago, then all hell has broken loose. New alts for old avs, ten foot high prim willies (actually they made me personally laugh but completely out of order). Anything that helps stop bullying is good as far as I am concerned since there's NOT A WAY you can stop minors accessing if determined unless the technology comes in for login by retinal scanner.

Is that a world you want to live in? Huh? Huh?

Me neither. Look forward to seeing if this helps. As to the flying - well there IS P2P teleport now which not everyone loves but hey ...