[Omitted to Avoid Suspension] Suspended for 3 Days

I'm not really comfortable trying to ferret out a particular Linden as it starts to stink of harassment.

Is that how you see your role? Amazing arrogance...a resmod is more like a hall monitor or an proofreader....not a cop on a power trip ready to police the SL membership, and by the way, it's "repercussions."

I see my roll is to keep the peace. In that respect it is like the police. Nowhere in the description of this position or the guidelines describing it, is police style brutality permissable. Police brutality is something that unnerves me.

That said, it is just an analogy, there really isn't an analogy that fits how things actualy work. Hall monitor is a much better analogy (think i'll use that in the future), but proofreader not so much. I usualy use volenteer fire or ambulance service; when describing being a ResMod (though that doesn't describe the repercussions).

Hall monitor suggests children; police suggests criminals.

The origional announcement by Cristiano was actualy pretty detailed; it gave enough information that it was replicated by other posters on the topic.

What is important is that individuals were able to replicate it with the instructions. Doesn't matter if they were complete. *insert saying about good intentions and the road to hell*

What is important is that individuals were able to replicate it with the instructions. Doesn't matter if they were complete. *insert saying about good intentions and the road to hell*

Agreed. There was no information revealed and the intent was not malicious.

As long as we're suspending those acting without malicious intent, how about we suspend the LL employees who let this bug slip into the code too.

@Lou
Editing attachments was in the post. Didn't say what had to be done with them, just that they needed to be edited. The second person to respond to the thread verified the exploit in 15 min. It was also the first post on the topic.

Are you certain the person doing the verification did so on the basis of Cristiano's post, or the more detailed instructions posted earlier by somebody else?

It's the oldest thread that was moved into LR (It was posted at 1:45 AM (EST); the other threads moved to LR didn't start till after 5AM). I've looked though both the sandbox & general for locked threads, but if there were older threads with more details; they don't exist anymore. The only ones I remember were the ones I saw when I came on in the morning.

Thanks Luo, I stand corrected. The oldest instructions go back to the night before at 11 PM.

I would expect if the tail had wagged the dog at 11PM then things would have been addressed 4 or 5 hours earlier. A good way to get the ball rolling on this sort of thing is to AR it.

EDIT: didn't see your post before my previous post (as i also didn't see this last one till i'd already posted).

In fact his actions comport themselves to the norm of the software industry, and I honestly think this is the case of one overzelous LL emplyee over reacting.

I strongly urge LL senior mngmt to reconsider there poition with respect to name ommited and to think about what message this sends to developers community

Oddly enough, while I believe Linden Lab made a dire public relations blunder with this embarrassing flex of disciplinary muscle, I wouldn't advocate overturning Cristiano's sentence.

Allowing a mob to bully Linden Lab into reversing policy judgements is a bad precedent and I wouldn't want to see it become a common practice ("ZOMG YOU BAN ME FOR GRIEFING! MY FRIENDS PROTEST!"

Rather, I would be happy if Linden Lab reviewed the policy, the interpretation of the policy, and the Linden(s) making the judgement call in Cristiano's case. Hopefully such a review would prevent future PR disasters. As somebody who has her livelihood embedded deep in the success of Second Life, I truly want to see what is best for the platform, and what I have seen here isn't it.