Favorite LL Disciplinary Inconsistancies

I was speaking in general and not specifically about what happened to you. While what happened to you is definitely regrettable, I think it's unreasonable to expect LL to get it right every time. I think it's pretty remarkable that they even try to look at events in context before taking disciplinary action. They could just ban first and ask questions never, and it would require a lot less manpower.

Actually being "impatient" with griefers will almost guarantee you being banned.

Yeah, if it was a free service, I would agree.

*chuckle

I like April because she baffles me.

In the language of Enabranese, April's a lvl 62 elite rogue built for camouflauge and stealth. She's there, you're pwned, she's gone, you never knew it.

Because I am sooooo much more pithy than pandagriefer:I'm not saying LL is tyranical by any means. But, like panda's analogy of the overstressed parent, they have gotten random and a little bit sloppy. And if they weren't so lenient on real griefers, panda would never had been shot or had to call a Liaison.

I think that both that situation and the legacy of he-who-shall-not-be-named were problems inadvertently created by LL trying to be permissive, ultimately resulting in more headache for themselves.

That legacy wasn't created in a vacuum. From what I've seen about which reports have been acted on (in terms of deleting attacks) and which have not been, it's less a matter of leniency than of inconsistency.

The TSO mods do a terrific job, and they are all volunteer. Now I'm not saying we would be better off that way - cause if the volunteers were some of US, then there WOULD be a problem, when the mods started fighting among themselves, lol. There's too much history gone down here for that to work.

I'm just saying that it can be done and done well, while at the same time being lenient enough to allow all points of view to be expressed, and allowing ALL players to feel like equal citizens with equal opportunity to speak their views. It takes manpower. These forums aren't what they were during the early days of SL, and they are certainly not going to stay the same as they are now as the game grows.

I also disagree with any concept that deems entire points of view or philosophies out of the realms of discussion. Discussions of possible appearances of favoritism, for instance, are not divisive. If people see a problem with that - or anything else - then there may be a problem with that, and it's worth discussing. Discussions of ideas should never be taboo, whether they are concepts we all agree on or not.

As far as I can tell, we have the same problems we had before the new rule that makes suspension or banning from the forums equivalent with suspension or banning from SL entirely. We just have them less often, since the people generally drawing the ire of less-tactful posters don't post as much as some in the past have.

As far as I can tell, the forums could work fine if there were enough manpower.

coco

P.S. I think most griefers in the game actually spend very little time in the forums. I would agree with less leniency on griefers in the game, if that is possible. As for the forums, of my suggestions for reform, the most-agreed on was more strict enforcement of the rule against personal attacks. More manpower would make that more possible.

The forums are much better since the new policy went into place.

From: Seth Kanahoe

Thank you for spewing sense into this thread.

This is another thread I don't quite understand. The ToS is quite clear (I don't see the gray areas that many seem to think exist) and if you violate the rules you take your medicine and don't bellyache on the forums like you were wronged. You sure won't get any sympathy from me.

And if you don't break any rules at all, and yet you get the 'medicine' anyway, (which is what the original post is about) what then?

Well we are only talking about a couple of warnings here aren't we? That hardly seems worth getting all bent out of shape about (no offense, Panda).

I don't think panda's concern was that he got warned; I'm not concerned that I got a forum suspension. I think the concern is that these are indicitive of something wrong with the game mechanics and operation. I'm sorry if I gave anyone the impression I was complaining about sanctions for knowingly posting after warning; I wasn't.

Well, I'm kinda bent out of shape about it. I know that in no way did Panda deserve that warning, and it shouldn't be on his record. The other guy should have received at least a hefty suspension (and I hope he did). But Panda didn't deserve it, and I hope and expect that his record will be cleared, and if it isn't, I'm gonna be even more bent out of shape.

coco

mmmmm Strawbearry Coco Shortbread. Damn I'm hungry.

If a person feels they are 100% innocent they should be talking to the Lindens and not whining like a little crybaby on the forums. There is enough "me me me" on these forums already.

Someone mention me?

hahah yeah I've been slapped on the wrist too - but eh... thats life aint it? sometimes you cross the line...

Yes Siggy slap slap slap now go to your room.

Did you read the original post?

1. He is talking to the Lindens, and at least 1 Linden, who was there, backs his story.
2. He's not whining about it.

Nevermind.

Maybe you and Chip are right. If we get warned or suspended or banned when we've committed no infractions, we shouldn't try and bring up the idea that there may be a problem with the system, we should just bend over and take it like men.

Welcome to my alt!

She looks just like me, but I really need a white bear avatar for her.

coco

P.S. I'm quite glad I decided to post here, before going on over to classified (houses) to post my new Nice 'n Icy Tiny Penguin Palace under the wrong name! (hint hint - go look!)

coco

Ms. Reading Comprehension 1972

When are people gonna tell some stories of unequal enforcement of CS and TOS that make one go "hmmm", written in the style of Arsenio Hall?

I don't think anyone is getting all bent out of shape about it. Certainly not Panda, who retains his 12 year old girl shape. It is a valid topic to discuss without having it dismissed as whining or much ado about nothing. The disciplinary system in SL is completely flawed. It has always favored griefers to the point of ridiculousness. When someone is disciplined, there is very little information about the actual offense, and you have no idea who has made the accusation against you. The lack of any transparency makes it even harder to handle situations where the discipline is misapplied.

Yes, one warning is not a big deal. However, abuse of the system and obvious misapplication of it is problematic and worthy of discussion, especially when that system already has glaring flaws and it affects all of us. Yes the Lindens are human, but you still expect consistent and fair enforcement of the rules we must abide by to be here. I would rather have someone get away with something than to have someone punished for something they did not do, and have very little recourse to contest.

The part about Panda's story that worries me is that a Linden claimed there was a server log of it. So we either have servers making up logs of events that never happened, or we have a Linden lying about investigating it at all. Neither fills me with confidence in the disciplinary system.

It seems to me that some of the imperfections in SL's diciplinary system are largely due to lack of staffing. Some of the "bad calls" made to lock a thread or move it to off-topic usually appear to be the result of a cursory look at the material rather than a careful examination. While the forums feel like an important part of the Second Life culture, I can see from a management perspective why it would be tempting to keep the staff focused on the actual game itself rather than the forums about the game (a temptation compounded by the rather small percentage of the SL population that actually USES the forums.)

It may be helpful to include with your favorite quip about disciplinary inconsistancies some suggestions for improvement. For example, does anybody feel this problem is bad enough where they would be willing to pay for forum access as a premium service? The forum fees could go towards getting more manpower involved in making better diciplinary calls.

I would love to hear some alternative suggestions.

That's all well and good, and I agree... but does anyone have any suggestions beyond just complaining? Enforcing the TOS in SL is quite unlike enforcing it in any other MMOG. Our experiences and freedoms here are not constrained by game mechanics. They are nearly infinite, and as a result, so are the possible ways to cause trouble or grief. Trying to maintain law and order in SL is more akin to trying to maintain it in RL than to preventing hacks and exploits in WoW. In a world like that they only need to worry about what's possible within the confined mechanics of the game. In here we aren't confined in any way. Nothing is black and white. Nothing can be taken at face value.

As much as I like and respect Panda, how can I be sure I'm getting the whole story here? Should I just take his word over LL's chat and server logs? Do we know if the other person involved was also warned? Is it fair to accuse LL of bungling justice when any crime in SL depends so much on context that's impossible for anyone who wasn't directly involved to completely divine? I have no doubt that mistakes are made, and that judgements sometimes lack full and proper contextual information necessary to divine intent or cause and effect. Given the nature of SL how do you propose that be avoided?

I'm not trying to dismiss anything. I'm trying to point out that we're lucky LL even tries to see things in shades of gray instead of just in black and white. I don't work at LL. I don't have access to server logs or know what they contain, or how easy or difficult it is to recreate events in context with that information. Neither does anyone else except LL. How can I judge their performance based on nothing but hearsay and supposition?