Second Accounts and Ethics

Well, I try not to bite the hand that entertains me

wow! If you go to the top of that thread, you find a whole post full of listings from the Police Blotter detailing suspensions for First Land Abuse. I wonder what else could be considered abuse of First Land other than buying it with alts?

My point exactly as well as Cocoa's original view on the practice. I rest the case. BTW, Judge Roberts was overwhelmingly confirmed today we have a new Chief Justice woot!! (the last sentence bears no relevance to this thread whatsoever, I just felt like bleeding red today)

Oh. And just found another quote from you Coco in a thread titled: Alts buying First Land?



It seems like in this land you recognized the importance of the word *first* in "First Land". So now I'm confused. Or did you change your mind?

*high five*

I need a pwnt image post, stat.

NOW the link works. I just spent all this time finding that original thread.

I was about to copy/paste the whole thing.

It was written in July, around the time I started looking for my First Land, and at the same time in which there was an incredible shortage of First Land.

That sort of abuse was what I was referring to, that which was mentioned in the first post. The makings of many alts to glom up all the first land.

Nonetheless, it does stand as an inconsistancy, my words then and my words now.

But nonetheless, I still see nothing wrong with a person buying a second account for the express purpose of using that account and keeping that account, and then buying First Land with it.

I've always believed it was an abuse of the system to take advantage of it to buy a lot of First Land and then resell it for a profit, then dump those alts, and particularly to do so during a Free Trial period.

Because that makes it impossible for a new player - OR an old player getting a second, real account - to get the 512 that they have rightfully coming to them. If I had added this second part to my post of last July, I wouldn't be in hot water for it now. But I never thought that we were talking about new, second, real, accounts. (Or third, fourth, or fifth.)

coco

Yes, I did, Pendari. But I was still coming from the fact that any new real account would get this, their first piece of land.

Not from the idea that people can make bunches of alt accounts for the express purpose of buying up all the new land and then selling it for a profit.

That I, if I ever chose to set up another account, would also be safe from people creating a bunch of fake accounts to glom up all the First Land to then resell it.

coco

Weak. Defend this one then as previously posted by Pen Pen.
/130/f7/53390/1.html

By the way, is there any Linden Hotline topic about this issue? I was looking for one but wasn't able to find it, and I'd like to know the official stance on it for future reference.

"You're being inconsistent, Harry."

"Yes, you're right, I am. I said that it's terrible to run over turtles last month, but today I gleefully ran over two of them."

"Well, what's that about, then?"

"Well, while I did say that, I don't think it's so bad to run over the turtles if its me doing the running. That makes sense, right?"

"Well, not really..."

"Of course it does. While I think it's bad if other people run over the turtles, I think in certain circumstances, it's fine to run over turtles, particularly if I am involved in the process at some stage or another."

"You're whacked out of your skull, Harry."

"Now, then, let's not make this personal, shall we, then?"

Yes, I found that one, too.

The $38 was the figure someone came up with to show what a person might actually make if they actually made it a business to create temporary alts in order to go around buying up all the First Land and then resell it for a profit.

THAT was what I was referring to.

coco

What ever you just said makes no sense. And I was one of the people in this thread who said I didnt see anything wrong with you getting a second parcel.

You're saying in one breath, it is only wrong if someone gets "a lot of First Land and resells it"

Then in your next breath you say its ok as long as its a "real" account and its not wrong to get a second or third or fourth or fifth?

Wouldnt that be alot of land?

Please define real account and not real account?

It was also the day after you made your new alt Strawbearry, who is really her own person but was created to be a testing drone, but testing drones need land too...

Yes. Nolan posted a question on the Hotline here:
/invalid_link.html

And ok Coco. Thank you for clarifying your position. Though I'm still confused about how you can define "first" two different ways. But ok.

I guess search is working again eh Pen?

*Watches with interest as Coco gets out the wirecutters and goes about craftily defusing this bomb*

Real account - one you intend to buy, use, and keep. OK to sell it. Up to the five account limit everybody gets.

Not real account - made for the express purpose of buying First Land and selling it later, for a profit, then deleting the account.

coco

DON'T CUT THE BLUE WIRE !!!!

Ummm...

You implied here that even if they keep it, that there is an unfortunate side effect...

Sigh...

Ok that was some of my confusion. But just so you know the new limit is 3 accounts and deleted account count towards your limit.

Class dismissed, good rebuttal Counselor Nolan.

NO ITS MEAN THE GREEN ONE!!! AHHHHHHHHHH!!! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!

You seem to have concluded that anyone who dares broach the idea that people are piling on, are accusing people of
group think, which is not always the case.

I willing to accept that this is true for some, but a broad brush indictment of anyone who raises it is certainly not warranted.

The broad brush certainly marginalizes those who are not
accusing people of group think.

Heh heh