Monster Homes & The Great Land Rush

My 16-year old daughter and I have small adjacent lots in Clara. She built herself a nice little 'grotto' with the hill as a 'back wall'.

Then a crop of people with loads of $$$ built gigantic buildings, dozens of times taller than an avatar and 50 times wider abutted to her land, tearing down the hill, ruining the effect. Her property line was moved [in Z space] without her permission.

First off, I'd like to argue that this is a bug. But that isn't the point of this post.

The main point is that SL's current construction rules and practices make for ticked-off neighbors. If folks get a lot of cash, they create towers that spew techno for miles or 100' on a side 'houses' that are giant empty husks. It seems that Bigger/Higher/Taller == Status to many. I think that's ultimately detrimental to SL, as the world tends torward chaos, with no sense of order. Another way for n00bs to feel disempowered/overwhelmed.

In real life there are community standards and _laws_ to limit construction. In SL we only have the Server Code for laws, and the Terms Of Service for community standards. At the current time, neither are sufficient for creating communities/neighborhoods. The current code/tos are ripe for abuse.

The Great Land Rush only works as a model for land distribution if there are 100s of acres of land for each homesteader, and the land is free/cheap.

Honestly, it would be nice for folks to talk (send an IM) to anyone who's land they move in adjacent to, and see if an accomodation can be worked out before any Monster Home construction begins.

Recommended Reading -

Order Without Law: How Neighbors Settle Disputes
Seaside (Or any book on New Urbanism)

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0674641698/qid=1051207726/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-3294162-9775040?v=glance&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0882899961/103-3294162-9775040

Oracle Omega

16 ???????

It is my understanding that the minimum age to play this game is still 18. There is material in the game not suitable for your daughter, and no means yet to protect her from it.

All other arguments aside, I think this is another issue with the current land tools. Previously when land was altered it was only YOUR land that was altered, creating the dreaded cliff at the edge of your land. I agree that you (or someone else) editing land should NOT be able to make changes to other adjacent OWNED land. Its just plain wrong and can ruin effects someone worked hard to create.

I see your point here, but...

If you build a nice house into a part of a hill and someone comes along and buys the hill...thats just kinda...tough. The solution I see is....buy the hill, too. Its like buying the first house built in a planned subdivision: you shouldnt buy that house without the understanding that more houses are probably going to be built around you.

I think most of us would like a little open land around our houses, rather than being packed together wall to wall. But the only way I see to do that is to buy the land and dont build on it.

The idea about governments for individual sims might be able to help address this problem too.

Avondell

This has been discussed before, and I have expressed my opinions, but I am nothing if not pedantic

You can already do whatever you want on your land, more land management tools were added in the last major release and I suspect more will come in the future.

What you are asking for is for The Government to tell other people to only do things that you like on their land.

If you want to live in an area with certian rules, find a group of like-minded individuals and make it. You have this power. The themed communities currently being built are an example of this. The are Linden sponsored, but the only thing the Lindens did for us was reserve the land.

There is no reason that a group of 5 or 10 or 20 residents couldn't do the same thing, it's only a question of finding the land, and now that we have the ability to sell land, you can, if you want "buy out" people to create your area with your rules.

I agree that this might be surprising to newbies, and maybe this sort of information needs to be conveyed to them somehow.

I don't want to engage in old-fogeyism, nor do I want to discourage people from commenting and contributing, but you see this with every wave of new people, they enter SL and say "wow, this is great, except we need to tighten up this and close off this and etc". Not realizing that all the interesting things an innovation comes from the openness of SL. SL is a totally open world, you can do whatever you want, and this is both exciting and scary.

Wednesday, why such a rude and dismissive post?


Did you even glance at my references? "Order without Law" is about people living next to each other and reaching accomodation WITHOUT government participation.
I never once mentioned The Government. SL currently has rules. I was asserting that they might be improved.

It is not only surprising to new folks, it is infuriating, disappointing and confusing.

Most people would take these new-user comments, and the fact that they recurr, as an indication that there is something that just might be a problem. Dismiss the comments of new users at your community's peril.

From: someone

Not realizing that all the interesting things an innovation comes from the openness of SL.

Openness costs. Discussion of the cost/benefits should not be shut down just becuase you like it that way.

From: someone

SL is a totally open world, you can do whatever you want, and this is both exciting and scary.

Pish Posh! SL is *not* 'totally open', as you assert. There are rules, mechanical and legal. It is completely reasonable for me (or anyone else) to claim that the rules are not as good as they could be.

I think wednesdays main point is that wsnt you want is control, in some way or another, over what people do on their land.

If the mountain/hill is important to you, then buy it so it can't be destroyed.

There have been communities already setup with rules, I think there is one in lusk, lindenberg was one and the new themed communities are all based off this idea. That some people want common things in their building and their neighbors.

Find a group of like minded people and build together, set your own rules for your group.

Exactly, Wednesday!

Let like-minded folks form local HOA's and create areas where they feel comfortable, but please don't impose this practice on all of SL. One player's paradise may be another's hell.

It's struggling with the unexpected, dealing with the wild card, coming up against new challenges that keeps Second Life fresh. If we make it "tame", it's just a fancy dollhouse.

Because we have unprecendented freedom to shape the world, and the next player has the same, game developers don't have to make up "challenges" or "game goals". We have real challenges: "How to cope with Monster Homes", "Immigration Problems and You", "Living In The Outlands Without Getting Shot"....

So we can make up rules to cover every situation that may ever come up, or we can treat them like part of the "game" and let the challenge inspire new creativity.

I don't think it's dismissive to answer newbie comments with practical ways to accomplish their goal. There are in-game controls over the land that you own. Players have the ability to form communities and groups. And there are a few examples of community development in the game already.



Well we already know you don't think much of the minimum age requirement rule.

Oracle, I'm sorry if you found my response rude and dismissive. Sincerly I did not mean it that way, nor was I trying to shut down discussion, I was expressing my opinions on the issues raised.

I'm not going to argue on a point by point baisis, saving this, although you did not use the phrase "The Government" you said:

Which seems to imply that you want more/different codes of conduct imposed on all players. Codes of conduct are inforced by the game's administrators, to writ: the government in SL. Whereas I am in favour of groups of players banding together, making up their own rules and abiding by them.

(edit: upon rereading my original post, I realize that I said things like "you don't..." and "you want..." and "you need to..." and I can see how you would take that as a personal attack, but that is my dialetic style, and I was not saying "you Oracle Omega need to..." I was saying "you the generalized, non-specific person that holds opinion (a) need to...". I appoligize).

OK here is an idea.......come by my maze sometime and turn the simple rendering off in the debug menu.....now if I only bought the land under the maze someone could have bought the retaining walls that encase the maze, and therefore ruin my maze(which takes more work and hours than im able to admit)

BUT instead "I" planned my build with the thought of "ok someone "IS" going to buy the land next to me and ruin my maze in anyway they can......

Ultimatly taking the approach of the defensive in a private preventative manner so as to not in the end get in a pissing match with someone over land and building disputes.

So accurate planning "IS" needed if you plan to have a certain effect of your build....


Like the old saying goes........

"Your lack of planning is not my emergency"

Build smart, plan ahead. This is the internet, there is NO game out there that doesn't have at least one person causing or trying to cause problems....

Also DO NOT push for limits on everyone's freedom because of your own lack of planning, and ultimatly getting the shaft in the end. If you need help planning builds so that no one can damage or ruin it, ask someone who is an established and talented builder. I'm sure there are those who would love to help....


************NOTE****************

"YOU" in this post is a general statement ment to anyone it fits, it is not directed to any one person. Simply because I have seen many instances where one person has been wronged and wanted to make everyone pay for it by asking for global limits...

Now everyone is ganging up on Oracle. I think every post following should say at least one positive thing about Oracle.

Oracle Omega, I like your name and appreciate your attempt to improve the SL experience, even if I disagree with some of your suggestions.

What is it with the attitude? Sure makes one feel welcome. NOT!

You guys win.
Be rude to new people all you like.
I won't bother with this forum anymore.

Cya.
Oracle Omega

Appology accepted. Thank you Wednesday.

The style here is more heated than useful to me, so I'm ducking out the door I came in.

Oracle Omega

Oracle, as of this post, there are 5,783 members in SL. PLEASE don't let the comments of half a dozen ruin your experience.

There is no right or wrong in the discussion, just opinions, and we all know about those.

When you say tour leaving, I hope you mean this thread, not SL. Hang around, it can only get better.


-TK

Folks,

The underage daughter was mentioned in passing. That was not an issue relevant to the post or the points raised in it -- after all, having a favorite hill demolished can happen to someone of any age -- and it is not the job of anyone who has commented here to enforce the age restrictions. Attacking Oracle because of an irrelevant point is rude and childish, and does not at all support the popular notion that the SL community is somehow 'nicer' than your average cliquish, snarky newsgroup. Y'all be nice, y'hear?

To the points that were actually brought up -- I'm still not clear on whether or not the hill was actually owned. If so, there are real problems with management of land-editing permissions that need to be addressed. If not, then user understanding of those permissions is obviously lacking, and it should be stressed that anyone can and in all likelihood *will* come along and change land that isn't owned.

I, too, harbor a deep loathing for the gigantic, empty cubes that spring up everywhere. I would love to live in a community where this was not a problem. However, I am one of a fairly large number of people for whom the themed communities are too restrictive, and the general free-for-all is not nearly restrictive enough. I want to build what I like and let my neighbors do the same, but I want to know and trust those neighbors to take my wishes into account before they compliment my structure and then do everything in their power to obscure the view with gigantic plywood walls in the very same day. (Sorry, guys, the castle's coming along nicely now, but it was pretty irritating before I shifted over my plot.) My brownstone is right next to a Mayan temple, and I'm happy with that. I'm not happy with the giant, hollow bricks everywhere else.

In short, I want a middle ground. Buy out my neighbors? Hah. That suggestion smacks of a surly, isolationist attitude -- "I don't agree with you so I refuse to acknowledge that your problems exist." Buying out the neighbors is not an option -- in theory, it could work. In practice, there is always one belligerent neighbor who will cling to an empty lot out of spite, and for every one of those there are dozens of inactive accounts, or worse, accounts whose owners log in ju-u-ust often enough to avoid outright deletion. What can we do about them?

Proposed solution: set aside somewhat smaller tracts of land, perhaps four or six per grid, for groups' communities. If a group has yea-many members, and enough interest is expressed in a group lot, let 'em at it. That is -- allow members of that group to buy land within that grid, DON'T give everybody permission to modify everybody else's stuff. Love thy neighbors, but don't trust them with the front door key. If the land goes unused after a certain amount of time, or a certain number of members go inactive, the group is at risk for losing the plot -- it's not a licence to do nothing with the land, it's just a more formalized option for, say, the group of friends who all agree that they don't like huge cubes or giant towers, but kind of like the surprises that turn up when you're not holding people to one fairly specific theme.

Obviously, this isn't going to happen overnight, but it would be nice if people like myself (and, I suspect, Oracle) could feel that our needs are even being recognized as distinct from the needs of those who wish to live in a completely themed community, and those who want to buy out that one fairly friendly neighbor to expand an existing construction. As it is, the suggestions are unhelpful at best, downright belligerent at worst. I'm *not* attacking people who like to build giant towers, I merely wish to distance myself from them. I have no problem with them existing, I just wish they would exist way, way over there somewhere. Fair enough?

i like your idea of group communities. not as restrictive as the themed communities already in existence, but enough control to keep things reasonable. four to six groups per sim sounds good, if the lindens can afford the extra servers right now. i think also perhaps allowing these groups to change land-editing settings would be a good idea, if possible. for example, one group might like the idea of towers and palaces on hills and houses in valleys, and want to do away with the 45° restriction entirely. another might want flat, open land with perhaps just a few rolling hills, and increase the restriction to allow only 30° of land adjustment.

just some ideas to elaborate on another idea

Yes I like this idea too. Then the restrictions as a whole can be left out of the main arena of the world. Only for those who wish to be a part of a certain area.

I for one would love a area with massive Roman/Greek builds...

But ofcourse if any of you know me You already know I'm for that type of build anyway.

Maybe it's just me, but I think part of the issue here is courtesy.

Just like RL, if I want to build something that totally dwarfs what my nieghbors have built, then I should have the courtesy to talk to them about it.

Yes, SL is not the "real world" however, if we don't grant the same courtesies to our neighbors here, then it probably says volumes about our personality outside the game.

When I first came into SL, I started looking for coastline land. I had the dream of owning a beachfront property. And I found what I deemed to be a reasonly great little island. As I was busy figuring out how to build my dream house, the person who owned the property connected to the land nearest the island asked very politely if I would consider moving toward the cliff, as they had plans for said land, but needed to wait until the next day (Wednesday) to get the money to finish buying the land. After consideration, and hearing a bit about the plans for the land, I decided to release the land and move a bit further down the coast, as the property they were proposing would "ruin" the dream view I had.

Now, maybe I was being a doormat. However, the person in question was polite about their request and I felt at the time, and still do, made both a reasonable request and did so with courtesy which were the main reasons I chose to release the land.

Could they have made threats such as, "if you dont release the land I'm just goin to build around you!" Or just gone ahead and done that? Sure. But, I'd like to think they understood that, by sharing their dream with someone else and asking them to help accomplish said dream, they would get a lot more cooperation in asking politely than making threats or just doing their own thing and ignoring me as if I were some bug in the way of their road of progress.

As for the flip side of this: planning your build space:

May I make a suggestion to the Lindens to add to the FAQ's about planning your space and how other people's building/terraforming might effect it? In addition, if this could be mentioned in the building classes, since I know I didnt consider this when I built my first structure (eyesore?) By the time I built #2, I had a reasonable idea of planning it, and now, with my third one, I think I've covered most of my bases. However, having a mention of planning your land purchase in the basic (and even advanced) building classes might be a way to make sure that people taking the beginning building classes may gain awareness of something they may not have originally considered.

Raven, I quoted the entire paragraph because I was afraid people would stop reading your post before they got that far. You have two execellent suggestions that everyone should be aware of. I hope the Lindens will follow through on your first suggestion, and I know I will on the next building class I host. I would like to think that people are just so in awe of what they can do, they aren't thinking about the effects of what they do.

Good luck on your 3rd build and see you in World.

-TK

I just wanted to publicly make an apology here....

The monster home was mine that was initially reffered to. I just found out today and I am takin steps to fix the situation.

In my efforts to build my maze I bought a "buffer" zone. Like the zone I mentioned earlier in this thread.

And by doing so and flattening it t the level of my maze as to protect it from people comeing in and building a giant mountain and well messing up the interior of my maze. I in effect ruined someone elses buffer.

The hill was partially owned but not fully enough to protect them from my landscaping of the buffer for the maze.

So in my haste I didn't look first to see if by me buying a pub section and leveling it, if it would hurt someone else's build.

So lessen to learn, just cuz you can doesn't mean you should.

I should have paid more attn to the landscape and builds to see if YES even pub land was used in a particular fassion.

This will continue to be a issue that will get worse till more sims are added. So from my mistake please take note from it and be nice to your neighbors as we are packed in tighter and tighter.

Apology accepted. Thank you for being so neighborly and
setting things right.


This is what I was getting at in my original post. The system doesn't provide the tools to facilitate good neighbors. We have to be lucky enough to be logged in at the same time.

For example, the system could provide an (optional) no-mans-land buffer between lots that would prevent these kinds of issues.

Likewise, tools to contact offline neighbors would be of great help.

[My detractors will note: Never once did I say that anyone should be forced, coerced, or governed to do anything. All I'm asking for is some mutuality.]

Oracle Omega

Well I was kinda hoping for a land of choas. I think Linden should NOT limit much more in building style.
I've read Otherland and there was a virtual environment called the 'Treehouse' (or something like that)
When I read about it, it was a virtual reality world with no rules, and almost total chaos) I really loved the idea. So when I read about Second Life I hoped it would be like that, and it kind of is.
So my OPINION is that they should not make rules about building. I don't have any arguments or anything.. just think it would be really cool.

Charlie:

This is exactly why I moved in next to you and Lynnix. I wanted to be sure I was becoming neighbors with people who had the same kind of "community/neighbor" respect that I have (at least tried to) demonstrate to others.

I bought land in Clara after the mass exodus in The Outlands. I relocated the Dream Weavers headquarters there and carved out another watery area for aesthetic reasons. It costs me an arm, a leg, and a few body attachments every week in taxes, but it's worth it to me, despite the defunct powers of the voting stations...

However, I DID inadvertently purchase land that pushed other landowners into the decision of having to buy more to keep me OUT of their space or to move altogether. Granted, I was not paying close enough attention when I bought the land that butted up to theirs, but in retrospect I did learn something. The next time I buy a quantity of land, I need to check the PURCHASE DATE of the land nearby. I was relying very heavily on the 28-day rule and expected my immediate neighbors with 2 or 3 squares of land (that I would not object to obtaining simply out of virtue of wanting my own land to be more "squared off" becoming available within a few weeks. Sadly, right after I did my initial purchase I met a player whose first day was only a few days prior, and I basically squeezed them out of their home and they decided to relocate. They did not HAVE to and it WAS discussed between us once my error was made.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that yeah - setting up a neighborhood sort of atmosphere is very very sought after, at least from my perspective. Oh, and my original point - Charlie and Lynnix are awesome neighbors, but you can't have them, they're mine!

-Voodoo