Linden's Object Modification Policy

I have recently had an object of mine modified, without my permission, by two different Lindens at different Times. I have been told that this is against policy. I have discussed the problem with one of the Lindens and he appologized, but I want to make a public request that all Lindens adhere to the policy of not modifying other users' objects unless there is some sort of community standards violation, or an object is adversely affecting server performance. To my knowledge there are no other situations which warrant modifying other peoples objects.

Thanks,
Pat Murphy

Unless it's a really ugly lookin' giant pink flamingo. Hehe..

(just kidding)

what was it if you dont mind me asking ?

A scripted object I was working on. It wasn't defaced, but the first time it was left with public copy/move/edit permissions on, and the second time it was set physical and vanished from the world.

I was the first Linden to modify it.

Yes this is against the policy. User created content belongs to the user.

In this case I broke with the policy because:

(a) Josh Starseeker was on hand at the time and I thought he was a full partner in the project.

(b) I really wanted to be helpful by trying a different script approach to see whether it would improve things.

Unfortunately I did leave it in the permissive state, and am very sorry about that.

Also, I did not ask Josh's permission to modify the object, although I'm pretty sure I told him what I was doing. He probably was not aware of the changes of permission that were necessary in order for me to edit it. So, this breach was also my fault, and I apologize again.

I will try harder to abide by the policy from now on. Also, I'll direct the attention of the other Linden's to this thread so they can learn from these mistakes.

Finally, this is partially a technical bug, since we Lindens currently only have the ability to make things more permissive, not less; I was unable to back out of the permissions changes.

I understand the confusion, and thank you for your response andrew. I'm sorry I didn't have the chance to talk to you personally before posting.
-Pat Murphy

Just a couple points of clarification...

It's our policy not to change users' content unless

1) it violates our community standards. For example, we have deleted textures in PG sims which don't meet the PG standard;

2) it's causing simulator-style cardiac arrest, which some scripts have been known to do.

This brings up another point that was rasied by a few residents a while ago...

Ownership.
Technically, under the TOS which everyone agrees to, all content in Second Life is owned by Linden Lab. In theory, we can edit all content at will, but in all practicality, we don't and do not intend to. Honestly, you make great creations, and we don't see any reason to edit them unless they fall under one of the two conditions listed above. Make sense?

I appreciate the need to have absolute final control over the state of the game and things in it. However, if Lindenlabs decides to exercise this final authority, in addition to the mail that gets sent, maybe a copy of the original object could be preserved and held for a RL week. This way if the owner says, "that's just bunk the item didn't at all look like that and/or the script was not that annoying/loud etc.", a liason can produce the object in a quiet corner and point out the issue and why x-y modifications were made; not as an appeal, but as a well-defined courtesy to players. Perhaps screenshots of the item if it's not practically copy-able (like a multi part flaming glowing tower or something).

I'd add that it's my bet Lindenlabs would only invoke the TOS position reluctantly and in extreme cases.

What the hell? We have no real rights here. All objects could be deleted and we are not within our rights to say anything about it and expect satisfaction. Maybe it would be better if people just realized that this is a test, not a product yet.
No tester owns his/her intellectual property in SL. It was signed away with the TOS. If people are going to impose rules and imaginary rights where they don't exist, well, they might end up being disappointed. I am not saying that people shouldn't be upset when their work gets altered, but those of us who actually read the agreement knew this was a possibility coming in.
The Lindens have been more than fair about respecting users' work. Perhaps it is time to respect them instead of telling them how to do their jobs?

I agree 500%

Xavier

Nicole, "what the hell?"

I am not "telling them [the Lindens] how to do their jobs." My post was simply a request. It is not official Linden policy to arbitrarily alter users, or I should say testers, objects, and it would be best if that policy was followed.

I understand that everything is owned by Linden, and they can do whatever they want. But after having 2 bad experiences with Lindens altering my objects, even though their intentions were good, I felt it was important to push for a clearly established policy.

This is for everybodies good, users and Lindens, i'm not trying to be bossy. I just think that going by policy on this one will prevent unfortunate accidents, and unhappy alterations.
I'm just trying to help. There is no need to get angry.

Both the Lindens involved and I have not gotten upset at all over this, nobody is pointing fingers or calling names, we just want to come to a general understanding. So there is no need for you to get upset.

-Pat Murphy

Consider this: we are beta testers, true. I guess part of our "job" is to come up with ideas, think about them to make sure they may actually have some value and haven't been discussed/laid to rest, and submit them to the Lindenlabs via the boards, email, or in game. Discusson of policy or how Lindenlabs will deal with issues--and suggestions to modify those policies--is interesting conversation. If they were just looking for load testers to spawn objects I'm sure they could automate that.

While we have no legal "right" to content, a game needs to attract players, which means that a level of "reasonable expectation" needs to be set. It's reasonable to expect (and ask) that Lindenlabs will have a well defined process for something like modifying an object, and that players understand it--and find it reasonable. If I thought that there was a distinct possibility that my objects could be modified with no explanation other than a cut 'n paste of policy under "you have no rights", that attitude would turn me (and others) off to a game that needs to attract players to stay alive.

We is just learnin' is all.