Do ad farms have rights too?

i dont sell signs myself. i dont want other people using my signs to advertise land i am not involved with.

My two cents:


If you can advertise with tact, dignity, and style...then go for it! If you have no design ethic or respect for your fellow citizen, you have zero place in this virtual world.

Do you think people walk around Manhattan's China Town and praise the ads and design flare? Heck no...Do you know why? Because it's just plain ugly. But at least a business isn't going to hang a banner across someone else's property...that wouldn't fly.

And if you want to place inappropriate ads on a 16m sector, then I think you deserve a swift boot to your account--because THAT I believe is just plain intolerable.

Exfreakingactly.

You better stop posting, every time you do, you contradict yourself even more. 'I said I do stick to the rules', ' if someone breaks the rules with me, I will do the same'.

You lost your right to have us give a crap about you or your opinion when you became an ad cutter. Ad cutters use SL for their own personal gain and are in essence saying "screw the community". So the price of becoming such a pox on the landscape is that whenever we get a chance, we say "screw you" back. Start beautifying SL instead of destroying it and you will get a lot more openess to your views.

Ah, the non-paying resident
/327/44/196778/1.html#post1589566
has become the final authority of who does and does not have rights within SL when they do something which does not violate the Terms of Service.

As Stylee has chosen to join the ownership portion of the Second Life community and exercise his right to own land and to cultivate it in whatever way he sees fit without violating the Terms of Service I'm sure we can all agree that this will cause a complete breakdown in global civilization and the Earth will go hurtling into the Sun.

According to the Economic Statistics page for June 2007 42,597-residents used Second Life for their own personal gain: They made a profit (oh noes).

Ultimately, ad farmers do beautify Second Life, as they help pay the bills at Linden Lab through their tier fees and account fee payments, which in turn allows our universe to be maintained and expand.

I agree with what you are saying which is exactly why i do give a care about his Stylee's views. By defending his position in these forums he is giving us a view into the ad cutter subculture (if such a thing actually exists) that otherwise doesn't get much public exposure. <insert homily about keeping friends close, etc. here>

QFT

There is a rule above the ToS.

The Golden Rule.

And for those of you who missed learnign this when you were two: "Treat others as you would have them treat you."

Most people think putting an ad on a 16m plot right next to where they build their house/store/park/whatever is rude. To buy a decent sized plot, put up a build of some type WITH an ad there as part of the build is completely different.

Ad farmers are jsut plain rude, so get that in return. And yes, if I was that rude to someone, I'd expect it in return.

~Jessy

NO, as we all know, the TOS is the final authority, not me. But I think the hundreds of USD I put into SL in the past gives me a right to an opinion even though I am not paying tier right now (I am still premium though so am still paying to be here).

You only look at things as they relate to black and white terms of service and not how they actually affect people. Your myopic view is as bad as that of the ad cutter.

I made a profit by adding waterfalls and palm trees to my mainland and selling it for a bit more than I paid. I like my business model better.

Bot runners and ad cutters are lucky to have you. By saying spam ads are beautiful you have forever proved how blind you really are.

But... but... but... you personally gained from that. And that appears to be a problem for you when other people do that using their own techniques.

The Terms of Service is simply a document which we all agreed to when we joined the community. It's sole purpose, along with the Community Standards, is to give us a framework to exist within. When things go wrong in SL, unlike some persons, I don't readjust my foil hat, reach over and grab the nearest sugar packet and shake it about screaming that the whatever appears on the back must now be the one law that binds us all or the Terms of Service would be "SPIDERS SPIDERS SPIDERS!" Instead, I peruse the Terms of Service and the Community Standards.

Okay...

Here you say this:



and now you say this:



Pick one... Or is it simply situational and depends on which cargo cult you're trying to poseur-up a little street cred with?

Elex... It seems that "paying into" Is basically buying lindens and land to him, not the actual membership fee. Which...if you think about it, some people when starting pay a lot "into" the game..

Gosh... and this entire time I thought "I don't put money into SL anymore" meant "I don't put money into SL anymore" and that would include purchasing Linden dollars from the LindeX, paying tier fees, and paying account fees, as that would involve... *sighs and rolls his eyes*... putting money into SL.

I'm wondering...


Would there be a way to create an alpha-style channel blockade for ad blocking?

Imagine how a tree is created in-game. Two alpha channels in an X, so that that your eye is tricked into thinking it's 3D. Now, Imagine if you took a screen shot of the corner of your plot in two different directions (for each side of your X -- or V depending on if you collaborate with a neighbor). Now, you can place these prims up so that when viewed, it tricks the eye into thinking you're seeing through an invisible prim.

Does this make sense?

You have to place the texture from the screen shot onto the prims...like the Predator. You'd have to do a bit of shifting and matching up...but, could this work?

Anyone grasp my madness?

Elex, how does lowering the value of the mainland fit into your "Spam ad farmers are good for the economy" theory? They lower the value of the surrounding land in every sim in which they appear. Land that might have sold now just sits there.

As for your other personal attacks, I'm going to ignore them. It's the only way to make you go away because I've seen from past experience that you thrive on trolling.

Hmmm... that's a pretty good idea. Where were you when I had mainland?

The land that you also don't own... which might also be snapped up by a landbot (oh noes!). Please treat this as a heads-up, if we're suddenly concerned about the value of everyone's land we don't get to later complain that land prices are too high.

The fundamental premise of the thread is that some residents, who have the right to own land (which they paid for), should have their right revoked as what's on the parcel, which violates no portion of the Terms of Service or Community Standards, fails to meet the rather subjective guidelines of some random beholder, who is another resident.

The OP is asking that rights be taken away from other residents soley on the basis of failing to meet a subjective criterium.



The last time I checked the backs of the sugar packets finding someone trapping themselves betwixt contradictory statements doesn't violate the SPIDERS SPIDERS SPIDERS rule.

Nice job evading my question as to how spam which lowers property values is good for the economy.

My statements were not contradictory. I said I was not putting money into SL and I'm not. I did, however, renew my yearly premium membership which is repaid plus $25 USD by my stipend. And I stand by the assertion that putting money into SL in the past gives me the right to give my opinion here now and call myself a paying member. Regardless...

The two things I dislike most about my SL experience are spam ad farmers and landbot runners who take mistakes and don't give them back. Since you side with both of these camps, I dislike you by default. Add to that your constant quoting of a flawed TOS as the final word on every issue, your holier-than-thou pontifications and your poor attempts at humor and I am happy to say you are about to be the only person on my ignore list. Oh noes! Oh yes!!!

Goodbye Elex. May your land in SL be surrounded by the spam that you condone and may your land transaction mistake be taken advantage of by a surly and remorseless landbot.

*puts on ignore list

Neener-neener-neener to everybody. You have all been feeding the troll again. Now look how much it's grown.

Really? I can't tell... someone's head seems to be in the way of the mirror.

Well, I might have said that, except had I done so, I'd have spelled it correctly.

Look, somewhere back there I already said that the micro-barons can rest at ease (or In Peace, for all I care), I'm not gonna "grief" the sacred 1/4096th sim upon which depends their entire fate in Second Life. May the torrential cash-flow from their micro-parcels rain down on their exalted, pointy little heads forevermore.

But yeah, "subjectively," I think a superfund site is not as appealing as old-growth forest. Mirco-barons are free to disagree, but to be convincing, it better be an appeal to the aesthetics of toxic waste, not vapid self-congratulations on having conformed to the rules of the nonce.

My specific statement made no mention of the Second Life economy and was:



This is because they put money into the pocket of Linden Lab which maintains the framework of Second Life.



Gosh, and I totally overlooked the footnote, that wasn't there in your original statement, elaborating on the vagaries of your account status.



Ad farmers are simply cultivating their own parcel in whatever way they see fit.

Landbots simply acquire land that other residents have placed at below market value for sale to anyone.

Pointing out that something does not violate the Terms of Service or Community Standards does not mean the messenger is either embracing or rejecting the thing. It simply means it doesn't violate the rules.



Goodbye SPIDERS SPIDERS SPIDERS

Ah... a spelling error... my evil plan has now failed and I must be banished to the Phantom Zone



The title of your thread specifically posits the question: "Do Ad Farms Have Rights Too?" The discussion seems to revolve around how a group of people who have cultivated their land as they see fit must now have their land rights revoked as they have failed to meet someone else's subjective guidelines.

It's a slippery slope.

For example, there's no way to define what would constitute an advertising violation. Too big? Can't rotate? Can't use certain colors? Can't be an ad at all? Can't be a logo? Simply can't get in your range of vision? Effects land values around it? What if the land isn't selling because of the ugly build already on it? They're making money with the parcel? They're making too much money with the parcel? How much are they making? Can we look in their pocket?

An ad farm would have to violate Section One, Section Five or Section Six of the Community Standards. However, if it hasn't done so then... it hasn't done so.

Glad you see the wisdom in that. If you cite me, try not to make a mess of it.Yes, exactly. We do that all the time in Real Life. All that's lacking here is a stroke of the virtual pen. So, what might be the consequences should we decide to hurry the hand holding that pen, with a little civil disobedience?Not really. One approach: all parcels under, say, 256 sq. m. revert in perpetuity to Governor Linden by eminent domain, compensated with freshly minted L$s at the average L$/sq.m. of the preceding week's land sales. No slope, no slip... easy. (So I have to move a few servers, big deal.)

No prob. Your question is actually malformed. Land, in and of itself, has no rights. The owner of the land has rights regarding it which they may exercise.

When you form a question, try not to make a mess of it.



Your form of "civil disobedience" involves griefing the parcel of another resident whom you feel has violated your own personal standards, but has not violated the rules of the community. At worst you could be Abuse Reported for the actions taken against the parcel, and owner of the parcel, which didn't violate the Community Standards.

If you don't like the logo T-shirt someone else is wearing are you allowed to toss your beverage at them? Should you be able to deport them? Maybe something in between like setting them on fire.



People would simply create ad farms larger than 256-sq.meters. A change in minimum parcel size will not correct the issue.