Ban Lines visible to those who put them up

Perhaps land access ban lines should be visible to those who put them up.

Wouldn't stop my land bans being up.

Excellent idea - propose it and I will vote for it. I know it won't stop some - but seeing them glaring in all the time (preferably neon - glowing and flashing) might remind them - they are all alone - through their own (mis)judgement.

And (as I've seen suggested) perhaps they have just forgotten they put them there when they were fresh and new and wanted to see what all the buttons did.

(perhaps we could activate them so they can't get out..............) Sorry Banking not you - of course...

I think you missed the point. The point is some people put them up temporarily, as do I often. Unfortunately we sometimes forget to remove them. I'd prefer to be able to see some indicator of the presence of my own ban lines on the occasion when I do put them up.

So..how about having them default to being visible to the parcel owner but with the option to hide your own ban lines?

Perhaps have them default to visible to the owner with an option to hide them. I wish mine were visible on the occasions when I turn them on. But if they were to be permanent, then I'd want them hidden.

Or visible when your av is outside the boundaries, invisible when it is inside.

That defeats the purpose. They are visible to the neighbors when the neighbors don't want to see them, if they are close to the property line, why not make it equitable by having them be equally visible to the person who put them up when they don't want to see them?

This is a suggestion born of being in an area with a lot of ban lines protecting empty land.

Having the ban lines visible to those who put them up wherever they are visible to people who are banned seems sort of fair, in a mean spirited way.

It depends what the purpose is. If the purpose is to let others know what their plot looks like, then (unless they spend all of their time on their plot and never go anywhere else) they will see it.

I think there is more mileage in reminding people that they have ban lines they may not know about, than in forcing them to see what others see.

Ban lines are a curse - so why make it easy on those who feel they need them - by all means they can have them - but letting the perpertrator NOT see them while the rest of us suffer adds insult to injury.

Don't want to (re)light a firework but SuezanneC just what IS a "cone of context" [ducks quickly]

Seifert, did you mean visible to them all the time they are outside their property, no matter how far away they are?

If you meant that it should be visible to them when they near it, just like it is for other people, why not make it be on either side of the ban line so they experience the same reduction in usefulness of land near the property line that they cause others to experience?

Those who put up ban lines cause an effect that occurs outside of their property line, reducing the enjoyment of people who aren't even touching the property line.

The purpose is not simply to remind those who've forgotten, it is to create a situation of equity with regard to the effects of ban lines on those who impose them and those who own land next to them.

You aren't suffering by not being allowed on my land. Quit with the persecution complex.

Since you hate the ban lines, why don't you suggest an alternative that will keep greifers off our land?

That is absolutely fine. That is your prerogative. By and large though, not everybody uses ban lines for the same reasons and by extending the metaphor so that everybody sees the same thing, it would not only grant visual equality, but reduce the prevalence of ban-lines that exist for territorial reasons alone.

[sarcasm]Maybe if an avatar was forced to urinate all over their parcel every x minutes after enabling ban-lines that would help too.[/sarcasm]

Why do you require an alternative? I take it you like ban lines? Great! Now you will get the same view of them as your neighbours.

I don't have a problem with this.



And if you were forced to urinate all over your parcel every x minutes without bans lines, this would make this, as you said yourself, visually equitable.

Or perhaps just when you cry persecution over not being allowed to fly over land you have no right of travel on. On a side note, you're now on my lands explicit ban list. Forget 200 meters. 768. Suck it up.

Hint: That comment wasn't entirely serious. Nor was it aimed at anyone. Try not to be so sensitive.
I did that?
Sheesh. Did some guy name Raven unfurl a scroll of static in front of your face recently? Take the goggles off. Go for a walk. I neither have the time for forum drama nor the inclination to trawl 4000 sims just to look for another irrelevant parcel with ban lines.

Nice day Sir.

Apologies if my little end-note humour offended you Sir. It certainly wasn't personal. I don't recall crying persecution over anything in Second Life and I ain't a frequent flyer TBH. Regardless, I thank-you for gracing me with a land ban, and should I one day get to spend as much time in Second Life as some, who knows, maybe I'll stumble across your desirable parcel(s) amongst the approx. 4000 sims that make up Second Life...and feel suitably rebuffed.

Have a great day!

Property rights in-game and in the real world are a fiction that we have invented because fighting all who might tresspass on "your" land is a time consuming pain in the ass.

In the real world, we've agreed to accept the fictional "right" because trespass can affirmatively diminsh the value of your land. At the time these agreements were made, the value was typically grazing rights or water rights or farming rights.

In SL the only diminshment another party can effect on "your" land is merely being there. If you think ban lines provide privacy or security, you're mistaken.

When my plane gets returned because I flew over it at 3000 meters and the sim hiccupped on me, I'm suffering. And I have no way of avoiding it and no way of knowing I'm over your land and you have no reason to complain about my presence.

Even if all the rest of your elitist claptrap that makes me feel *dirty* for being a fellow landowner was valid, until this bug is fixed you're like a private property owner in some anarchist dystopia smug in his right to keep anti-aircraft guns on his property.
Indeed. I'm tempted to write a script to make it totally obvious just how pointless ban-lines are, just to drive the point home. If Mr Reser... I mean Mr Laws wants privacy, he needs to tell Linden Labs that instead of pretending that he's already got it.

I've passed on land with too much ban fencing around. It DOES happen.

shrugs

Theres an entire 16k or something next door with ban lines up, and I dont complain, and Argent, thats a SIM issue not ban lines, so take your own advice and talk to LL, not me.

On SL I do have the right to keep anti aircraft guns if I want, and set my land to damage.

Flight rights are an in game fantasy invtented by players, I don't have to let you on my land. If you think you have the right to be there, you're mistaken.

It's not ala carte. You put up ban lines knowing the effect they have, you take responsibility for all the results of that choice. One of the consequences is trashed airplanes. The security and privacy you're trying to get, though, isnt in there.

Boy, you're really sounding more like a doctrinaire libertarian whacko every time you post.

Land rights are an in-game fantasy created by Linden Labs. Flight right-of-way is an in-game fantasy ALSO invented by Linden Labs: Lindens have posted that there is a right of way over 768 meters. The only difference between these two rights is the enforcement mechanism. One is enforced by ban lines (and so badly enforced that it's hard for me to comprehend why you're bothering to defend them, rather than demanding real privacy), the other by the building limit.

With the hiope of privacy blocks there will be less security orbs that high. Hopefully.

Ban lines don't hit you at 3k meters. Its a sim issue.

As long as the guns don't shoot off my land (sensor guns, for instance) then theres no issue. Besides if you're flyign at 3k..whats gonna hit you? Whats gonna be in sensor range?