New Proposal for Restricted Space exemption for boats

What if the build works with the theme of your plot? I'm sorry, but I don't see how it's being a bad neighbor.

Well, using words like "selfish" certainly sounds like you blame them. I wasn't aware that SL was open for YOU to use as you see fit and if someone gets in your way, even if they've paid for the privilege to do so, is selfish. I missed that memo, too. I didn't know that we were all paying good, real money for your passage. Someone really should have told me about that before I bought land.

There are no public waterways? Really?
In addition, are you saying that it was wrong to offer people property with water on it? That they shouldn't have offered that as an option? You seriously think that waterfront property should never have been put up for sale?

Ridiculous.


Again, are you saying that there are no public waterways? That Linden Labs didn't leave at least SOME water for public use? Really? I could have sworn I saw some.

If the build obstructs a waterway from being functional and thus cant be used, how is that being a good neighbor? If your 'theme' is 'nice house with a navigation choking dock and ban machine' then I guess it works for you, but not your little boat riding neighbors.

I blame LL for this lack of foresight. Being selfish is a state of being. Its a free country, be selfish and have disregard for your neighbors if it pleases you. But where I come from it is not an admirable trait. But thats a moot point, this has nothing to do with the guy whos willing to blockade a river, this has to do with LL enabling them to do so by poorely planning the land distribution system.
Traditionally waterways are a public transportation network. Somewhere along the line LL decided that public access down rivers wasnt a priority in their infrustructure design and allowed waterfront land to extend on either riverbank to the point where somebodys 'ban device' or 'oversize house on a dock' could prevent passage down said river. Ive owned waterfront land, I suppose I could have installed some river choking build, but didnt. I build in harmony with my surroundings, I dont build to the detriment of it or the safe passage by the community. But hey, thats just me. I tend to be a nice guy who believes in working with the community, not against it. Do I expect everyone to be as cooperative as I am? Nope. Ive been around long enough to know that some people just dont give a damn. LL should have realised this and planned accordingly.


Interesting interpretation of what I said. There are public waterways, and for those who are into recreational boating, you can find some lake somewhere to ride around in circles. But for the person using the waterways (lets clarify the term to mean 'roads made of water') who would like to use these waterways to sightsee or whatever from one end of the continent to the other, naval blockades by waterfront landowners impedes this form of travel. Its not that waterfront property should not have been sold, its that there should have been a buffer zone installed, a river channel so to speak, so that owners who dont care about travel access to the public cant shut down the waterway. Im sorry Ive gotten you all excited and defensive over this. Nothing personal.

no, let's clarify further: "private roads made of water that run over private property".

Private. Property.

Actually its 'Roads made of water that run 'between' private property.'
I figured out your adament 'private property owners can do whatever they want with the property they paid hard earned dollars for and ect ect ect' stance several posts ago. Further emphathis of this stance is unnecessary. If you understood any of my posts you would notice I already accepted that concept and realise that some property owners dont care that their actions negatively impact the community at large. That is not the point, the point is that LL allowed the waterways to be obstructed by not allowing a large enough 'free passage' zone between these private properties. Perhaps in the future of designing new mainland sims, LL will take this factor into consideration. You cant make people play nice with others, you cant ask people to not block waterways with their PRIVATE LAND builds, but you can point out to LL that some things need to be addressed.
Public travel, and the enjoyment factor inherent to this, should not be diminished because of sloppy infrastructure design, tho it often is.

ok.. whatever

Well obviously it's not the owners fault its Lindens for not building decent accessway of Linden land. If it's private land they can terraform it above water level if they like, because it's their land.
Just because my neighbour has a small lake doesn't meant you have a right to use it with your boat.
I don't have to provide roadway on the front of my land for cars & pedestrians.

I agree there's not enough water about and the main reason is it's a waste, private owners aren't going pay $300USD per month to maintain a whole sim of water for boat users who won't pay to use it.
Linden Labs need to start upgrading older servers and using the older ones for making water sims where they will be lightly used and loaded, there should be a sim of empty water around each continent and linking between continets really.

It's not about "so and so owns a whole lake," as far as I can tell. It's "so and so owns a section of what on either side is Linden Protected Water."

Next time my land is over water, consider pay access on. You can be on my water for 5 minutes (or less depending on how much time to 'just pass through' and size of property) for a mere 100L.

Great idea, and one that should have been implemented in the first place.

If you have nice scenic boating area and are renting for access, 100L for a decent period of time may be worth it. 100L for five minutes? Well, it better be reeeeal nice lol. Thats a whole day of sitting in a camping chair to pay for that! For a simple 'pass through' toll I would expect something more realistic like maybe 10L. One boater paying 10L would keep the property owner out of a camping chair for an hour Much better to pay a toll than have to yank your boat out of the water and drop it back in on the other side.



Correct. If he makes his own lake, its his lake. Hell, he can charge 100L for an hour of boating access if he wants to. In fact, he can even rent out his own boats. Seen a jetski vendor somewhere that rezzes rental skis. Good idea. This thread has nothing to do with private waterways. This has to do with Linden waterways that are impeded by shoreline builds who's reach, via whatever means, results in an obstruction to safe passage.

But... but... you said you'd be happy to pay the toll. That's the price Banking wants for access to his land. Now you want to not only force him to open his land up, but you want to set the price for it?

I don't THINK so, mon ami.

100l for five minutes or no access whatsoever. Your choice.

I don't use camping chairs, and don't want you on my land to begin with - if you don't want to pay 100l, then don't. You just can't pass, but you had the option.

Much better to pay a toll? The toll is 100l. Suffer.

Suffer?? And an ' I DONT THINK SO'?? My my, what negativity. Sounds downright nasty in spirit. Are you both the same person? True, I can choose to pay his overpriced toll, or I can pull the boat out of the water and start over on the other side. Fair enough, thats the nature of business. But you wont get any brownie points for being a positive member of the Secondlife community by telling folks to get stuffed. In fact, your reputation might even suffer because of it. You remember those who were helpful, and those who were not. Such things can cost you business in your other endeavors.
Instead of a 'suffer' and an 'I dont think so', I would say, lets haggle over the price as men have done for thousands of years and come up with something mutually beneficial.
Thats cooperation for the good of all. As Spock would say, " The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." We all share this experience, and by working together we can make this a better place to enjoy our leisure time. If you dont agree with this assessment, and your determined to be a reclusive stick in the mud who doesnt care about the group experience, then thats your loss. The rest of us can work it out without you. I know, your entire arguement is ITS YOUR LAND, ITS YOUR LAND. You guys sound like a broken record, and you add nothing to the discussion. Je vous souhaite bien

No more nasty than your irrational and outlandish demands.
Nope. I know this might be hard to believe, but people can agree with each other and not be the same person.So, someone acceded to your demands and you're still not happy? According to you. According to me? You don't get "brownie points for being a positive member of the Secondlife community" by imposing your views on people and making demands. Namecalling and outright attacks, like the ones below don't help either. Read above. Same applies here.

So, first you demand that landowners charge, then, when one offers to, you demand that they change their price, now you're demanding that they negotiate? Do you do that in a restaurant? "I don't think this burger is worth $2. How 'bout I give you 75 cents?"
OR, you could enjoy your leisure time in your own plot or on public land and Banking can enjoy his on his land. And here we go with the namecalling. Actually, the only loss in this situation is a loss to the landowner. You lot who want to force this have nothing to lose.
And your entire argument is "You're a big selfish jerk for not letting me on your land an' no-one's gonna like you"
I love how you denounce us for not adding to the conversation when you've added nothing yourself.
YOU'RE the one demanding change, for no other reason than it's something you THINK should happen. You call us selfish, but your demands are selfish, insisting that landowners are doing something wrong when they are completely within their rights (as laid out by the deal we have with LL yadda yadda).

Finally, what you are demanding isn't a NEED, it's a WANT, thus rendering the Spock quote moot.

In a "mutual benefit" situation, one assume that each party pull an interest from the deal, the way i see the situation , you want something for nothing in return. Can you argument what you can possibly offer in exchange for getting this pass right you seems to want to impose to the land owner?

Nobody has to be nice with everyone.
It would make a nicer world, for sure, but it isn't mandatory.

??? Irrational and outlandish?

Based it on your similar writing styles and attitude.
Nothing says I have to agree to the first offer, we call this negotiations. Whos imposing? Im suggesting. Namecalling and outright attacks? This is me being polite.


Havent demanded a thing. Do you know what the word 'demands' means?

No loss in a mutually beneficial agreement. And if 'stick in the mud' qualifies as namecalling, if the shoe fits as they say. Ive been called worse for less.

Thats what you got out of all that? Then I wasted my time.

Read above. Same applies here.

You read between the lines where there is nothing there to read. You come across as feeling attacked. You were not. Relax, have a glass of warm milk. I speak of working together, your standing on your wall with a gattling gun defending yourself from nothing.
Save your ammo, its your land.


Spock still applies.

I offered to pay for passage, being paid is a plus. I get to pass, he makes a profit. Hense mutually beneficial. I impose nothing.

Yep. That's what they are.The only thing similar is the attitude. Our writing styles are not similar. Look at spelling, sentence structure etc. I've only agreed with him on the loss of rights. I don't agree with him on security orbs or putting up banlines. Look a little closer.
YOU are imposing. And attacking and namecalling.
Yep. Do you?
How is it mutually beneficial? As far as I can see it, it only benefits you.

No, you just haven't really said anything but "You're a bad person if you disagree with me".

No, I didn't. I quoted. I pointed to the attacks and the namecalling. You do NOT speak of working together, you speak of having everything on YOUR terms, with no concession for anything else. And what I'm standing on the wall with my GATLING gun (capital G. Named after Richard J. Gatling. There's no such verb as "gattle".) defending myself from is an attempt to take away my Linden given right to stop people from coming onto my land. I do not use this right, but I do feel it is just plain wrong to try to take it away.
How does "The NEEDS of the many outweigh the NEEDS of the few" (emphasis mine) apply to your WANTS? There is a difference between needs and wants.

You offered, he told you the price. You didn't like the price and refused, then changed the argument to, basically, "I offered to pay for passage, but only the amount I want to pay, not how much it costs." That's not mutually beneficial.
He's given you a choice, which is what you wanted, but you don't like the choice.
What now?

Also, why does he have to negotiate? He named his price. He's under no obligation to change it or negotiate. That's how much access is worth. It's not your place to tell him how much it's worth, it's his job as the supplier.

Insofar as the server implements the "laws of physics" of SL and no amount of customer complaints over the years have swayed LL at all, just accept that "god" doesn't want you to fly, boat, swim, or explore.

After all, they don't get much revenue from players merely enjoying their virtual world, so go out and shop and be happy, damnit.

Mickey, just seems like Im pissing you off for no good reason. Misreading my intent from the get go. Youve been reduced to giving google history lessons on gatling guns. I fully expect to hear an " I know you are but what am I?" Seems personal now, and all Im beginning to hear is that Charlie Brown schoolteacher voice going " WAH WAH WAHH, WAH WAAH". Sooo, I abandon this thread and will let you get in the last word. Maybe you will sleep better tonite
I leave with the post Ive felt sums it all up nicely. Words of wisdom from someone who knows exactly where I'm coming from.

So it's still Lindens fault for setting the landscape like that then selling the chunk in the middle, "oh here's a 2000m block of land at $18/m, but you're not allowed to use or terraform half of it because it blocks the river off."

Lol, good luck you caound make a whole water sim and you'de be lucky if you could get the stingy tight arsed population to even fork out $10 to to use it.

You can call names all you want but I still don't have to negotiate. If you think I care about the general opinion of SL, well, obviously you haven't paid attention to most of my posts.

Price won't drop, but it might go up if you keep whining.

This kinda got lost in all the disagreements in the thread.

But man, it's the BEST DAMN IDEA I've seen since starting to read these forums.

(Can you tell I love to sail in SL too? It's my second favourite thing in the game.)