RFC : Tenant tab on the About Land box

This is an idea that I will put up as a feature request if it gets at a least a little support, and not too much flack, on this forum:

Proposal: Add a "Tenant" tab to the "About Land" dialog box. It would look almost exactly like the "Ban" tab, and the owner would add and remove names from it using the same mechanism.

Persons named in the "Tenant" box would have the following privileges:

1. They could set a point on the land as "home".
2. Their objects would be immune from the autoreturn feature, if it is enabled.
3. Their radios and video monitors could change the URLs on the Media tab.

Discussion:

This feature would eliminate the most important reasons why a land owner might maintain a group for tenants to join. Group membership for tenants to enable these features is a sort of hack, and brings with it a lot of undesirable features, such as tenants getting charged for group expenses, and tenants getting a share of the proceeds of a land sale.

I like it!

Nice! Great idea!

I think its a great idea! why didn't anyone say this before?

Fifthed.

Absolutely. Add this to the proposal system. I'll throw a couple votes your way.

Good idear

Anything to eliminate the need to join a group, and the spam that comes with it, for simply being a merchant or renter.

Ditto

I always knew you were a smart fella'. I'd vote for that.

Count me in.

Thanks to all for your support.

I have started Proposition 1313, "Tenant tab on the About Land box. Go there and vote.

Call me a noob...but i dont see it anywhere. Its on the forums right?

my vote too

Sco: go to http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=1313

I put a couple of my votes toward this, too. Nice idea.

I liked it so much withdrew all 10 votes from other proposals and put em on this one - waits patiently for a note from Torley saying shes dropping a copy on phils desk

1313 (nice number) has already grown fast--let's see who else wants something like this too. Always exciting to see leveraged support in the community.

Sorry, if I have missed something important, but, if I want a certain group of people to have build access to my land, what is so bad with having a GROUP for them? Why clutter the user interface of the client with yet another functionality if 90% of that functionality is already present in the group functions?

... as soon as Linden Lab makes room for a larger number of groups, which has been promised already.

Proposal 1313 does not grant build-access to anybody. It allows a landowner to grant three privileges to non-owners of a plot of land : (1) mark a point on the land as 'home', (2) protect objects from autoreturn, (3) modify audio and video URLs.

Of course, all three of these privileges can be granted using groups. But, requiring a person to become a member of a group brings with it at least two problems : (1) members of the group will be charged for group expenses for which they receive no benefit (such as making a piece of land owned by the group visible in 'find'), and with the removal of dwell payments they won't receive any share of dwell payments, which might have offset the charges, (2) since all members of a group receive a share of group earnings, an owner must jump through hoops to get the full purchase price of any group-owned land he or she decides to sell.

I plopped 3 votes in there and one of my partners put in 10 going to spread the word to not only my partners but also my tenants!

Also, I put a link to the vote in my siggy... if anyone else want's to do the same here is the tiny url I made to link to the vote page:

http://tinyurl.com/jsy3f

All these issues have been discussed at length with the renovation of the group tools. There is a whole subforum dedicated to this discussion here. Please have a look. There are simple and logical solutions to all of these issues.

It makes much more sense to fix the group tools than add "just another cranky handle" to the Second Life user interface.

Here's a better idea. Add an option to the group:

[X] Restrict group finances to officers.

With this checked, only group officers are charged for group expenses and recieve group income.

This would be so useful in so many other ways, and would provide the functionality you want as well.

except it won't provide auto return protection... people will still have to set their items to group and so many tenats (while they understand that it has to be that way) don't like using auto return.

If it wasn't for the 10% increased holding I'd have all my personal land outside of my groups just so I wouldn't have to remember what group I had active.

My votes are still goin for outside of the group tenant support

edited to add: but having the restrict finances to officers would be handy too so I want BOTH