Crime and punishment

In the real world, punishments are generally proportional to the crime. However not so with Linden Lab.

A simple read of the police blotter shows people doing major crime - under age on main grid, crashing grid through self replicating object attacks, password theft etc, recieving perhaps at most a 14 day suspension - which we all know is easily defeated by simply creating a new free account.

However, a number of people have been given 'bans for life' from posting on the forum or blog, with little to no proof of the alleged 'crime', absolutely no way to appeal (or at least no way that works), essentially forever.

Surely crashing the grid is far, far more 'wrong' than getting drawn into an argument with someone on the forum? There is much inconsistency regarding enforcement of the loosely interpretable rules anyway

I am just curious how the policy is defined regarding removal of posting rights (yes it is a right, not a privilege, especially those of us who pay) seeming to be a 'ban for life' when much greater, much more serious crimes are being committed and ignored, or seemingly even rewarded.

Amongst certain sections of youth here in the UK, getting an ASBO (Anti Social Behaviour Order) from the police is seen as a badge of honour, and I can cetainly see evidence of this on the police blotter given some of the ridiculously light sentences handed out, and the ability to make a new account and be back within minutes.

Permanent removal of posting rights is the SL equivalent of the death sentence. I would dearly love to know why these are handed out so freely when surely a much fairer system would be for any removal of rights to be for a specific time period rather than open-ended.

In UK criminal law, many crimes are regarded as 'spent' after certain periods of time, and are no longer counted towards an individual's good standing. What LL does is the equivalent of branding an individual a 'dangerous criminal' (and thus affecting their job prospects, credit rating etc) for life when all they actually did was steal a packet of sweets from the corner shop when they were 12.

I know you cannot discuss 'specific examples' on the forums but I am usually available in-world; however I am talking about the general principle here of an overzealous enforcement of rules, which perhaps is more of a serious problem than Lindens realise - being a well known, respected member of the community requires active participation on the forums too, and having that taken away for little or no reason can be seriously damaging to your Second Life experience.

Recent actions by the Lab are actually sending me closer to hitting the 'cancel' button, and although I am quite sure there would be a week long party at LL should that happen, surely retention of customers (especially the paying ones) should be a number one priority.

Lewis

Hi Lewis - as I told you when we were chatting inworld, we never throw a party when someone leaves. And truly, we'd be sorry to see you go.

The guidelines point out that a permanent ban from the forums mean a similar ban from Second Life.

"This means if you are suspended or banned in-world you are also suspended or banned from the forums, and vice versa, if your account is suspended or banned from the SL Forums, it will also be suspended or banned from in-world. Violations are evaluated on a case-by-case basis depending on the severity of the offense and past history of violations. "

Both inworld and on the forums we make our discipline decisions based on both the severity of the offense and the frequency of offense. You may be seeing a warning on the police blotter for someone who has no prior problems. When you see a ban, on the police blotter or on the forums, it's after repeated warnings for the same problem. For that reason it's hard to draw conclusions about consistency -- you just don't have all the facts to be able to understand the decision that was made at the time.