Should people with abillity to "ban" from land have restrictions/rules?

The difference is that in real life you can *recognise* what's a house and what is a club or museum or conference hall etc. When flying, or even walking, through a sim in SL it's really very often impossible to tell which minimalist glass box is a home and which isn't.

Not unlike existence anywhere within the other million million parallel universes, both physical and virtual, over which we have domain to travel, having ownership of a door with a lock entitles you to choose who gets they keys. If you want access to something, that depends upon maintaining a positive relationship with those who own the locks.

I don't think I know three people in all of Second Life, over the months that I have been here, that was ever banned from two lots owned by different accounts, at the same time.

Second Life is free access, but it is also free choice...if you practice good citizenship, nobody selects a priori who gets in or not by pulling up your profile and banning you before you get there, without darn good reason, nor do they care much who else has banned you, for that matter. What DOES make a difference is whether you respect other people and their space...you almost certainly will only be banned by someone after they've had the opportunity to meet you...unless a bad reputation precedes you...and do not underestimate the power of people to talk to each other...and frankly, if someone has diminished the quality of my friend's SL, then I am likely to believe them when they say that same person will bother me, too...and...refer back to the first paragraph.

If you get bad treatment from a business, then the obvious conclusion...you didn't want to do business there, anyway.

First impressions are even more vital in Second Life, via the behavior of your avatar, than in RL, because ALL that we have upon which to judge our safety is your behavior.

I'd suggest a slightly more moderate approach to landowners, should you want access to enjoy the fruits of their labor and spending, which will go a long way.

For my edification, is there ANYONE out there who knows how what has been described here is even possible? I have tried everything I know, and I cannot see anywhere in the range of avatar/UI controls I possess the option to view "ban-data" on any avatar, for any land which I cannot access by About Land> ???

I don't know of any possible way to view 'ban-data'. Not only that, but it would be quite the hassle to look-up ban data (if available) on every visitor.

There ARE myriads of groups that share information among themselves...especially in RP or Entertainment communities. These communities will try to pre-warn their group members of grief attacks.

In my experience in owning land, moderating sims, and speaking with many people who run stores, clubs, and rp-areas...banning is something that people take seriously and --as a general group-- do not hand out randomly.

Things that WILL get you banned quickly:

1--Using 'disallowed' items in an area.
2--Using gestures
3--Appearing 'out of environment' in RP-sims (often this means furries, other times it means Jedi in midieval sims, and still others children in any RP sim, etc.)

I suggest very seriously that people:
1--Read any posted rules
2--NEVER engage in talk that could be considered offensive
3--Realize that some places will not let you have "your world, your imagination" because those areas are built and paid for by them to be "their world, their imagination...and we invite you to join it under x,y,z rules"

I think people should be abel to ban you when they want to-

But to support this there has to be two conditions

A 3rd Party Ban Group system should not exist - No one should be able to get you mass banned from lots of places on a whim.

Linden Labs would have to abandon their plan to investigate people who have been banned by a lot of parcels.

If a Ban Link system and ban related LL investigations exist - then you need to limit how people ban other residents. Becuase then land owners are hurting banees ability to travel Second Life, and potentially disrupting their account access with a simple "eject and Ban"

Im surprized how few people seem to be interested in Residents Rights to their Account and to use their account.

And at the same time their are so blood-thirsty when it comes to banning griefers.

This is a formula that leads to disaster - in which innocent people could and will lose access to their account.

For our newer friends, the Golden Resource for accessing rules for any lot you are about to tread across, swim across or fly over...if they have restrictive rules, but wish to permit you access anyway, they will tell you how to get along...

1. cursor over the land, and right click
2. select and left-click About Land on the pie menu
3. A window opens, find and click on the Covenant tab
4. Read it, heed it
5. If you don't like the rules, don't enter...folks aren't kidding
6. Enjoy the opportunity, Respect Their Wishes

Additionally, look for Notecard/Info Vendors at entrances. If the Land has complicated rules, such as one finds in the Gor sims, the combat sims, and the Roleplay sims, they will typically have a process you need to adhere to when you pop in as a visitor/observer/tourist...do what the card asks, wear what they ask you to wear, don't go where they ask you not to go...

Finally, if you find yourself banned, and cannot figure out why, or wish to have your case reconsidered, pull up the group/owner profile, get the name of the owner, and send a courteous IM to them. In many/most cases, after some consideration and demostrated lack of animosity on your part, you are likely to be readmitted, depending on severity of the circumstances.

Hope our advice helps!

I got banned this morning around 5:15 am just because I happened to have the name of another Ashley that was causing problems with ***** from Love Bugg. I wanted to prove I was not the same Ashley she thought I was and Jennifer banned me anyway. I personally think she abused her power because she did not give me a chance to provve I was not Ashley ****. So yes I think they should have restrictions.

Actually correction on the time...it was 3:30 am or 12:30am SL time when I was banned.5/15 is the date.

You're not supposed to post names here.

I don't get why people think there should be restrictions on bans. People rent that space, they can ban who they want. They can ban everybody if they want.
LL is a service provider. When I rent servers from my suppliers, I wouldn't stand for them telling me who I can and can't ban from accessing my sites. My ISP would be told where to stick it if I was not allowed to run my own firewall. Service providers provide services to paying customers, without dictating that those paid for services must be shared with the rest of the world.
So what you've been banned. Get over it and go somewhere else.

there should be no restrictions -

Provided that:

One ban doesnt involve you getting banned by a huge chunk of the community (ban link)

Bans dont result in you gettting investigated by Linden Labs.


----------------
SOMETHING has to give
- either -
-owners ability to ban
-OR-
-Banlink systems ability to black list and
-Linden investigations based on number of bans.

Nothing wrong with banlink. When someone is being a turd on my site, they find themselves banned from about 75% of the niche my site belongs to. If they are doing it on sites I staff at, they are banned at my site. People will always share information like this.

I do agree with bans not being investigated by LL as if they were ARs though. When someone is banned for an AR offence, an AR should also be filed, in the same way that someone attempting a DDOS on my servers will be reported to my suppliers and firewalled, whereas someone banned from my site for other reasons wont be reported.
A lot of bans are for non AR offences. The only permanent ban I have is for the guy who wouldn't stop trying it on with the RL/SL missus
Annoying, but no reason for LL to investigate.

People can and should be able to ban for whatever reason they see fit. Not everyone is going to like you.........and because of that they just may ban you for that reason. Hell they may not like a group you belong to........and ban you. It's fair. They have the right just as you do if you own land or have permissions to ban on other's land. Whining about being banned without "cause" is sort of like whining about being muted without "cause". The "cause" is that the person banning you thinks it's something that needs to be done..........and what you think is irrevelivant.

Suck it up...........move on. I don't know if I've ever been banned. But I do know I"ve been muted.

so let me see if I understand you.

75% of your niche?

Lets say there was a Elizibethan Roleplaying community in Second life. It was loose knit but it has a ban link system. Lets say its 100 sims ..

Sarah brakes up with Lord Scummybutwellliked, owner of the Shakespeare Sim.

She is banned - the banlink chain reaction hits and she finds herself banned from 75% of the Elitzabethan RP Sims.

For breaking up with a jerk ...

Lovely

Meanwhile Luara Noobie is nosing around in Lord Scummy's Manor and he, being in foul mood bans her.

Laura Noobie is banned from 75% of the Elizibethan Sims.

Very nice.

A friend of Luara's comes to get Scummy back and "griefs" him by zapping him with some scripted gun.

he is of course Banned for griefing - even though his gun had no effect.

3 peopel banned from 75 sims each for barely doing anything.


Sorry Im never going to think this banlink and guilty by a single button push decree is a good idea.

Griefing is simply not a big enough problem to justify the potential abuses.

Why don't think of it this way. If a single sim with single owner ban you, the ban tend to be permanent, since the owner could have muted, kicked, and banned all at once. So you'd have to chance of coming back at all. But with banlink, it show who ban whom, for what reason. And with the chain of banlink, multiple owners see it. So that one would have much more chance talking with other owners to get herself unbanned, when they do, she'd get unbanned from all the chain as well.

And well, intentionally grief someone with scripted gun is an uncondition request to be banned, every officers would do that even if they'd say they just want to take back for their friend.

see an actual griefer doesnt care if they get banned from one niche - its a throw away account , they will just move onto a new niche.

But "Normal" people you can ruin their whole SL enjoyment for stupid reasons.

Of course the banner wont say to banlink "she dumped me" hell say "she damaged my items" or some "appropriate" reason

*shrug* It has up and down side as all the tools available. I'm planning to use it too when(if) i get a sim. Using banlink is cheaper, faster, and more efficient especially if the link you attach to has similar mind. No need for lots of security officers in every sim, just a few scattered around.

So lets say you came to my shopping center (pretend I owned one) and a friend told you about his shop there. Well you get to this shop and I happen to be on and be walking around and you say Hi to me just being the typical nice person you are. And I say Hi back then ban you for reason.

Your (most of you) are saying thats my right? To ban for NO reason whatsoever? Even if others lose business because of it? If you are then obviously you are idiots. If someone bans people and I own a shop at a store on the land I am going to tell the owned of the land that I want some money because hes banning people like crazy and banning potential customers.

Yeah there are idiots that need to be banned. But theres no reason to ban people for no reason. Or for stupid reasons like I was. To me people that get banned should get the right to appeal the ban with official "ban judges" or something. People that see why you were banned and any evidence to see if you were wrongly banned. And if someone is caught banning people for stupid reasons they can get in trouble.

Can anyone of you HONESTLY say you would want to lose business because someone kicks people off of land where you may have a business? Of course not. Most of you pay for the game and its costing you money for your business, clubs...etc. People banning for no reason is costing you money in the long run!

I banned first griefer on my parcel today. It has been almost 6 months I own it. I was busy cleaning inventory and did not notice anything until a Be My Friend blue menu appears for no reason. What is that I thought? So, I sit for a moment, and next, he starts to shoot me with a gun! So, I freeze him, give him my words of feeling and eject/ban him.

It =is= my land, and I shall not be restricted from prohibiting the people who obviously want to cause trouble. I continue to handle bans on case-by-case basis for now, but anyone to visit is guest, and should behave accordingly. There are plenty of other places to go to be annoying and my place is not!

It is obviously a land owner's responsibility to choose someone trust able and have reasons. If other owners in the banlink start losing customers that way, eventually someone will complained. And when they do, they can choose to either ejected that one who abuse the power, disconnected from the banlink and choose better one, or just ignore the complains and start losing more customers. Its their choice.

Well, if a shop owner just ignore a potential customer complain, that shop isn't worth visiting to me anyway.

That's why I was saying maybe there should be different parts of the "world" which each have a different understanding of what SL is for. Some people would probably regard the whole experience as a laugh and would enjoy spending most of their time in a zone where these things were considered all part of the fun, and everyone they meet out for a laugh too. It takes ages trying to find and hook up with individuals who see things the same way, and then finding a place where you can be yourself. Dividing into areas would really speed up the process of getting into meeting the people and getting the type of interaction you came here for. And to move from one of these zones/worlds to another should require a teleport with notification of the change in zone, so you don't have to keep worrying you're going to fly into the wrong type of zone by mistake.

It doesn't seem fair in some ways that everyone is expected to be treading on eggshells in order to not offend the more conservative or conserved residents.

There has been quite a lot of discussion about this with regard to the new estate level governance tools:
http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/04/20/introducing-estate-level-governance/.

The questions you raise are relevant to Chadrick's post in that certain Residents have wondered who will hold estate owners accountable for their actions once they are granted more substantive governance tools. Your comments here help us to understand what kind of accountability will be appropriate when we implement these new estate level tools.

Keep talking to us.

I don't think it's quite the same thing. Nobody is held "accountable" for any bans they issue, as bans are the right of the land owner. It doesn't matter if it's mainland or estate, landowners govern the banlist.
I would hope LL ignore any AR based on "so and so banned me, it's not fair!".


Yes, it's your right as a land owner to ban anybody for anything. And no, I'm not an idiot. I can actually post my views without resorting to name calling and flaming.

Whether you are using a premium account or not, you do not have unrestricted rights to go into any land you feel like. You are not the person paying for that land.
If you rent land for a shop and have an issue with the banlist, rent somewhere else. Renting the land does not entitle you to dictate the banlists for the sim. If you want that control, buy your own land.


Does banlink automatically pass the bans along though, or does it require someone to manually enter the bans to be passed on?

Either way:

In the same way that I am able to achieve about 75% bannage through being known and trusted by the community, others aren't able to get a single site to use any of their ban info. Whether I'm well liked or not, if I put out a global ban request for a silly reason, or didn't back things up with proof, people would stop using any of my ban info.
It is possible to like somebody without trusting them

Your following the issues is appreciated

Of course Chadwick's plans are part of the problem.

It was his idea in Estate Level Governanace post that you would be investigated by the Lindens if you aquire too many bans.

That and a couple of days early the Blog endorsed a Ban List system called Ban Link.

Basically its like this

If you want people to be able to ban someone for any reason.

Then that Ban, for sims owner by the Banner, should be the only punishment. Someone should not suffer further reprecussions - Since the ban involved no due process of anything its at the Whim of the land owner.

If Bans are going to carry potential further punishments, restrictions on casual bans will need to be put in place.

Becuase the simple ban for no good reason can hurt residents out of any realisitic proportion.

People have an irrational fear of griefers in Second Life. Ive been griefed dozens of times. The Vast majority of attacks are laughable. The only really scary stuff is Denial of Service attacks - which is AR/Account Bannable and high priority anyway.

Is it really worth risking simple protections to your account access and where you can go to cut down on accounts that are throwaway anyway?

Like I said the land owner can LIE and write whatever he/she wants as a "legitimate reason" to ban you , so that the chain ban will go through.

a ban for Throwing back an engagement ring could be turned into "Self Replicating Object spam."

a ban for Not agreeing with the sim owner about the Iraq war can be turned into "Abusive Insults"

a ban for asking someone out once can be turned into "sexual harassment"

"Proof" can be manufactured ... easily. Typing fake dialog is just as easy as typing on these forums.

a Chained ban system CANNOT exist fairly with the ability to ban for any reason whatsoever.

Its too open to abuse.

considering that the ban for any reason SHOULD be a land owner's right - that means the chained ban system is the weak link.



In my opinion the System evolving to "protect us" from griefers is worse than the griefers are.

And thus it is the owner's right to give that permission and power to someone they trusted. Which is the point of the ban link.

The purpose of ban link is a Black List

a well intentioned, well run, responsibly maintained as possible

BLACK LIST

thats all it ever was.


Yes I suppose its in the owners right to ban people and then tell all others in a 3rd party site to ban them too.

I find it reprehensible - but In their right -I guess okay.

But Linden Labs has endorsed the site - Thats out of line.
Linden Labs has plans to Investigate people banned form "many parcels" - Thats out of line. Especially after endorsing a Black List system.


I find the lact of account protections in SL very disturbing.