Right to Roam

EEEEEEEW!!!!



on topic though : i reckon as long as you're just flying through you should be able to just keep flying and enjoy it until someone's security orb flies you somewhere else i guess.

The whole primcount issue is subject to empirical confirmation, but those details have to be worked out eventually such that, if this were to happen, the skies above 768 don't fill with space junk *and* folks can fly across prim-full parcels.

And the details have to be worked out to make it so 768+ doesn't become haven for griefers of everyone below (like: no-object-entry has to come into force for stuff moving downward through the ceiling, lest we all be bombarded by physic-enabled pig poop from the heavens).

BUT--call me a Communist (and, ya know what? I won't even be offended!)--but sure, I'd *like* folks to be able to fly above my parcels unimpeded. And I'd be perfectly happy for LL to take that step without compensating me, or even asking nicely. I hope they won't break too much other stuff when they do it, but sure... I might even fly up and wave sometimes.

lol - I'm not neutral - not even close. I wouldn't do anything inSL if I thought it was going to mess up someone's enjoyment of SL or their SL experience, such as screwing up their prim count, etc. Why wouldn't they extend the same courtesy to me? I don't understand why they care if I'm just flying overhead and not hurting anything. Seriously, who cares? If I start rezzing stuff, running malicious scripts, or if I park up there and spy on them while they're naked, that's out of line, but just flying by? They can't do anything about it if I just walk by outside of their property, and that would likely get me much closer to their precious stuff than flying overhead would (and yes, I understand the difference between being OVER property and being next to it). I just figure if I'm not hurting anybody or disrespecting them, I ought to be able to move about as I please. As it is now, movement other than tp'ing is pretty restricted and frustrating and I think that hurts SL.

On the issue of the seas, standing on the dock at the Dresden build, it occurred to me that I really wanted to get on a sailboat with a friend and just sail into the sunset. Of course, the sunset doesn't exist, the water isn't really there, and I don't have any friends (ok, maybe a couple). If there was a way to get those offline sims or whatever you call them, to just be ocean that you could pass over, then how cool would that be? It would just be LL owned/controlled ocean that you could fly over or sail across. I know, I know, pipe dreams - but still.

"No script" stops taking effect somewhere at 30-50m above ground level.

If you're flying 50m above ground level (which you should to avoid access restricted land) no scripts won't affect you, so your "one and only problem" doesn't even exist which leaves you without arguments.

If someone wants a house, they have to rent/buy land... so if someone wants to ride/fly/boat, buy/rent the appropriate amount of land and you can enjoy your vehicle to your heart's content, otherwise be happy with the "mere" 100+ open access sims that LL provides just for that purpose .

If that were true not only would I be without arguement, I'd not have started the tread because what I wanted would already be the status quo. However, it's not true.

i've always wished i could just float from one continent to another. i've tried to fly, and gotten pretty far out there, but i can't remember if i got bored or if the world ended, either way i've never actually gone from contintent to continent other than TPing.

You know, I voted no, but the more I think about it, the less I care. I still don't want anyone close enough to peep in my windows easily (or perhaps 'obviously'), but that's why I have a security orb. *shrug*

I took that as a given right from the start. The arguement that it would be a griefers paradise never held any water to start with.

If you just sit in the vehicle, it's not attached. When we were flying the other night with you sitting on the wing, one of the more spectacular crashes was when we tried to cross into a sim where all the prims were used up and I was denied entry because the plane would have increased the prims over the limit. CRASH! Invisible wall. I don't know if I can just attach the biplane from my inventory and have it work, but I'll give it a try later.



Feelings hurt a little. She can't throw me all that far, but if she orbits me again, I'm AR'ing her.

Apart from the whole "it's what we're used to in RL" is there any reason new sims couldn't be created as tall boxes both next to and on top of one another. Now they're just horizontally adjacent. It would be cool to have a new continent that acts as a 3d volume instead of a plane with space above it. The effects of gravity would need to be different, i.e. no limit on how high an av could fly unassisted. The map would be....problematic. Horizontal and vertical public flyways could be Linden owned with special controls that allow rezzing vehicles but not just any old object that stays put and clutters up the place. And your lot would then have two more sides where neighbors could put ugly build!

They'll ignore it. LL already have you pegged as a trouble maker after you griefed that poor woman up against her window.

The disconnect is on whether or not the land is owned all the way up. The way I see it, yes, it is - although I personally don't mind passersby and keep my land open, I can sympathize with people who just want to be left alone when in their space and limiting it to group access. My understanding was that they already lowered the ban lines for non-specific bans, and I have found this to be true. But apparently there is some problem in some places... would be nice to know where. Anyone ban you by name, Conan?

Not that I know of - I've certainly not been upto no good if that's what you mean. Maybe Elmore now, but no one important.

The problem comes when you can't fly above land that the owner is quite happy to open to the public. Things still tend to get a bit screwy even then.

Even if the land is owned all the way up, nobody is taking the land ownership away. The landowner could still build a skybox and do whatever he or she wanted. It's just that at a certain height, the landowner is going to have to deal with passing aircraft. If you build at that height, aircraft are going to have to go around whatever you've built up there, but at the same time, you are going to have to be a little forgiving if someone crashes into your skybox by accident. It's give and take - compromise. It's good for us, even if it tastes like medicine.

She's lucky I was wearing pants.

The problem here is that "attaching" a vehicle is not the same as "sitting on" a vehicle.

On the lake where I live, I like to go cruising around the water in various ways.

If I use my surfboard, which is an avatar attachment, I can go anywhere my avatar is allowed, without concern for prim counts or auto-return.

But if I use any of my small boats, all of which are "sat upon", the lake becomes a minefield. I can't stay on the Linden-owned center strip for too long, as the ridiculously-short 5-minute auto-return (hyphen-mania!) keeps stealing my canoe or Zodiac right out from under me. But I also have to be careful about venturing into private parcels, because several of the parcels give the full-parcel error, again causing my boat to disappear in a puff of de-rezzing sparklies.

Now if "sat upon" vehicles could be treated the same as avatar attachments, not subject to parcel prim count nor auto-return, that would solve a lot of the problems right there. Personally I do feel that a vehicle should be considered part of the av while it's in use, and that if an av is allowed to walk, run, swim, fly, or otherwise move through a parcel, the same av should be allowed to do so while on a vehicle. And please let's do remember that avs CAN fly on their own, to any height with a flight assist. The vehicle doesn't change that in any way.

As far as dumping the vehicle on a parcel, I would say that if an av doesn't have build permission on the parcel, any vehicle they un-sit from should just be automatically returned to their inventory. (The equivalent of un-attaching an av attachment.) If build is turned on, then the vehicle would be subject to whatever auto-return is set, just like if the av dropped their prim hair.

Try it with a normal script on a no-script parcel: on the land it won't work, no matter what, then fly 100m up AGL (since I'm not sure of the actual cut-off height) and it'll work perfect.

If your particular vehicle refuses to work on no-script land above the threshold, you should be complaining to the creator, not complain about an issue that simply doesn't exist.

I have tried it with multiple vehicles by several different creators. I'm at 2500m right now as we speak and it just happened. Something is going very wrong.

Anyways, if what you say is true then - as I said - I already have what I want. As I said, I wanted to know how the community felt about the issue. Now I know. I have not made any demands at any point. Ever. I was brought up a Thatcherite and believe you get what you work for. That doesn't mean I can't ask for the community's opinion on an issue does it? Apparently that makes me a communist though.

EDIT: Just passed into a No script parcel at 2500m and still going - seems Kitty is right. Not sure what the cutoff is or why it happened a moment ago at the same height.
Although at 2518m it goes Off-World. Apparently that is where the stratosphere is.

Aye.

I too would favour a commons for air space, proper waterway, roads and ability to have a functioning rail system.

I do not wish to upset people with my views and opinions but I do feel the need to express them here.

I would have hoped that most people would not have the SL mainlands transform into a collection of sim sized (or smaller) boxes from which there is no in or out without teleport. (Especially as teleport is borked a lot of the time but that is a seperate issue).

However with the ban lines and security orbs I see everywhere, I see that most people would rather have this experience than a place where people have the freedoms to roam.

Rhetorically speaking. for those who feel very possessive about their property and their resources, how many of you came into SL with land immediately and have stayed away from all lands that give access freely to all?
Some?, but the majority I'll bet relied upon the charity of those who gave them free access to sandboxes or gave them access to resources of theirs and people who could help them learn and grow for no other reason than they wanted to improve SL a little for all people coming here.
I would wager that almost everyone has, at sometime used, the freely available resources graciously provided by others at some point in their SL lives and yet they dont feel inclined to give even a little back in return.
I would be very surprised if there are many avatars that have not travelled a linden road, flown over a piece of land that they did not own or enjoyed a linden provided space at the edge of their property to give them space from their neighbours?

Without these efforts in SL and RL our worlds would be a lot poorer for it.

Why then can you not also have a little charity and help improve SL for everyone?

Most advocates of travel in SL would see a system set in place that would have the most minimal impact upon each persons resources as possible and would have it so that that each land owner would only be asked to make a small sacrifice to make this feasible.

If the majority of people could agree in principle that travel in SL is a good thing then the work could really begin on proposing a workable system that is the best for those who travel regularly and those that dont.

There are many ideas out there...

Just for example, if a revenue could be earned by letting people travel across a small access way on your land, paid for by a commons group that had paid membership, would that change how some feel about it? Perhaps...

Human ingenuity seems to overcome most problems eventually if there is a will to do so.

Just something to think about
Nathan

Im not even going to comment on most of the arguing here, but my basic question. Why? Why would you want to fly at over 700 whatever m when you cant really see anything except maybe those high skyboxes anyway? You cant tell me you are site seeing, you would have to have your draw distance at what? Yea. So unless you are wanting to fly through there to have the great views of random skyboxes and lost prims, what exactly is the fantastic draw to getting to ride in a vehicle at 700 whatever m high?

Some other points that were mentioned. Making the area seperate, or like another sim. If LL was going to do that wouldnt it just be in their best interest to make a small continent of a few dozen sims, build on them (heck, have a contest of builders and let them each do a build on a sim, things with certain requirements and themes so they flow ok together) with roads, and open sky ways and road ways. If they have to use up resources anyway, why do you NEED to fly over land that other people own? Why does it HAVE to be mainland land that other people might not want you flying over if they have a skybox home you could bonk into or pass by?

Honestly, why not just propose that LL simply create an area that IS open to everyone but ISNT a sandbox. They could come up with a 'loading' area where you can take out your vehicle and start riding around with it in, with a auto return time on you could ride from sim to sim. Why not propose that LL create more usable roadways, waterways and protected sims instead of coming in to argue that hey! You cant use the air way up above your land to build anyway, let me in!

There are simply more solutions to "I want to fly around" than those proposed. Most of which just seem, silly, in my opinion.

Wow. This is a tough one. I think it is in LL's best interest to promote touring the world and looking at it, from a low enough height that you can actually SEE something. And I think that landowners are entitled to their privacy if they want it -- SL differs from RL in that the airspace is completely accessible to landowners for building, so they should be able to use it all.

Here's the feature that I wish LL had built in from the start: A worldwide "view zone"

> There is a "special" view zone world-wide at some height above land where you can still see architecture.

> Prims in the view zone do not count toward land prim counts. Autoreturn on any non-attached non-saton prim is short, and fixed throughout SL.

> Landowners have the option to block their land from being viewed. It will show as a gray blob or something to those in the view zone.

> Landowners can turn on/off the ability to see vehicles/avs in the view zone from their land.

> There are click-and-zoom restrictions in the view zone, to discourage just zooming around spying on AVs. The same restrictions worldwide.

> Perhaps there is a maximum amount of contiguous time an AV can spend in the view zone?

> Anything in the sim within <n> meters of the view zone cannot be seen from it.

Anyway, you get the idea. I don't know if this could be added now; while I agree that there is no theoretical reason why sims can't stack, there could be assumptions about contiguity built into zim rezzing. I, too, like the idea of residents being able to zoom around and see things.

Basically, I'd like to fly much lower but I was trying to suggest a compromise that would mean landowners were unaffected. That's it in a nutshell.

Thank God for places like FairChang though.

I voted "no" because obviously, the landowner should be free to build or fly as high as he/she wants over their own land, and not be penalized because someone else used some SL tricks to build above them with prims that will count against them, or at least block their options. OTOH, I think the present maximum limit on ban lines (I think 150m) or something like it is a very good idea - allows free travel, like an aircraft (or satellite!) passing over your house in RL, that does not interfere with your free use of your own property.

Right to roam is a definably different issue from rights to property.

I never used free sandboxes. Nor did I rely on Charity. I bought land very soon after I came to SL. It was the moral and correct thing to do.

The "Commons" only means one thing, that the said resource will be abused and degraded by everyone. Private property is the only sensible way to hold any land.

Let me fix that for you: -

[I never used free sandboxes. Nor did I rely on Charity. I bought land very soon after I came to SL. It was the moral and correct thing to do in my opinion.]

and

[In my opinion the "Commons" only means one thing, that the said resource will be abused and degraded by everyone. I believe that private property is the only sensible way to hold any land.]

There thats better. I do not hold the same view as you. I do not believe that holding private property has any moral considerations one way or the other. In terms of a workable solution to land management I do not believe that private property is the only way to have a sensible solution.

And maybe you did not need or receive any help (I was not just talking about land but being the recipient of any altruism) of any kind from anyone at any time in SL ever just because they wanted to make SL a better place for all but somehow I doubt that very much and if it really is true then you are in a minority I beleive.

I am not advocating freeloading, I am talking about building something together for all, maybe even with some profitable byproducts as a consequence. The charity comes in acknowledging the need to do something that benefits everyone and being willing to accomodate something that you may not use as much as other people. It does not have to be free necessarily, just available.

After all without this cooperative spirit SL would not probably not exist, the Linden's own goals are or were at least based more towards something for everyone.

Regards
Nathan