TOS and Forum/SL linkage

In trying to understand a recent situation, I came across this in the Guidelines:

"We believe that in-world and forum behavior are linked and behavior carries across the boundary. 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."

How can, why should, a posting in the forum have any reflection on the behavior of an individual inworld? Why would the pursuit of information in a public arena give any reason to create a punitive action anywhere outside of that arena?

Many of the decisions in the last few weeks, both inworld and here, are causing me a great deal of dissatisfaction. I came to SL because I not only sensed a profound degree of freedom and creativity, but as well an inclusive and welcoming environment. What is playing out, in rather Draconian means, is far from it. Can the organization, or the individuals chosen as empowerments of that organization, truly be that petty? From all that I've read on these forums over the last couple of months, transparency is a commodity in veeeery short supply.

But I'm only 4+ months old, and mainly a lurker. I'd love for someone to shed light on this.

Regards,
EC

Its actually pretty common for this to happen in a lot of games etc. If you are banned from the game your also banned from the forum or visa versa. Although usualy its pretty hard to get suspended in most situations and the only time I ever got kicked from anything once in my intire internet life it was due to lack of posting rules in the forum so if you read the rules and stick to em then it should be fine. (mostly)

Honestly though there really isnt anything such as freedom anywhere in fact I find the more the rules are lacking the easier it is to get in trouble cause its easier to ban/suspend people when you dont have to give a reason

I prefer rules that means you actualy have to break one to get in trouble.

This just proves that you can't always please everyone. A while back, people would complain because people that were banned from the forums would not be banned in world, and vice versa. I see the idea that you are just one person, so why would your behavior in the forums be different then in world? You break a rule in the forums, which is part of the greater SL, you get punished for all of SL.

Basically it seemed form people's attitude of not caring if they break the forum rules because the worst that could happen is they would get banned form the forums. They could just use alts to post until they got their main account back on the forums. No real punishment for forum rule breaking. LL changed the way punishments where handled to try and get people actually listen to the rules.

Also, think of it this way, if you get perma-banned in world, should you really not be banned from the forums too because you did nothing wrong there?

If you come to the forums and break the TOS then yes you should be banned in game too. I don't see the problem there at all. The forums use our AV names.

It's a lot easier to not cage someone, or not use the f-word in a PG area, than it is to say something you consider truthful, and yet fear retribution for it.

coco

This is thinking - or lack of it - that I simply can't fathom. My inworld activities are very quiet: I keep to myself, I live in a quiet area, and I occasionally visit friends. However, I *am* aware of many of the issues in SL, and there a a good number of issues worth speaking to. If I come to a forum such as this, where Guidelines are different from the SL TOS, and I raise some hackles simply by stating opinions or ask the wrong question of the wrong person, how in any sensible and reasonable way should that affect my inworld life?

I don't use alts, I don't grief, I am square and civil beyond belief. Yet I've seen intelligent discourse get clamped off, while inane (admittedly a judgment call on my part) go on and on. Seems like an arbitrary and very oblique sense of punishment.

As for some of the other comments: it may happen that way in other games, but I'm not a gamer, and SL is reportedly not a game. In kill-adventure scenarios, I could see revenge being wreaked in-game and mutual banning, but even then I don't think it is right.

This policy is not only ripe for abuse, but is egregious in nature.

As long as "something you consider truthful" isn't an attack on another person or business, you should be good to go.

How many times has this rule been used since it's inception? Not once, that I know of.

I view it as more of a deterrent than an actual enforced policy, and it certainly is not unique to SL or even games in general.

1. If a business - especially inworld - were to cause a problem for me, are you saying that I could not even discuss it without assuming there would be a severe penalty. IOW, you aren't just talking about demeanor but censorship?

2. You need to know more then. It not only has been employed, but within the last 24 hours.

3. Whether or not it is employed elsewhere has no bearing on whether or not it is good policy. There was a time in the United States when women could not vote; I doubt men in another country with female voting rights could have convinced them it would be ok to take them away. (or any other analogy you care to replace this with)

Weren't several famous oldbies banned from the forums, back when the forums were temporarily suspended (and the general discussion forum eliminated) because of rampant personal attacks?

Or do those people just stay away from here because their new alternate forum sites are less restrictive?

(Or am I just making that all up? It all happened before my time.)

I didn't make the rule that you can't complain about businesses, but it makes sense to me, because for every legit complaint you'll get several that aren't. Jilted or scorned people trying to make life difficult for someone they're mad at and so on.

1. There is no point to complaining on here about a business, it is not the proper channel and just starts flamefests. I've never seen a business dispute resolved on here. So, in the end, it's just someone wishing to involve others in their personal disputes, and to try and publically harangue people.

2, It may have been used a few times, but that certainly doesn't mean the rule is abusive.

3. You're really out there on this. As if a common practise like sanctioning people from things because of poor behaviour were at all analogous to voting rights. Sigh. And yes, it does have bearing, because sanctions are a nearly universal human response to unacceptable behaviour. So I guess we're all just awful totalitarians as a species.

Editing to add: I will insert an anaogy of my own, only one that is actually analogous and not drama'ed up like voting rights (is Godwin coming next?). You verbally abuse a sibling or (repeatedly) so dad says you cant go to the ice cream parlour with your friends anymore. I'm afraid for you because of the level of import you put on being able to participate in SL.

What happened was there was one Infamous Resident who was a prolific writer - It was actually amazing how many words he typed in a day.

Anyway - he would get into huge drawn out battles with the forums community. He wouldnt technically violate the Forums rules in 99% of cases - pretty amazing considering how much he posted.

These long drawn out battles on many SL subjects led eventually to him getting banned off the forums. The statement the Original Poster quoted was added to DIRECTLY deal with what had happened with him. He was not banned from the game however - which is only right, since the rule existwed after he was banned from the forums.

This all happened quite a while before half the forums were shut down. After he was banned it didnt stop the battles on the General Forum, it was after a while more of that they decided to shut down most of the productive forums on the site.

Sadly, even though the forums have become fairly active again - most of the insightful posters never came back.

Well, you have a point.

But what do you mean how many times has this rule been used since its inception? Suspensions? BUNCHES OF TIMES. Anyone who has been suspended from the forums has been suspended from the game. Permanent bannings from the game? None, that I know of.

The Lindens don't really want to end up actually banning someone from the game for what the person said on the forums, I'm pretty sure. Which means that they themselves aren't crazy about the rule, heh.

As for this particular incident, "attacking" isn't what I would call it. In this particular incident, someone was calling for removal of someone in the mod position. (And it's not the first time someone has suggested that on the forums.)

I don't think mods should be protected from another individual calling for their ousting. Because really, mods are just ones of us, who have been given power over others.

All that controversy aside, though, I disagree with the rule that a suspension or banning from the forums automatically means suspension or banning from the game.

That's like - they have a town hall meeting in your town, and lots of people attend. But if you cause a problem (and I'm not saying anyone here has), they don't just throw you out of the meeting, they take your house and property and place of business, too.

It's overreach, and unnecessary. The only purpose it serves is to scare people, and I don't think that is ever helpful in a place of discussion, which forums ARE, despite LL trying to state that discussion isn't allowed here.

(If discussion weren't allowed, there would be no forums, by definition.)

Getting suspended or banned from the forums is punishment enough, imo.

coco

Dear Sunspot,

I'd really like to be as clear as possible, and please note that I am maintaining a civil tone. The one thing that you *have not* spoken to is how, or why, there should be a direct connection between activity on the forum and that inworld. I am a meek and nearly-invisible presence in SL - why, since I cause no ripples in the pond whatsoever in there, need I fear being banned from SL from commentary in the forums?


And pray tell, since the businesses operate in SL, where would you suggest people direct any problems? And would you yourself not be interested in avoiding unscrupulous businesses?


I never said the frequency was the issue - I take issue with the linkage between two complete different arenas.


The analogy was a stretch, but I was trying to make a point about "well, it happens elsewhere as well". Failed in that.


I'll steer clear of the sarcasm at the end, but I reiterate that it isn't the sanctions as such, but the manner in which they are applied, and how obtuse is seems to *automatically* conjoin forum and SL behaviours (now noting the Queen's English).


Well, now, that's hardly fair, is it? I'm not that kind of person, and would never have gone there. Does this mean I shouldn't voice my opinion in these forums, lest people *assume* what my next train of thought will be? Will you give me the courtesy of not prejudging me?

Thanks for the dialogue,
EC

Personally, I believe that forum bans and inworld bans should not coincide. Persons have different personalities on forums than they do inworld (some of the time), and even so, what stays on a forum usually stays on a forum--unless you live so close to your rival.

So, in essence, I agree with Coco on this one.

I have to say, I don't believe that Forum and In-game banning is warrented. After all, In-game behavior and In-Forum behavior are mutually exclusive. For instance, and I'm just making and example here: I've never met Lorna in world, don't know her at all except for postings in the forum...now, if I did, and based on forum posting, do you think that I would expect her to be a satirist 24/7? I think not.

So, in view of that, I vote for separation....*pulls the lever*

"This just proves that you can't always please everyone. A while back, people would complain because people that were banned from the forums would not be banned in world, and vice versa"

Yea yes how wonderful, people that had great inworld experience and reps had their whole sl reps broken because some lindens took things personal from forum issues. So double standards ( the simplest and totally BS basis power play .If lindens hated you they used their power nomatter one did no wrong ). Now look at the forums junked up insulting everyone. see anyone get banned? NO! but afew months back out less then brained linden worker linden banned people with little reason. oh well two face/double standard. Talk about your pay hitman..........who needs them when you have.........

Forums and in-world are very different. Most people I talk to here, I will probably never see in-world. Most of the people I know in-world I'll never see posting on here.

Yet...

Second Life is what the forums are about (for the most part.) Second life itself, is why the forums are even here in the first place. They are a part of the game, even at a distance, so if you are banned from in the game, then banning on the forums should take place as well.

I don't know how I feel about the reverse, however. A lot of residents don't even use the forums. I don't know if banning on the forums should warrant banning in-world.

Well in a perfect world LLABS believes all should balanced out. But they Don`t know and Don`t care. In Real Time Sence there is differance to both inworld and forum issues. Only power to dum down people. Don`t you just love how they handle social issues, they don`t have a gram of thought what they are doing to help stablize the behavior or social patters of people. There are now more upset people for that last 10 month they ever before.

You need not fear anything if you act within the ToS and guidelines. Are you really afraid for yourself here?

With the business owner, and that failing, Linden lab. It's forbidden on the forums and I imagine that is at least partly because of the reasons I gave in my last post.

I don't see them as different arenas. I see the forums as an extension of SL, much the way forums and bulletin boards for schools and business work. If you get on your Uni's site and start posting dubious material, you risk being expelled, same goes for the workplace. I do not understand this firewall that people want between the two. I've not even heard a decent reason yet much beyond "It's not right (or fair)".

I don't think it's obtuse at all, and as I stated before, it's a common societal reaction (or consequence, if you will), in many venues, to disallow troublemakers.

First of all I asked, I did not say you would, because using voting rights as an analogy really caught me as bodering on the absurd. I'm sorry for offending you however, and I am glad to hear you won't be going there - many people on forums do go there though, so it is certainly not outside the realm of possibilty.


This last bit isn't directed at you in particular, but I must ask, why do some subscribe to this idea that people are different on forums than they are in world? And, if they are (which I don't really believe) why are they that way? Are they two-faced? Jekyll and Hydes? Disingenuous in their dealings with others when inside SL? Phonies? It really baffles me, because I am me regardless of where I am, and I really can't muster much respect for this notion that people are entirely different in SL than on these forums, and as such, they shouldn't be sanctioned in both venues. Sounds like a not-so-clever escape clause to me. It actually fascinates me, and I'd truthfully like to hear more on why people, even though they are posting under their avatar name, think that "in world" is so much different from the forums?

I quite agree about the first thing you said about mods.

I disagree with you on the RL town hall analogy thing because RL is not elective. SL is a privilege you accept a ToS to be a part of, RL is not. In short, we're customers and not citizens. LL seems to be moving away from that view of SL at a rapid pace - residents and a world and all that, which is saddening on some fronts. Welcome to Second Corporation!

All in all, I think it's more of a detrerrent than anything else, and I agree that the Lindens probably don't want to actually enforce it. But hey, sticks and carrots permeate life at all levels and all ages.

Lastly, I meant banned permanently, not suspended. How many times has someone been banned permanently from SL for forum activity? My guess is none or next to none.

I certainly hope I don't get us trapped in an unending spiral of quotes, but I find it valuable to refer to exactly what you say, rather than paraphrase.


No, not me, because I'm basically a well-behaved older gentleman behind this keyboard. But you immediately point out the obvious: the TOS refers to the inworld activities, the Guidelines to the forum. They aren't the exact same thing.


Well, I'm a bit incredulous at this, seeing that LL has just about cut off all communication in the last few weeks. I haven't been in these particular forums that long, but I have to wonder: have you *not* run into many people with various inworld problems that have taken weeks, if that, to resolve with the current non-support that LL offers?


And therefore we must respectfully, and distinctly, disagree. However...


Hey, I'm with you on that! But you seem to completely ignore the possibility that something could be taken as "troublemaking" on the forums (and you'll note, I haven't entered *at all* into the judgmental calls being made here) that has no reflection and no connection to a person's behaviour inworld. What, Sunspot, would you think if Strife took offense at me even bringing up this topic, and decided to ban me inworld as well? I am a benign entity there, hardly noticed by more than a handful of people, yet discussing a difficult or controversial point here will take me out *there*? How does that, in any reasonable way, follow whatsoever?


None taken. However, what about people that *don't* go there? You are painting me with the same brush you paint some high school snot that griefs inworld and trolls here. That ain't me, babe.


You *should* direct it at me: because I *am* different in the two arenas, at least in my activities! If you don't, or can't, acknowledge that difference, then you are giving tacit approval to a system of governance and punitive conditions that apply not only to the lowest common denominator, but to the very well meaning citizen as well. Frankly, my friend, I deserve better than that.


Just to be clear: you don't have much respect for me, though you only know me from a couple hours on the forum. Personalities can be varied, dynamic entities, changing with the circumstance. Key example: I'm a musician in RL; I cross a lot of boundaries, and play a lot of styles. Do you really expect me to behave and express myself the exact same way in a symphony concert as I do in a blues band in a bar? I *am* the same person, but the context is radically different. You completely overlook context in your desire to have these Unified Personality Embodiements floating around SL and forums and the like.

I'm no fool, and I don't place a lot of stock in the possibility of changing your mind on the issue. I *do* hope that you see a viewpoint from a thinking, caring, interested person, one who values both the freedom and creativity - and solitude, if I choose! - that is there for the taking in SL, along with the same person who values human rights, group dynamics, and the evolving social system that includes and surrounds Second Life. And, in that, a person who believes that it is not only possible, but that is does occur, for the misuse and abuse of the moderation policies of the forums to intrude on the activities of Second Life citizens.

It seems to me, having read a great deal about Philip Linden, the company itself, and the basic paradigm and ethos of SL, that this policy is in direct opposition to that which they seek to build.

Regards,
EC

The forums are an extension of inworld. People sell their inworld services via the forums, they are most definitely linked. If we had different forum names to our avatars (as happens in some games) then I'd see your point.

I doubt very much that you'd get banned for merely raising some hackles.

If I were to guess:

Banned in-world includes a forum ban because so many people, when they realize they've been locked out, come to the forums and post: "OMG! I've been locked out!" like anyone here can do anything about it.

Resident conduct on the forums is so despicable at times that piling on the addional punishment of an in-world ban for mis-behavior is likely the only thing that gets through to some people.


Anyway, that's my 2L on why they're linked.

This story caught my attention. Hello everyone BTW.


So far, you could be talking about Martin Luther King, or Benjamin Franklin. They were always arguing with people for what they believed in. I wasn't there to see it, but arguing on its own is not a crime, or if it is, yes, close the forums.

Not putting words in your mouth, but the "pretty amazing [that he wasn't banned]considering how much he posted" reminds me of when I hear the police saying "Gee, we're trying to keep the Hippies and Rappers [/whatever] off the streets, but its hard, because what they're doing isn't illegal" - which always makes me think, what the heck are the police doing trying to enforce their own moral code instead of the law???? If its not illegal, then smile and move on.



Again, don't know if he was being an ass or arguing for what he believed in. If he was just trying to annoy people, there were rules againist that, and would it really mean that he should be banned in game too? Was he annoying people there too, if so there were other rules that would get him banned in the game *for what he did in the game*.

Yes, if he was being way out of line and inciting violence or making death threats or something, then he should be banned from forums AND game. But it doesn't sound like he was doing that.



What this is telling me is that:
1) Banning him did not solve the "problem" any more than banning Martin Luther King would have.
2) He was not the cause of the unrest, it continued after he was banned
3) Trying to censor the forums permanently damaged the ecosystem we have here

Colette - not aiming any of this at you, I respect you and wanna have your babies. Thanks for making a good post that filled me in on history so I could put my 2c in, it was a good example to reply to is all.

OP - I don't know who was banned recently, but those are my views on whether the rule should exist. If someone is being a terrorist, yes, ban from both. If they were just sticking up for what they believe in, why ban them from SL? Its not like they were running round there trying to grief people.

Take Care,
Lorna.

As to the last point, guess again. I know at least one case to the contrary, otherwise I probably wouldn't have even posted.

As to the former, no, they aren't an extension, they are a companion to the experience. Surely you must know many, many people in SL who have neither come to the forums or maybe even heard of them. One could live a long time in SL and *never* have to come here. If they were inextricably linked, that wouldn't be the case. And being that, why should discussing topics here - even if it creates a fuss - cause me grief (from LL) inworld? That is like saying that if a boss is abusive to a secretary at work, they must be abusive at home, and should be locked up so they can't visit either place.