Would this be a good idea for SL?

In order to make something even remotely like this functional, you have to have clear definitions of what excatly IS Greifing....

Only for yourself, since the MUTE function already works that way.




Snakekiss Noir, who owns the lovely Silk Waters project in Orello, used to have a blog where she spoke about Moove once and it showed what someone truly creative could do with the VERY limited platform. Link is here:
http://www.snakesladder.blogspot.com/

... Definately not as complex as SL, but still able to incorporate a feature to help its customers get a little relief from serial-griefers.



I don't think open registration helped LL pay any bills other then in the round about way of Philip using the idea of "Millions" of residents to attract major money from corporate sponsors.

And I do agree with Colette, LL has endorsed some pretty stupid things, BanLink being one of them. But I don't think that should mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The OP was about creation of a Blacklist or enmass banning of greifers.. I know what the mute function does, my own mute list is far from being empty, but this wasn't the context of the post....

BanLink is entirely seperate. Not run by LL and is NOT an automated function. It is to the point that scripts can change the ban list on your land to match the BanLink list, but it's really no different from any other security orb that bans avatars. Just has different type of sensor.

BanLink is no more than friends passing info to each other. I do the same thing with my friends. Its an electronic age, and "word of mouth" just travels faster. The people using BanLink have come to trust it. No different from when your Friend A comes up and says "OMG!!! This [insert griefer name here] just came into my store and started orbiting people for no reason. I banned and filed an AR, but you might want to ban the name just in case. You know how slow LL is on AR's."

What I got from P2's post on this wasn't an auto-ban either.

To ban every alt from a plot is what a landowner wants. When I ban someone, I want them GONE. Not back in 2 mintues with another disposable alt. Same with Mute. When I Mute some annoying a$$hat, I don't want them going onto an alt and sending me a flood of IMs full of bs whining. I want them muted and done.

~Jessy

No. It was not about an enmas banning. Nor of one done automatically by the system based on what a person does. It is based on expanding individual mutes/bans on a per account basis.

A SINGLE Resident mutes someone. That person is muted. Then, if that person creates an alt, that alt is auto-matically muted to that SINGLE Resident that has already muted that person.

This idea only extends the mute/ban that already exists between two accounts (the one placing the mute/ban and the one being muted/banned). The information is not used by any other account nor parcel. So if I ban Joe Dumbass, he is only banned on my land. With this idea, an alt he has would also be banned from my land. But ONLY from my land. (though others might add him as well, heh).

~Jessy

I said Endorsed by LL - which it was- in a Blog Post.

Whether its automated or manually entered "word of mouth" - only affects how fast the Mass banning takes place.

The problem comes in is if false accusations are leveled by a "trusted" Avatar who is the member of a Black List System.

As soon as that "trusted" Avatar files a complaint, large numbers of others ban the "griefer" .. and the "griefer" finds SL much more closed off (depending on the size of the list). No investigation, nothing.

Dan Linden in that video interveiw described this as one of the systems of the future. This would replace LL removing someones access to the Grid. Different people exchanging different ban lists. Thus we would have layered black lists, where people without any investigation might find themself cut off from large sections of SL for a crime they didnt commit.

People tend to see this problem ONLY from the land owner's perspective, not from the person who gets banned.

I think land owners should be able to ban whoever they want for whatever reason. But if they go and basically Digitally character assasinate someone knowing the other members of the Black List will ban them as well, its a problem. If that land owner belongs to multiple Black Lists ..

Add in that a Ban would ban all alts .. it denys access to possibly large areas to Second Life without any sort of remedy.

Pie suggested a Mute list that affects all alts though - Thats a good idea. I think the Mute list shouldnt Tell you who those alts are.

If people started passing around Mute Black Lists though - we get to the same problem - luckily I have never seen anyone sharing out lists of people to mute.

The only time I've seen them mention BanLink was on the blog post where they shot ratings...


I'm not sure I'd call getting listed 3rd on the "you may want to explore" list an "official endorsement" Colette.

They're on their *second* new continent this year, in addition to having almost doubled the size of the Southern one..

Ahh well I guess it depends on your take.

In the context of that Blog Post I see that as an Offical endorsement. As much as the Linden's will endorse anything Third Party.

I read it as "Were sorry ratings are gone - you can use this stuff now instead."

However you are correct that is the Blog Post I meant.

I've never even looked into BanLink until just this morning, since, for some strange reason, in my 3 and a half years in SL I have had to ban very few people and have exactly 2 people on my own ignore list. Or maybe I just don't get out that much.

And Col, I do really appreciate your viewpoint, and your concerns. It makes me understand a bit more why someone might not want this feature implimented. But I still feel that the benefits would outweigh the cons.

I don't want to mass-ban anyone. But if I want to ignore you, I want to ignore you no matter how fast you can make an Alt. It seems simple to me. It seemed simple to the folks over at moove too.

I see the advantages of the Mute thing too, especially since people dont usually pass around "Mute" or "Ignore" lists.

You would think it could be implimented in a way where it wouldnt tell you whose people's alts were, it would just mute them.

Then, unless you actually stumble upon someone who isnt on your mute list but is muted, you'd never know.

And at that point they are probably harassing you anyhow - since you muted them.

'Mute' never seems helpful to me with griefers, because I don't usually have a problem with their text or sound, but with disruptive objects like cages or litter. And I have no idea whether they account for the majority of griefers, but the ones coming from 4chan.org (Patriotic Nigras) are generally on dynamic IP addresses and are using a third-party client that avoids hardware bans, so I am shrugging off the ban-list related ideas.

What about things like finer control over permissions based on things like account age and payment info? Right now, we are able to deny access to accounts based on these criteria, but wouldn't it be better to decide whether someone has permission to create objects or run scripts, things like that, based on those criteria?

Another idea... how about being able to blacklist certain scripts, if not just at the estate level?

Colette,

I'm confused as to why you concider a difference between Mute and Ban here.

I'm not talking about a ban-link like BanLink does. I'm just saying on a per account basis.

Example: I ban you from my little 1024m parcel. The SL System bans you and also bans any alt accounts associated with the account I banned. It does not put the names on my ban list (so I don't even know any account name other than the one I banned). The system does not spread you name, nor alt names to any other land, or Resident. The only place you and your accounts would be banned from is my 1024m plot.

The only thing the idea does is prevent a person from continually bringing alts in to grief a person ~after~ they have done something to recieve a ban on at least one of their accounts.

~Jessy

Lets say I own an Island.

My best freind breaks up with some one whom I consider a rotten bastard. This is my personal opinion. He hasnt really comminited any harasment or anything.

I Ban him from my Island which in turn bans all his alts.

----Everything is cool so far--- No big deal, we dont want him coming round-- But here's the punchline ---

I belong to 5 Politically Correct named Black List Sites. Im trusted by a ton of other list members. Heck some people just believe me becuase im a big name.

I type up a creative little story of how hes a stalker and harasses women. I can be pretty devious about stuff. Besides he hurt my best friend.

I post my little bit of fiction up on all 5 of those Blacklist sites.

People read the story cant believe how bad this guy is and ban him (and all his alts) from their Islands.

After a couple weeks Hundreds of estate managers have banned this guy. He litterally cant go to 1/4 the grid.

No investigation. Nothing. All he did was break up with someone in an online relationship.

Since the new Ban system encompasses all his alts - he cant even make an alt to go to those places.


-------------------------

Thats why Black Lists are dangerous.

Now if theres no Black List - its no issue. People only get banned 1 sim or cluster at a time for individual reasons. In that case Ban the Av and all Alts - no biggie.

Since there are not any (that I know of) Mute Black Lists .. And I dont really see there being any .. the Mute someone and all their Avs seems a reasonable idea to me.

Agreed. I personally don't like the Black Lists myself.

I do not see a way around that, however, as it's people's rights to have them and use them.

Though most do a bit of background investigation into issues. BanLink even has a formal appeal process for those that feel they were unjustly banned.

This new idea doesn't change a thing, it just makes things go faster.

In your example you could ban the perosn, find out his alts and ban them as well (You might not find all his alts, but I'm betting you could find a majority of them), and have them banned on the black lists as well.

That isn't a failing of the system. It's a misuse of the system. People already do that. Called "griefers". They abuse the system of creating alts.

A perfect solution, imo, would be to reinstate the need to verify accounts. I highly doubt LL is going to do that however. Everytime it's brought up, it takes a week for the smoke to clear from all the obsuring bs speak.

~Jessy

If Banning Black Lists are a given. And their Spread is a Given;

Taking away someone's opportunity to start over with a new AV seems a bit malicious.

a wonderful story Collete, now back to reality...

The reason the Lindies won't allow you to mute/ban all and future alts of people who annoy you is because it pushes against phillips fantasy of 8 million users. It's not hard to understand this number is complete poo. It's easy to see the linden's continue to push this number. BIG and FAT on the login screen.

We got us 8 million! um, yeah. Go lindens.

This is a simple and clear method to deal with repeat boneheads. There is NOTHING to stop someone you have just banned from making his 10th alt (8 million users!!!) to come and do it all again.

Phillip will never admit 90% of the user base Does Not Exist. We see daily how fat his and his companies blinders are. They are constantly more worried about the Box SL comes in then what the product inside is like. Short sighted, and we are seeing it bite them, and will continue to see it.

Type any random name in search/people....notice results? 1 in 10 has a profile filled out maybe? A bunch of dead one timers and the like. Dead weight carried by the system for no good reason except phil's favorite number.

I really don't see LL allowing us to mute other's Alts anytime soon. Cause they don't like to admit they even exist.

Plus the lead coder has been busy working on search for half a year and 70% of the team is on bug fixes....how's that coming then cory?

Yeah, big difference between "check out these things people have brought up" and "We are down with these"...unless your argument hinges on pretending LL is endorsing them.

In real life, there will be no "Great Ban List". There are enough educated people in SL to know better than to take some random guy's word that a certain person shouldn't be allowed in your area. Plus one man's "inappropriate behavior" is another man's "fun"!

If anything this would only happen between related groups and communities...and even then most of those communities aren't tightly knit enough to take everyone's word at face value.

Sorry guys, that's not a black helicopter. It's just a crow or something!

I got land-banned and muted by mistake once - I told the story on here. A griefer created lots of junk on land that was for sale next to mine. I contacted the landowner who came over to deal with the problem. While he was at work I happened to wander onto the land in question and he froze/ejected/banned me and presumably muted me - leaving me with no way of appealing to him to prove my innocence.

I never said Linden Labs would be concerned over a growth of Black Lists.