Should LL employees enable griefers?

While that method does work, it works extremely poorly if you're trying to run a business on that property.

I dont think Immy believes this person should be griefed, nor do I for that matter, but the way this person is going about it is on par with griefing itself, such as making false or assumed and very questionable accusations openly in public (such in the case of immy, this Linden).

This blogger has been grieved, it's obvious, and it's obviously wrong for it to happen. The thought though to many of us is this person invites the trouble, provokes it, and has been personally targeting a specific group and it's region to draw in all this attention and has been doing so (looking back at the archives) since at least 2007 where this blogger accused the now supposed grieving group of harbouring the then truely believed griefing group PN within itself... or of even being PN itself in disguise.

Now a VERY LARGE group of broad ranged personalities can only stay quiet for so long while they're being tagged and accused by a loud mouthed individual with a very selective, one sided thought process. To this blogger, even the most helpful, most community involved members of Woodbury are griefers who only help and get involved in the community as a whole as a means of "legitimizing" the group, and this is what Immy was accused of. The worst thing though was some people and we've seen 3 or4 of them in this thread, have chosen to believe this person at his word, some have even taken actions.

Now griefing this blogger is wrong, there are people that indeed took the fight to him/her within this person's private home sim, they had no reason to be there other than either to talk to or play with something, and it turned out it was to cause some grief. the evidence is there in this case and he should have taken this both to LL and to Tizzer's... if LL cant do anything, Tizzer's can at least caution them or ban them from Woodbury. Tizzers has clearly stated that these matters will be taken seriously (and I'm yet to see much to claim otherwise on this). On that note, Tizzers most likely wont actually ban without a backed up claim presented, and with this blogger's jump to conclusion personality, talking to Tizzers probably draws a blank, and he gets more in belief that the group in question is in aid of griefers. Blowing things out of proportion on a blog only causes more grief.. specifically to the innocent members within these groups since they've been tagged with the 3 or 5 members who actually caused the grief (recent events in question), it really is only a small percentage of a really large croud that are the actual problem.

But anyway because of this roundabout way this Blogger deals with things, the actual griefers are still at large, and barely any of this in gonna be resolved... the innocent members get criminalized, the drama goes up, the blogs continue, prevoking more (and I know it's wrong and something should be actually done about it) grief attacks, and so the cycle continues...

well untill this blogger quits SL... I mean because of the circumstances, this blogger's chosen fight can never and will never be won by them, unless they target the specific griefers individually rather than lumping them all in with the rest of a massive SL organisation whom have nothing to do with the event other than a membership tag of the griefers (like a serial killer with ties to the salvation army... what, it could happen) and being the target of this blogger's attacks.


That all said I can understand this blogger's dislike of the group in regards to a build in the Ravenglass sim containing elements made by some pretty big name Woodbury members... it is a bit pie in the face, a sort of legal grieving... they own the land they can build what they like as long as it doesnt directly target or name anyone. Their use of symbolism isnt offencive, it is a soviet sub.. just a sub, the only person who will get the punch and kick out of this build is the blogger themself. Since theirs nothing truly unsightly or even offencive about the build, no direct references against them or anyone, no intrusive particals, no oversized prims, on land gained through legal means, nothing that can denote a "grief build", except the fact they built this right next door knowing full well this blogger's dislike for them, and can do nothing but vent about it.

Honestly I'm kinda wiery about this element of things and doesnt help the name of woodbury much in this debate. However this too though is the result of too much unnecessary provocation through the crude unbacked accusations of this blogger.



I actually started writing this around 1:30... I think I worded this correctly

Ah, ok. Sorry, I take your point now.

I suppose it IS possible that she is simply making this stuff up. But my sense -- and I have better things to do with my time than research it thoroughly -- is that there are enough documented instances of her having been targeted to give it some credence.

In any case, this really doesn't impact on my main point, which is that condoning real or putative griefing of Prok is not very ethical.

Let's replace the word "griefing" with "harassment". Griefing can be treated as a subset of harassment in the context of Second Life. Griefing is a problem because it is harassment.

Who in this context has been guilty of harassment?

Yes. This.

who cares about this all - I dont! ;D

Well, speaking personally, Argent, I honestly don't know. My initial post in this thread was precisely on this point: I don't think there is enough verifiable info to make any sort of judgment about the rights and wrongs of this.

What I am asserting here is that condoning or excusing griefing on the basis of our nefarious blogger's own behaviour is unethical.

And, I agree, again, with what Nika has said. This is not an appropriate venue to be sifting through Prok's many alleged or real faults. Even if we refer to her merely as "the blogger."

Ummmm... I read that chat log, and there is nothing but a whole lotta crazy coming at Rodney there, for no apparent reason. The only really funny part was the declined bears.

Thanks for this analysis, Rinoa, which is interesting, and does provide me with another perspective on the subject.

It doesn't change my real point, however, with which I am happy to see that you concur: "I dont think Immy believes this person should be griefed, nor do I for that matter."

And, again, I agree with Nika. Prok is fair game, but only in a venue where she can respond.

No, it was the offer of the dead chicken in exchange that REALLY made my evening.

I'm not just talking about Prok.

Yeah, and they accepted the dead chickens, and the chick even said thanks. That was amusing too.

Ahhhhh. kk . . .

You know, Prok has taken a huge amount of flak, from residents and from Lindens both, for being a) outspoken b) opinionated and c) right.

Unlike some gadflys (you listening, Pep?) Prok actually has something cogent to say about real issues...and is obviously motivated by a deep belief in virtual worlds.

If any blogger publishes allegations they are open to be discussed anywhere. It's Rodney Linden that hasn't, to my knowledge, made any public allegations or claims so shouldn't it be him who's right of reply is the concern?

Smith, I wondered that too, I looked at the links, apart from Prok being rude to Rodney Linden, I saw nothing to say a Linden did that graffiti.. unless I missed something in the letters.

Prok and the likes should ideally just be ignored... but it's hard when they are publicly accusing people of crimes, such as someone earlier in the string being called a pedophile by Prok for not likeing Aristotle... people will defend themselves or react in anger at such tripe.

Should Prok be griefed, harassed? I don't really care. Prok should just be banned for slander and I wish LL had the balls on them to do it too.

Then Prok should be a LOT more careful about making wild accusations.

She's lied about me before. Why should I believe ANYTHING she says?

Pretty sure this is the case of the mad blogger jumping to the worst possible conclusion without any shred of evidence. This person would not be happy without something to rant about, so that "graffiti" secretly made their day, I am sure. I think the mad blogger believes that everyone up at LL is standing around the water cooler laughing about these things when quite a few of them probably don't even recognize this person's name. The mad blogger cannot grasp that most people have no clue about the particular little dramas they ranting about. Which reminds me of the part in the chat log where Rodney's confused why he is being yelled at about dead chickens. If someone had said that to me, I would have assumed they were clinical at that point. I mighta tried to give them a bear too.

lol, "Here have a bear & pill, it'll be better soon... " *pat pat*

Yes, here have a bear, I come in peace, I mean you no harm (Beam me up, Scotty!!!)...

This thread confuses me.

1. Most importantly. Is Prok male or female, or both?

Kidding. That's not the most important question. It's this:

2. Why are people talking about what amounts to gossip, and bringing it to the point of possible libel, against anyone. I don't see any proof or smoking gun, even. Anyone can write graffiti, and does what happens in RL have any bearing in here?

At the point someone's RL job could be impacted, in this economy, it sounds like the time to stop feeding the gossip mills. Just my .02.

The chalk incident poo-pooed by Linden Lab gave some the impression it was open season on Prok. After the convention they returned to SL and began griefing her property. She was harassed so much that she had to turn build off, close her groups and even put up the ban lines on her properties to protect her paying tenants and her own investments. The chalk incident was a catalyst for a barrage of harassment from the Woodbury University Clan and other hanger-on griefers - and a large amount of those griefers are members of that Linden fanclub.

So Prok had enough after a week of wasting her time and she started naming names and pushing back. She stepped on toes and stepped over the line - but so did the ones harassing her.

Maybe someone from the Linden Community Team could have forseen that enabling the mob to single out one resident would create a snowball effect of out-of-control idiocy. But when you promote the mail clerk to Community Manager you cannot hope for much professional insight from them.

Remember: Water dissolves chalk.

Word.

It sounds like there is plenty of wrong from all sides of this issue, that's all.

The ones who actually griefed in world are the only ones who are responsible for that. A piece of graffiti no one knows who authored is not the same as Franz Ferdinand being shot.

Just a coincidence then.

I don't know the situation first hand. But it certainly can't be seen as proof of a direct link by what's been said here. Why wouldn't it have been the cumulation of a lot of other in world incidents, for one example.

What I'm saying is that it is not cause to go after a person in real life, or their real job. Based upon speculation.