The definition of a griefer

I believe that if the tacky land owner is intentionally doing it to annoy and disturb a neighbor, then yes, it's griefing.... but if the tacky land owner has their own reasons and purpose for tackifying the land, and has no thoughts about doing it to cause problems for someone else, than no, it's not griefing.
Example: I post signs that say "my neighbor is a moron" that's griefing.

Actually I heard the same thing. They tackify the land so ppl would pay alot of money to purchase this worthless land. Basically, pay off money!

Just because it's so bloody obvious and no-one has said it yet, my definition is:

"A griefer is a player who intentionally causes grief to other players."

Grief is the objective, griefing is the action, and the griefer is the agent.

Not really rocket science here.

Jeremy, it is bloody obvious to define it that way, but as you would agree it is not that descriptive. This reminds me of most Webster definitions where they define, for example, "hypocrite" as "a person who pratices hypocracy." The dictionaries are laden with that sort of definitions that amount to tautologies in my opinion. Then you ask, what is "hypocracy," or "grief"? I think Corwin's question was exactly that. We all know what it is because we experience it, but what do we consider griefing, really?

Just my two cents.

Cheerios!

I would be curious as to the official LINDENLAB Definition of Griefer. What Criteria do they use to investigate they myriad of abuse reports that come to them daily. For Example. Several days ago while I was in the Morris Sandboxes I encountered a Trio of rather uncouth gentlemen with auntjemima flags sprouting, Watermelon and Fried chicken legs attached to each hand. Needless to say I was curious to say the least so I loitered about to look at these strange creatures. One of these fellows was in classic Blackface and spamming the most amusing dance. But.. for a person of african decent(sp) this may have been not only extremely offensive but blatently racist. I am unqualified to make this assumption and I digress. One of these fellows Shot/spammed/force rezzed one of those lovely annoying batman yakker boxes right on me He got a good laugh out of it untill I sent it away and promptly locked him in a commercially(sp) available psitrap to-which he seemed to lose his little mind. Screaming obscenities and threatening to report me to Linden labs, which one of his friends (Says) he promptly did. Now. All this time these fellows in thier 2 day old accounts and curious getups were telling me they were not "NOOBS" and if I did not release them promptly my SL experience would become a living hell. I promptly refused to release the said fellow and waited patiently for a Linden to come to the scene. (One showed an hour later and said nothing) Now. My question is. who was the griefer? them? Or me for locking this fellow in a trap he could not sit his way out of? I'm quite sure I "Ruined" his fun. but it was to me purely self defense. So..Lindens? Your take? Fellow Residents? Your takes?

Thank you for your time and pardon my sentence,paragraph structure.

Tautological definitions and statements are a pet peeve of mine. You only have to open any Microsoft help file to find the useless things in their natural habitat.

So while I take your point, and I somewhat agree with it, I disagree that this is essentially what I have done with my definition.

"Grief" is not a thing but rather a subjective state of mind. Everyone knows what grief is when they experience it and it is different for each person who does. Grief is the state of feeling grief or aggrievement.

The definition of who is a "griefer" therefore is only in question if the person being "griefed" has not communicated the fact that the actions of the griefer are in fact "causing them grief." Once someone has said as much to you, if you continue in your actions, then you are a griefer.

Intentionality on the part of the greifer is much harder to judge, but again, after they have been informed by the aggrieved party that their actions are "griefing" them, if they do not stop, then intentionality is simply a fact.

I like this definition much better than the list approach, as it is situational, it's more specific and it's based on moral values rather than just a list of "do's and don'ts."

Using this definition, someone who does something not specifically against any TOS rule, like putting up an illuminated lime green sign right next to your build, is most definitely "griefing" regardless of the fact that he might find the lime green sign attractive and it's not against the rules per se. The person being "griefed" in this scenario has communicated to the greifer that this sign is causing them grief and asked them not to do it, yet they continue.

Classic griefer psychology.

No list of "you can do this" and "you can't do that" is ever going to be as effective as a definition like this.

No other definition is going to be so helpful in defining the exact moral position required to *not* be a griefer.

No other definition gets to the root of the psychology behind the griefers actions so quickly and simply.

Dear Sir,

I wish to inform you that your passing away has caused me much grief.

Please cease and desist with being dead or I will report your activities as a violation of the ToS.

--
Sincerely...

Overall I very much like and agree with your definition.

However...

We also have to have some objective standards as to what constitutes a reasonable complaint.

For example, if someone is repeatedly shooting at you while you shop for a pair of jeans, after you've asked them to stop, then they can reasonably be called a griefer.

On the other hand, if someone is shooting at you while you stand in the middle of a free-fire combat sim then it is your complaint, not their conduct, that is unreasonable. No one shooting at you can really be called a griefer no matter how much you protest.

To me, a greifer can fit many descriptions. A few that I know:

A greifer is a person, usually an underage player who is new, who uses R2 BOmbs at public places that are also PG zones.

A greifer is a person who uses very spammy things to purposefully annoy people.

A greifer uses push weapons in sandboxes and orbits random people.


Those are a few things that I've seen in greifers.

Agreed.

But what Linden Labs thinks constitutes a complaint, is a different issue from "what is a griefer." My definition still stands as to defining the action of griefing and the identification of who is a "griefer."

To give you an idea of the problems Lindens seem to have in differentiating a griefer from a "good" player, I recently came into Second Life for a hour to finish a project i had been working on. Instead, I had my build ruined by four idiots who ressed junk all over it and bumped me, swore at me, insulted me etc., and while I was making out the various abuse reports they "mock fucked" me with a giant plywood penis while I was motionless making the reports. When the Linden finally showed up he impllied that they were just kids (alghough it was a mature area), and that he was "letting them off with a warning." Thus all my abuse reports (which I had to stand still and be humiliated to be able to make them), were all going to be ignored. The perpetrators laughed about it after he left, swore at me a few more times and then continued on their merry way.

If that doesn't constitute a pretty twisted idea of what a "griefer" is on the part of the Linden I dont know what does. These people told me that they "love" second life, they play it all the time, and that what they did to me was just what they do to anyone, all day long. "It's a riot!" I think they said.

Here I am an over 40 hard working creative guy, paying money to play the game, trying to contribute (I was making free content at the time). I have two degrees and 17 years experience as an techie/administrator at the local University, yet I get to be abused by frebie-account teenage idiots in a game they are not even supposed to be playing. I mean these jerks wern't even born when I started in computers. When I complain about it the abuse reports are ignored and the Linden in question doesn't see it as "anything serious."

PS - Jopsy... very funny but you missed the "intentionality" part.

That story is simply appalling.

To me, thinking they were kids would make their infractions more serious, not less, since as you pointed out you were in a mature sim. And from a business standpoint I would be a lot more concerned about the happiness of a paying, serious, adult player than I would be with indulging a couple of trouble making kids.

Disgraceful.

"he impllied that they were just kids"

Keep in mind that arrested development can kick in at any age.

Not to mention regression behavior later in life.

--
Physical adulthood is not a measure of mental maturity.
And vice versa.
Unfortunately.

Indeed.

It's also good to keep in mind that there is an "upside" to behaving like a child, especially later in life.
Not all childish behaviour is bad, and not all childish humour involves poo-poo jokes and punching.

I like to think I have held on to my childlike innocence and sense of wonder, as well as a good sense of humour. On the other hand, even as a six year old I was neither mean nor violent and did not find humour in demeaning, insulting and hitting other people.

One can never (and presumably this applies to the average Linden Liason as well), really know the RL age of an avatar for certain. You have to go on appearances and behaviour. My personal feeling (guess), is that the number of truly under aged RL people in SL is rather small, most of what we take as "kids" are actually humans in their low 20's.

Since these particular avatars were behaving at something roughly akin to a 12 year old level, I feel my description of them as "kids," whether they were in reality 20 or 40 is entirely fair.

It's not scientific, and it's certainly unprovable, but anyone on the scene would certainly not disagree with the description of these idiots as "kids." Least of all the kids themselves.

Second Life Turrets' Syndrome???

From Wikipedias definition of a psychopath:
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociopath )
"These days, psychopathy is defined in psychiatry as a condition characterised by lack of empathy or conscience, poor impulse control and manipulative behaviors."

Now, if we compare this with parts of the same Wikipedias definition of a griefer:

"In doing this, they heighten their enjoyment of the game by intentionally causing others' misery."
Lack of empathy...

"ironically, this may even encompass causing temporal greif to the greifer him/herself)"
Not so well thought through griefing is an obvious sign of poor impulse control...

"Griefers often use exploits and abuse unintended features or bugs of the games in order to give them an advantage and power over other users. "
Manipulation, of others and/or environment/situation.

Later in the Wikipedia, you can read:
"A psychopath is defined as having no concern for the feelings of others and a complete disregard for any sense of social obligation. They seem egocentric and lack insight and any sense of responsibility or consequence. Their emotions are thought to be superficial and shallow, if they exist at all. They are considered callous, manipulative, and incapable of forming lasting relationships, let alone of any kind of love. It is thought that any emotions which the true psychopath exhibits are the fruits of watching and mimicking other people's emotions. They show poor impulse control and a low tolerance for frustration and aggression. They have no empathy, remorse, anxiety or guilt in relation to their behavior. In short, they truly are devoid of conscience."

My only comment to that is: spot on!

So, shortly, a griefer is a psychopath, or at least closely related.
It is also stated later in the definition of a psychopath that they are of average intelligence. My guess is that its their mental disorder that renders them unable to develop any higher intelligence, luckily for the rest of us.
One form of griefer would be the so called 'script kiddies', who cause grief through generally very poor scripting to achive their malicious goals. They dont have either patience or intelligence to reach any higher levels of programming knowledge.

My advice to deal with griefers, in those cases its possible: ban and ignore, dont even bother to answer, cuz every little reply, no matter how you reply, is the attention they are seeking.

You forget Dr. Hannibal Lecter. Being a diagnosed biploar and "borderline sociopath" myself, I choose to do good, regardless of the fact that in the past I felt no remorse over doing anything to anybody. It took a lot of work on my shrinks' part(s), and it took my mania reaching a level that I couldn't stand, for me to reach this point. I was rejected by the military, but scored high enough on the ASVAB, before my rejection during the psychological evaluation, that my recruiting Sargent recommended me to be Psi-Ops instead of 88-Mike, (truck driving...hey I love to drive).

I beleive that greifers do just what many of the younger ones have a LOT of experience doing in "games" (like Grand Theft Auto), and this Virtual World...though open-scripted enough to allow griefing, is NOT meant to be the "shoot-em'up" or deathmatch style game they are used to. Unfortunately arrested development runs rampant in our society and if you ask me, it's unfortunately on the rise.



Exactly, without your emotional feedback...these weak and socially needy leeches derive NO gratification. They might as well be pokin a rock with a stick!

Okay, so I was digging around looking for the oldest thread in RA to necropost when I came across this gem. It's really interesting, looking back through the past three years just how *little* has changed with some issues.