Ad Farms + Beacons way up in air! Yikes!

give us the ability to visually mute them.

I can be convinced that this won't magically make all the ad farms go away. But, so far, I'm unconvinced that it won't help at all. Besides, ad farms aren't the only plots I'd like to visually mute.

--Hugsy

That's not a solution we have.

Not yet. And if we do get it, it will help. It will help me, a lot of other landowners who are adjacent to ad farms, and visitors to our land. It may not help noobs right away, but when they get educated on the feature, it will help them too.

--Hugsy

I think the problem here is, there is a constituency for turning SL into a nanny state. Not gonna happen. Because doing the staffing required to operate SL as a nanny state and adjudicate the disputes that would arise would bankrupt LL.

Nanny-state will not work.

What will work is putting the tools to handle their individual problems into the hands of the individuals, so they can make their decisions themselves. Policing the small percentage of people who will abuse that is VASTLY easier than policing the whole grid. In this case, that means visual muting, which I suspect might require a couple days' work by a competent programmer, as opposed to an officious, bureaucratic army of employees.

Oh, and there are already workable individual-level alternatives here. They are called screens, which can be very attractive. I know, because I make them. Visual muting would make them unnecessary, but in the meantime, if you have an ad-farmer or other land-griefer problem, look into landscape screens.

And let's get visual muting.

Mr Fairweather, SL _is_ a "nanny state". All of the regulations we have - the property rights, the content rights, the security of money in some occasions though not others, the ban lines, the prohibitions on ageplay and nazism and random pushgunning, the sleep functions in scripts - those were all decided on by people. If we were going to have a proper state of nature we'd remove an enormous chunk of that, and it would be interesting to see what would happen.

Sorry, the likelihood is FAR greater than nil in such a case. I saw numerous cases of LL acting against resource abuse WHEN IT WAS AR'ED AND PROVABLE, and so did many others. First, you can get multiple ARs from everyone in the sim hurt by this. LL responds to multiple ARs. Second, the lag or resources abuse is demonstrable and directly observable by LL. LL takes action when they have incontrovertible evidence that the AR complaint is real. Third, sim abuse is something LL takes seriously, as opposed to someone going WAAH! He bumped me! It is abusing LL's servers, not just individual Residents. They do not like their servers being abused. It forces them to spend money on even more servers, and they will be happy to take action against someone who does that.

Where does it stop then? I find one of Lias' builds to be an extreme eyesore, should she be forced to change it? No, it is her land. Let her do what she wishes with it, until she causes real harm to someone else.

And don't pull out that tired "property value" charge. LL did more to destroy property values when they dumped all the sims this fall than any ad farmer has ever done in SL.

There is a vast apace between anarchy, or a "state of nature," the extreme straw man you are setting up, and the sort of micro-management and substitution of the authority of a central bureaucratic entity for the judgment of individual adults inherent in the concept of "nanny state." The misapprehension is so vast it appears intentional.

Property rights - are invested in each individual who owns property. Your land, your rules, remember? No nanny state there, unless you want to distort the meaning of the term to include any law, rule or regulation imposed by a government or quasi-governmental authority. If you do, you are then pretending that individual freedom and responsibility equates with anarchy. It does not.

Content rights - are invested in the individuals who own the content. The individuals are left with the decision about what, if anything, to do about their content rights. LL does not make those decisions for them. Again, no nanny state in this case, unless you want to distort the sense of the term "nanny state" so enormously that it becomes devoid of any meaning except "I want it to mean something, anything, that will help me score a rhetorical win."

I'm not sure what you mean by the security of money in some cases and not others, but my experience of SL has been that your money is your own responsibility, unless you lose it because of a screw-up by LL, in which case you MAY get it back. Cite me a case where there is any nanny-stateism in regard to money, or I am not going to believe your contention, and neither will anyone else.

Prohibitions against ageplay and nazism were imposed by LL because ageplay (by which I will charitably assume you mean sexual ageplay) creates a very real and fundamental threat to the existence of Second Life because of very fundamental RL considerations; and open displays of nazism were demonstrably so disruptive to SL that permitting them was perceived by LL to be a real threat to SL. I personally believe that, instead of banning nazi display, they should have made those doing it fair game to every one else, but opinions differ. Taking action against fundamental existential threats to the existence of SL is not nanny-stateism - again, unlees you want to misstate and distort the meaning of the term "nanny state" to serve an argumentative agenda.

"Decided by people." This is something incomprehensible as a matter to be discussed here. EVERYTHING in SL was "decided by people." The code that allows it to exist, the server farms on which it sits, the business known as LL, and every object and action in SL is something "decided by people." This term goes beyond the concept of "non sequitur." It becomes insanity. "Decided by people" does not equate with a nanny state. "Nanny state" is all about WHICH people decide WHAT, not whether something is decided by a person of some sort. If not decided by people, pray tell, what else is anything in SL decided by? Or are you saying that Residents are not people, only Lindens are people?

The appeal to authoritarianism, you see, is not rational. Rationalizations in its defense are just that, rationalizations. The appeal to authoritarianism, IMO, is made by people who either (a) want someone else to take responsibility for their existence, or (b) lust for power and suppose the resulting authoritarian regime will either include them or else serve their agendas. All of which is unworthy for rational, mature, functioning, free individuals.

Goodness. Such a reaction.

The proposal, in case it was not clear, that the regulations deliberately imposed as part of the structure of SL - a large degree of inviolate property rights and far more effective than any sort of RL wall or weapon, a mechanism for possessing currency that is built into the nature of the universe where it cannot be taken without one's consent, protection against items being duplicated that goes far beyond that which exists outside of SL - all of these things were decisions on the part of LL, designed (I assume) to produce some sort of fair society. None of the "rights" of which I speak _had_ to be put into place. They are political and arbitrary.

The entire _point_ is that a huge amount of things in SL were "decided by people", given that it is created by people - that is why I said that in the first place. There are other restrictions which weren't, or which had lesser ideological basis behind them - restricting prims, for instance, is less ideological and more to do with the fact that servers can only handle a certain number of resources, and to encourage people to spend more money if they want more of them - and some of the ideological ones might also have practical implications.

But there really isn't any intrinsic difference between banning somebody from rezzing prims wherever they like and banning people from rezzing prims that display unacceptable things, except that the former is bad for business and there is a vague general consensus that the latter would be unacceptable.

We are nannied, constantly. It is just that sometimes we agree with nanny, and sometimes we don't. The whole point of society is to come to a consensus on the matter; hard to do in a world where we have effectively no individual impact, and also hard to do in SL (ho ho).

There is a great deal of difference between rezzing prims in general, which is an identifiable action with measurable effects on the grid, and rezzing prims that display unacceptable things, because "unacceptable" requires making a subjective value judgment concerning the prim. LL limits prim rezzing in various ways so the grid can function. It limits rezzing "unacceptable" prims very reluctantly, because the question inevitably is, unacceptable to whom?

As for being nannied constantly, sorry, you are generalizing a term beyond all meaning. Again. Repeating the same fallacy after being called on it does not validate the fallacy,

And SL is not a world in which we have no individual impact. It is true an individual has little and in some cases not impact on the grid as a whole, but in this thread we are not discussing the grid a s a whole, remember? We are discussing dealing with ad farms and other eyesores IN THE EXPERIENCE OF THE INDIVIDUAL. Best way to deal with that is not to make blanket ukases about what is "acceptable" and what is not grid-wide. Best way of dealing with that is putting the tools in the hands of the individual affected to eliminate his problem himself. In the matter of the particular experience and environment in which an individual Resident operates, the individual resident has a great deal of individual impact. Best swolution here is to enable the individual Resident to have more impact that allows him to deal with problems not yet dealt with that are widely understood to be problems.

If doing so is indeed "hard to do in SL," then the fix is to make it less hard to do.

I moved to OpenLife. It's a brand new world, still in Alpha and buggy, but at least you can run it on your own PC as a stand alone version. and yes, exporting prims from stand alone sim to OpenLife grid is possible and will be implemented from the get go.... Talk about a kick in LL's ass.

Let me tell you a little story about Foxboro. When it first opened, it was a beautiful region. Nice grassy setting with a little hillside type environment and large parcels that could have been nice as either residences or store fronts. My business partner and I bought two "future roadside" parcels there. We have a big store that fit in well with what others in the area were doing. And we preserved a large part of the parcel as a park and built a stream and small lake to keep the ambiance of the region.

Enter ad farmers. Across the road from us and all the way to the end of the region has become contaminated with tiny ad farm spaces that are priced into the ozone and just waiting to be cluttered up by ad farmers. There have already been several ads crop up in these, and C.E. is only one of them.

C.E, putting little trees around the base of your ads does not make up for the ugly particles shooting up into the sky or lag generated by timers and texture switchers running. I WILL give you credit for not making the darn things rotate. But do not claim the "high ground" in Foxboro until you lose the particles. You are not the only ad farmer along the Foxboro some-day-to-be-road, but those particles make yours the gaudiest there for the moment, though I also admit that there will probably soon be worse ones moving in to compete with your particles.

And before you comment about my Apez vendors I will point out that I have turned off all of the cyclers in them. They do not cycle except on demand by a user.

Cytherea and the rest of the "ad" farmers are nothing but extortionists. They arent interested in ads except for the fact that they are currently legal forms of griefing to extort high sums for their lil parcels. Sad thing is, they are so prevalent... because it works. Any idiot can be an ad farmer and make money... as long as they have no social conscience

Help take the economic incentive for being a jerk out of our world: Limit maximum sale price based on land parcel size, to combat ad farms / extortion / land griefing

http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-894

Visit, log in, and vote for it.

This won't work they will simply just do the same as they do now, but have a prim sign at the bottom facing the targets land saying "For Sale- $20k"

LL needs to fix this, they are responsible for creating a land without basic zoning and structure, and if it meant they had to employ some Lindens for this task, they should do it, it's not like they need anyone with a diploma to police this.
Everytime they create a new continent, they have the chance to do something about this, but they don't.

You have to break eggs to make an omlette, if one fix would work without upsetting anyone then it would have been done by now

There absolutely nothing LL can do without someone bitching about it. *NOTHING*

Give me various options for turning off the display of other people's objects. In this case, if the broken egg is someone getting upset that I muted their objects, I really don't care.

--Hugsy

QFT - like has been said many times, the key to anything is Abuse Reporting. Not one or two but HUNDREDS where a ToS is in place.

The more they get, the more they CAN act. Not want to. Not can be bothered to - can. The justification has to be there in the form of reasons.

I would LOVE to be able to banish annoying objects from rezzing for me or for people visiting my parcel! There wouldn't be a need for any sort of rules or policing from LL if they'd give us this power.

Only thing that I could see as a stumbling block to this idea is the temp rezzers and particles. It'd be great that if the source object is 'shunned' then so too is whatever it emits.

Don't think it would be ... would still affect sim performance :/

And does it have to be against the the TOS to recieve an AR? If itt's Abusive, it's Abusive.....

YESSSSSS finally some with a great idea ive been wanting to post something about this forever but figured it was a total waste of time.Im sure we all at one point or another have had are run ins with famous people such Robo Marx,Umnik Hax among 100s of others and yes im saying thier names they are probably the top 2 hated people in SL at the moment I dont see why Linden cant step in and make the limit on a 16sq something other than me paying 5000 lindens or more when i can go buy a 512sq for less LOL what a joke and believe me I have left my messages to them both.I just reminded them its untalented people like them that make everyone else that is here for fun hate them.I could do the same thing i have money in the bank it would only take around 100 US dollars to start one of thier little Scams.Ive figured a measly 100 US dollars could buy and break up at least 200 16sq areas maybe more if you found a cheap parcel to destroy then they flip and sell them for 20 US dollars a piece or more just dont sound very fare to me LINDEN WHERE ARE YOU,or is it like the ROADS AFK ,sorry for all the venting but recently i was suspended for having a greeters shout distance set to far near someone shop that did the exact same thing to me,I did receive the email but yes we are busy people in RL aswell linden not much warning and they booted me.NOW WHERE IS THE BOOT FOR AD FARMERS OPEN YOUR EYES , thanx and have a nice day LOL

if anyone knows of one circulating please let me know i have 100s of people that would sign the thing i would make a public vendor even for real shop owners to place in thier stores for a vote this is a MAJOR issue effecting SL

Sure Shawn... most of the ideas around this are on the JIRA issue system. The one I've proposed is a scalable cap on land prices based on the size of the parcel itself. It kills the ad cutting business, encourages combining of small parcels into bigger ones, but wouldn't impact livable parcels.

http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-894

Visit, log in, and vote for it.

Hi. Just a quick note...after months of removing the tacky beacons...the ad farmer has replaced her beacon in my sim. If anyone has figured out a way to get Lindens to remove this using any of the new "rules"....let me know. Thanks.

I might be wrong but it seems to me that right here you are admitting that you set up this lot the way you did with intent to cause grief to the neighboring parcel. That is griefing, plain and simple. Whether he griefed you first or not is irrelevant, he has not admitted to it, but you have admitted to griefing him. Two wrongs do not make a right. And while you are maybe feeling like you are getting him back, you are also making other people suffer, who did no wrong to you.

Why not be the bigger person, AR someone if they grief you, then build a bridge and get over it? "Biting back" should not be your course of action, especially when innocent people have to suffer your eyespam as well.