Can't TP to my land if sim is full

I'm pretty sure this has been commented on, but searching the website isn't finding it.

I bought 1024m2 in what looked like a somewhat busy mainland sim, to use for stashing backups. It turns out that someone who only owns about 1/2 of the land there almost always has 42 avatars in her casino there. So I can't get in when I need to. Is there any recourse? Is LL going to make a fix for this? Should one landowner in a sim hog all of the access so that no one else can get in? I've filed bug reports, but this isn't really a bug. What to do?

There isn't a whole lot you can do, unfortunately.

If you do a recon of the Casino, and it appears that the majority of the avatars there are 'campers' (afk avatars just soaking up free money) - some folks have had mixed success in filing abuse reports.

Unfortunately, the way sim usage is setup, its a classic tragedy of the commons.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_Commons)

Repeatedly AR the club owner for denying you access to your land.

Maybe the Lindens will look into it, eventually.

Otherwise, sell the land to the club and move somewhere more reasonable, like a well-managed private sim that does not allow clubs or casinos. It's doubtful anyone else would buy the land, since they would also be unable to use it...

Thats not the club owners fault, it's LL's fault


how can they 'sell' such HUGE size of land but only allow 50 ppl in it at a time

it's insane

with land as big as a 'sim' in real life you should be able to get at least 20k people in there


i would complain to LL that they need to perhaps run only 1 sim per pc instead of the 4 sims per pc they currently use. that way the users can USE the land they PAY for!

I made the experience that AR helps, if the region really is maxed out. If camping is indeed excessive, some action is taken.

Nut it needs to be "real" useless camping, not a club where a lot of people are having fun.

Incidentally, with dwelling not being used to bring up location statistics anymore, who is benefitting from camping nowadays, anyway? Is it just habit and stubidity which causes mall/club owners to install camping chairs or is there still a reason to subsidise that?

Yeah I'm sure it would be REAL profitable for LL to run an entire datacenter for each Sim on the grid....

Let me break this down to you, from everything I have read SL is BARELY profitable. Now quadruple the DC resources needed to run it. Oh gosh now its not profitable at all!

they r a private company yes?

then all records of profit / loss are private and there is no 'data'

if they r public then records are open and we could see them.

i do not belive they are not making a profit

Thank you! I'll try abuse reports. I don't think increasing the numbers of avatars per sim would help here - she would just use them all, I think. She's got ban lines around the club so I camera'd in - all the players were seated, I couldn't tell who was a camper.

What might help would be a different LL policy - allocating a max number per parcel depending on its size. In other words, someone who owns 1/2 sim could have 42 avatars there if no one else wanted in, but if another landowner wanted to tp in, then one of the casino's avatars gets kicked out. Something like that. She'd have to make all of them owners of the group to get around that.

The casino owner doesn't want more land - why should she? You're right - no one else wants it either - except me, actually - but I'd like to be able to tp or fly to it. I don't like renting from private sims much; at my tier rate it's more flexible and cheaper to buy.

I've read they are planning to stop using traffic to sort searches, but I don't think this has been implemented yet.

Always stood by the position that a landowner should NEVER be unable to access their own property due to sim full situations, even if it means bumping the most recent non resident. They need to figure out how to handle this.

This is a mixture of both problems...

Too many avatars in a sim and the lindens realllllly not having a scalable architecture.

you SHOULD be able to get more than 42 avatars in a sim BUT once you put in there Prim Hair etc .... the load of the server is quite excessive.

The only thing I can think is do AV's like prims i.e so many per 512

Marty

Try it the other way around. I used to struggle to use my home land - which was around a quarter of a sim at the time - due to a club set up on a 1024 attracting over 20 people simultaneously every night. It's an old sim, so it's not got the best performance.

Thankfully they moved on to some private island somewhere.

Linden lab frequently releases information about its profitability in the form of publicity and such like. I know, let's google "Linden Lab" and "profitable" and see what happens.

alt+tabs .. returns ..

http://www.netmag.co.uk/zine/discover-interview/philip-rosedale



First result. For the first time in years they're *close* to turning a profit and of course they're gonna shout this from the rooftops because they want to be bought out by teh Google.

Erk. double negative alert.

IF the casino/club is constantly filling the sim's avatar capacity, and
IF the owner will not do anything to reduce the problem after requests by other landowners, and
IF LL won't do anything whether by system change or attitude adjustment on the club owner

(count the 'IF's)

Then
Since the other residents are effectively unable to use their land for normal purposes, they could instead advance science and human knowledge by using their land to host a big bunch of scripts that do valuable things like constantly finding new prime numbers, or maybe double-checking that the known ones really are prime.
These very heavy scripts might have the unfortunate side effect that all the scripts in the casino would slow down to a craaaaaaaaaawwwwllllllllllllzzzzzzzzzz, but a few more prime numbers for the universe outweigh a few Linden$ for that kind of club owner.
If the club owner is working on the principle that it's ok for her to hog one type of sim resource, then she can't have any valid objection to other landowners hogging other types of sim resource.


Some here might argue that one should not "fight abuse with abuse".
That position, however, admits that what the club owner is doing is an abuse.
That position also assumes that workable alternatives remain available. See the 'IFs' above.

It would be better if everyone behaved responsibly and respectfully towards others as a matter of course.
It would be even better if such behaviour did not need to be encouraged by rules and TOS
fine print.
Unfortunately there are people amongst us who are spiritual pygmies with shrivelled up little souls. That's fine as long as they are not permitted to destroy the experience of others. If LL won't stop them. then nuke them.



All that being said, the OP could just sell up and move. That might sound easier but think about it:-
1) They could be selling a pig in a poke to an unsuspecting buyer, who would have good reason to regard them as dishonest.
2) There might be issues for a buyer actually getting into the sim to buy the plot
3) The price obtained might be less than the cost of the new land
4) Unless they were prepared to buy new land and pay additional tier before selling the old, they would be homeless after the sale. They might feel rushed into buying new land.
5) Taking down and rebuilding something that is not a single linked unit it not trivial.
6) The same thing might happen all over again in the new sim



Get together with the other landowners in the sim.
Approach the club owner as a group
AR as an orchestrated group to LL
If nothing improves, adopt a scorched earth policy. The club will die. Move back home. Repeat as necessary.

Agreed. It's unlikely but maybe the clubowner isn't aware of simulator limits and will choose to be more neighbourly once informed. There again they might not. In which case, the next step in the plan (AR as an orchestrated group) is a suitable response.