BarcodeBrian

For quick sale. Includes roadside length across a little more than half the region. http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Demorgan/107/121/49 1.5L/m ² obo

Sized for buy for group: Two 560 m² parcels (128 LI), L$2323 each: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/243/80/79 , sold http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/182/179/82 . sold One 1120 m² parcel (256 LI), L$4423: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/110/208/90 . sold

You are confusing yourself. In an attempt to be even more clear, for what Dora has said: llOwnerSay() sends messages to the viewer of the object's owner. All scripts run on the server, therefore, none of them can detect messages sent to a viewer; the exception with RLV is that these viewers can share data related to messages received using @ symbol (details out of scope, but that's about as simple as I can explain it).

Letting go of approx. 18,000 m² adult land in Polasido - various sized; some with maximum, 10% tier-free group bonus included. Two standard sized larger parcels: - 4096 m²; (937 LI); L$14,540: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/224/226/81 . sold - 2048 m²; (468 LI); L$7,679: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/224/175/80 . sold Two 1024 m²; (234 LI); L$4,147 each: - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/174/79/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/210/76/80 . sold Four 512 m², (117 LI); L$2,124 each: - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/175/132/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/216/120/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/233/123/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/209/95/80 . sold Sized for buy for group: Eleven 512 560 m² (117 128 LI); L$2323 each: - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/141/109/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/162/110/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/182/111/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/200/120/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/208/96/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/248/78/79 . - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/238/97/79 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/191/150/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/216/148/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/242/149/80 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/183/176/81 . Two 1024 1120 m² (234 256 LI); L$4,423: - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/113/115/81 . sold - http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Polasido/104/203/90 . Very few micro lots left over - available for area land owners. Send an IM for any modifications wanted.

Prokofy Neva wrote: Piety about the TOS or the propensity of pasted items to be suspect are entirely beside the point in -- may I say it once more -- a world where anyone in a group that sees the same thing -- multiple people! -- can a) paste chat to an abuse report, as far as it goes b) paste chat to a landlord. Public chat spam put in a group can HARDLY be the grounds for a TOS violation when related to a landlord for action. This is sophistry. Point a is correct. Point b is not. Nothing may come of it likely, but it is still against ToS.

Artorius Constantine wrote: If anyone cares, I had an extra "id." in it. Finally got it. Auto attach on touch, no open listeners, temporary object,, temp attach. And it works! Yaaaaaaay! Now to figure out how to make a cumulative score keeper that adds to the count every time someone drinks one. Do I have this order right? Touch rezzer, drink rezzes and the rezzer says "Touch me to attach", now when they touch it. I have all the permissions I need for the rest of this I think On attach the drink rezzes a HUD, that HUD auto attaches (I should have the permissions from the drink right?)and Rezzes the AO, which then auto attaches with the same set of permissions. Make any sense? I want to eventually make these drinks "experiance enabled" but for now I want them to work everwhere. No, you are not correct. Each item will need its own permissions granted for themselves; unless Experience enabled, in which permissions for the Experience as a whole need only be granted one time. You shouldn't need an AO; you can always ask for permission to animate after the first attach happens (the trickier part Rolig mentioned). Any animations for it should be inside the same attachment, and the script holding those permissions should handle it.

Is your head or ears the only mesh you are talking about? First, make sure you are wearing only one copy of it at a time. If that's not the problem, contact the seller.

Chrismaky wrote: Honestly, I have NEVER seen a piece of "crappy" mesh. Compared to prim-made objects? ANY mesh made thing would look 10x better. False on all accounts, including what you've seen. This only shows you don't know the difference between quality mesh and crappy mesh because the low quality mesh in SL outnumbers the quality mesh. The differences are both looks (up close and farther away to where it should still look nice), and the strain on resources that the lower quality creates. The LI alone is not the determining factor. It should mostly be lower than prims, but too low usually means it turns into triangle pieces or disappears way too soon. The opposite is also true; high LI often means it is heavy on vertices and made more complicated than it needs to be.

Inside your listen event, try: llRequestPermissions((key)message,PERMISSION_ATTACH); Nothing else for your simple example. Of course, the way you have it written for testing, once rezzed, it will try attaching to what it will interpret as a key to any chat at all on local channel. I'm sure you were planning on filtering for a specific channel, and/or from the rezzing object's UUID. Without shutting off the listener, this attempt will be forever repeating when local chat is heard. Rather than resetting the script if not attached when rezzed, define a listener (with a variable) and shut it off after hearing or when timer runs out, let it delete itself. I prefer to temporarily change the rezzing objects description to the target avatar, and in the rezzed object, use llGetObjectDetails for both its own OBJECT_REZZER_KEY, and then OBJECT_DESC of the rezzer for the target UUID. Let the rezzing object reset its description after a short timer, and no listeners unless needed for other tasks. Your way will also work.

I really can't let this part slide either. Prokofy Neva wrote: that their profit-making for themselves selfishly, at the expense of the rest of us who are in groups or run groups, is *just not on*. Users reading group chat have no expense whatsoever going to a landowner. None. And very few landlords in SL are making a profit. Even you, when often renting close to L$1 per prim, (IF you had 100% occupancy for a month - we all know that doesn't happen), would need to own an entire mainland continent before profit might be a rational word to use. You have authority to eject a renter for any or no reason. Perhaps you should include a disclaimer beforehand to your customers that if anyone claims their store brand was mentioned in a group, they will be evicted. Seems the description of a reputable landlord is getting quite hazy.

I suppose you can try reading my post again. It doesn't say what you think it does. Prokofy Neva wrote: In a world where you can cut and paste chat from a group that clearly shows a spammer, it's hardly some "he said she said" vague accusation. I never insinuated that complaints of spam were disingenuous. Nor was there a 'he said she said' reference to spammers. Look at what I bolded in the quote, (especially the last word bolded), which was added as a landlord's responsibility to police. There's a clue, both for that analogy and the fallacy of expecting user, landlords or whoever, to police venues of other users. Let me spell something out a little more clear: Group spam is not always originated by those promoting the store. It is sometimes done by those who wish to make that store look bad, which is the effect it has on an overwhelming majority of those witnessing it regardless. It rarely causes someone to visit, and almost never gives them anything but a bad reputation. Prokofy Neva wrote: In a world where you can cut and paste chat Nothing is proven from this; it is easily faked to anyone but LL, who are capable of seeing the actual records as they were entered in the chat. You know this very well, but I will spare you the embarrassment of a source. It is also against ToS to cut and paste this chat to another user inworld without the chatter's consent. Landlords are welcome to handle their own business relationships, but they step outside of their own ToS-granted jurisdiction at their own peril.

rainbow Fairymeadow wrote: For the life of me, I cant see WHY you would answer like that.. so crappy! People come to the forums to ask questions and get help, not to get smart pants answers like this one Speak for yourself, please. I often only come here to read the hilarious replies.

ChinRey wrote: That was the point of my first post - not sure if I managed to make that clear. Renting out land for spamming and griefing and other antisocial activities hurts your reputation as a landowner. To the best of my knowledge, that is not the reason anyone rents out land. Furthermore, as Amethyst pointed out, where does it end? Your sentence above implies far more than spamming a group. ChinRey wrote: You loose money on ti because it drives away other more reliable potential renters. If one of your tenants is harassing another of your tenants, I can see taking action. It usually involves a little more than an accusation; and should originate from another of your tenants. The reliability of renters in SL is most likely irrelevant. ChinRey wrote: The moral aspect is quite interesting and rather complex but it's not actually very relevant in this case: The moral aspect is very relevant. Is creating alts to spam a few groups the new way to close the land stores of your competitors? Is it even slightly moral for any resident to assume the role of finding this out? Or we can go hunt for anyone renting to someone who got pissed and cursed our friend and unload on them if you prefer. I know who I would be muting.

Chibbchichi wrote: 1. this thread was posted in the wrong forum 2. doesn't change the fact you derail it 3. i bought the head anyways because i found it 4. your point ??? just creating steam it seams lol 1. Your mistake- so what? 2. Derailing is bad for trains. For threads, it can prevent people from going to horrible places, and nobody gets killed. 3. We're happy for you. 4. His point was that for many, that is something that might be wise to avoid. I agree with it; YMMV.

Chaser Zaks wrote: BarcodeBrian wrote: Chaser Zaks wrote: While I do agree LL should do something about Tramps and their spam bots(They register a new account every day or so, as such it is impossible to block them). You can stop them from spamming you. Go to their place, cause problems and break their rules, get yourself banned from the sim(Estate banned, not parcel banned. Taunt them from outside the parcel if they parcel ban you). They will ban you from tramps but they will also remove you from the spam list. Yes it is a poor work-around since LL has refused to ban them for over 6+ months, but it works. I did that. Decided to accept the tp one time so that I could voice my complaint vividly, shouting. I got banned. The teleport offers continued. The only result is you get denied entry, but the tp spam continues. It really can be a hassle depending on the user and what they are doing. The new Firestorm preferences were the only way I found to stop them. Give it a day or two, maybe a week. Bots have to update their lists. It lasted for a couple of months before I used the new Firestorm settings, and I therefore have no reason to give it any time at all. There is no reason to think those Bots will update any lists. The owner of them might, eventually, but if it happened anywhere near that quickly you wouldn't have seen these threads. I originally blocked all teleport requests until I needed to have them available - and when enabled again weeks later, they returned. Impatience of the spammed is not a factor here. Please don't pretend it is. Multiple threads and a new Firestorm preference were not created frivolously. Did you read the whole thread, or any others? ETA: The title of this thread alone, with the original and Whirly's post really said a lot. They were not wrong.