Dresden Ceriano Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Lunar Core wrote: I say this as if people need to learn and use personal responsibility and quit looking to someone else to solve all of their problems, nothing more and nothing less. Nowhere have I said a single thing about Linden Lab not bearing any responsibility. That is you making an assumption Dresden. I'm all for people taking personal responsibility, but when you say that people should quit looking to someone else you're essentially saying they shouldn't expect someone else to accept their share of the responsibility... thus my so-called assumption. Lunar Core also wrote: The ONLY thing Linden Lab needs to do in this case is add in the option to block all IMs from anyone that is not in your friend's list. That's it. Same as any other IM system. While this would be a nice option for those that wish to use it, I disagree that it is the only, or even the best, way to deal with this problem. I, for one, wouldn't want to have to resort to blocking everyone from IMing me except for my friends and I'm not even a merchant, who would absolutely need to be able to have customers IM them. The solution is just not that simple and really requires that LL do something to discourage the creation of throw-away alt after throw-away alt. ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tari Landar Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Lunar Core wrote: The ONLY thing Linden Lab needs to do in this case is add in the option to block all IMs from anyone that is not in your friend's list. That's it. Same as any other IM system. I just logged in to double check this,because I was certain it was an option. I might be a bit confused by your statement here though, or just misunderstanding it. Are you saying it's *not an option? Becase this option is available in the firestorm viewer(I can check singularity too, not sure. I don't have the sl viewers installed, but maybe someone else can check them). I also know it works, at least somewhat, because I had to use it for a bit a while back when dealing with some royal tools. In firestorm it's under privacy>general>3rd checkbox down from the top, and says "only friends or groups can call or IM me". I know it's not an ideal solution by any means, I'm only pointing out it exists. The rest is more just a general reply. For those unwilling, or unable, to set filters in their email, it may be a good option to turn that on if the spam is really that bad, or frequent. I can't say for certain, I'm not one of those people-so it may not be too. I have filters set up in my email, but I have for years. I honestly think everyone should, and everyone should learn how and be more proactive than reactive. Sl is hardly the only place one could, potentially, get spam from. I'm not absolving LL of responsibility, by any means. But I am saying there is still a level of personal responsibility that needs to be reached as well, and some truly aren't willing to do that. We can get spam from all kinds of places. Since we have the option to have IMs sent to email-we can, of course, also get spam from sl. In that right, it's not a whole lot different than plenty of other places. I've gotten spam from sl before, just as I've gotten random spam generated from god knows where, and plenty of other places I've been. That's precisely why I have filters set up. So if/when I get spam, I can let them take care of it. And if it's not spam, I *can still check it, if I so desire, before simply deleting it. This particular "company"(mmook that is) doesn't exactly label their spam in a way that most filters would miss it. Most email providers make setting up filters not necessarily too difficult too(ok, not all, but there are plenty of sources one could go to on the 'net to figure out how to do it). Yes I think LL holds some responsibility for their own platform and how people choose to use it. But I honestly think any solution they opt for is, as already described, nuclear. It's entirely reactive, and not proactive. As much as I'd love to give LL and LL alone credit for that fact, I can't. The residents/users are *partially to blame for that too. I'm not saying that to lay all blame on the residents/users, not by a long shot. But just look at how people react to something, like spam. This is certainly not the first thread, and won't be the last. But for some, it gets out of hand, they get beyond up in arms, even frantic about it. What do you expect a company to do when people start acting like chickens with their heads cut off? Yeah I wish they didn't opt for the nuclear reactions to things, and some of their so-called fixes, but I can understand (partially) why sometimes that's their go-to option. I've had similar issues running sites that were hit by spammers and watching my customers do the exact same thing. Of course we didn't choose the same options LL does, and has. But I don't envy anyone that has to deal with wacky waving inflatable arm flailing people. I really don't. They don't help the situation, they're just as reactive(and more often than not, refuse ot be proactive or even helpful, when something goes awry). While it was always my job to protect my site and my customers to the best of my ability, I'm not superwoman. No company is a super company that can protect all of it's customers, 100%, 100% of the time. It's not even remotely reasonable to suggest they should. So, unless people have actual options and ideas as to how LL can better serve the people and help be proactive and not always reactive...they're going to continue to be reactive. That's just how things are sometimes, even though none of us really likes it. What do people propose LL should do to prevent ALL spam? I know, that's an odd question, and I also already know the answer(I think everyone does0. but I love seeing suggestions. Maybe LL could learn a thing or two. Maybe not-we all know they don't typically listen. Certainly other residents here, merely trying to help, aren't going to be able to make the spam go away entirely, for anyone. They can offer suggestions(and they have), but getting angry at them hardly seems productive. Getting angry at them when they make suggestions on things you, yourself, could do, is just as pointless. They really are trying to help, even if you don't think so, and even at times when they may be blunt and very straightforward to the pint they basically tell you to stop acting like a nutjob and DO something. Yeah, not the nicest approach, but you have to admit, sometimes it's actually effective. Sometimes people get tired of telling others how to better help themselves in situations where LL is(obviously) not going to help. Because the ones who need the help, aren't even listening in the first place. I can understand that frustration-from both sides of the coin. Yeah, I'm long winded, I know TLDR; Set up filters for your email, if you absolutely must you DO have the option to only allow groups and friends to IM you(which includes IM to email). Let LL know you're unhappy with how they're dealing with something by filing tickets and JIRAs where needed(yes, even if you don't think it's going to do a lick of good...occasionally it does). Don't get angry with residents who are trying to help. Don't get angry with residents who are utterly frustrated when things are just going terribly wrong for them. Spam, although absolutely annoying at times, is not the end of the world. You do have ways to protect yourself from it-even if you think LL should be doing better. Utilize them, they work. There is no 100% solution to spam, it's out there, it will find you, you can deal with it, I promise.(and please don't think that's as condescending as it sounds, it was sincere) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anya Ristow Posted January 13, 2014 Author Share Posted January 13, 2014 Lunar Core wrote: tell a user how to fix it on THEIR END one-step thinking mathematical fail I-got-mine solution Reminds me of the spam apologists of the 90's. Just delete it. Learn to use procmail. Blah blah blah. Look around you at the people in your life. Do they know how to filter their email? Should that be an obstacle to using SL? Ever hear of a company called google, and a product called gmail? That's right, people like spam filters. People *need* spam filters. My solution would be even simpler than yours. I could block all SL email. Done. No adding to filters ever again. I got mine. But some part of me still has hope for SL. I want it to be non-hostile to real people. I want it to be successful. I want it to be a place that isn't only for dweebs and their anti-social suggestions and their spam filters. Any effort LL makes is multiplied by the number of users they have. It's worth some effort to protect their platform and make it non-hostile for their users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Anya Ristow wrote: Lunar Core wrote: tell a user how to fix it on THEIR END one-step thinking mathematical fail I-got-mine solution Reminds me of the spam apologists of the 90's. Just delete it. Learn to use procmail. Blah blah blah. If you're not a shut-in and actually know people, look around you at the people in your life. Do they know how to filter their email? Should that be an obstacle to using SL? Ever hear of a company called google, and a product called gmail? That's right, people like spam filters. People *need* spam filters. My solution would be even simpler than yours. I could block all SL email. Done. No adding to filters ever again. I got mine. But some part of me still has hope for SL. I want it to be non-hostile to real people. I want it to be successful. I want it to be a place that isn't only for dweebs and their anti-social suggestions and their spam filters. Any effort LL makes is multiplied by the number of users they have. It's worth some effort to protect their platform and make it non-hostile for their users. I'm not sure I completely understand your post. But what makes us think that LL isn't looking into the problem? Many are assuming that LL shut down the private message function on My Second Life in response to the Mmook spam. The timing makes it look that way but I am not convinced it is the only reason. I have no evidence that I can cite, but I personally am wondering about the security of the Web Based services in general. And Instant Messaging In World. How the heck do you set up Spam Filters server side on something like that? Viewer side it would be plausible but it would need to be my choice whether or not I ever wanted to see the word F*ck in an IM. I sure don't want LL playing Chat Nanny for me. Could making new account registration harder on the Spammers? Possibly, but for many of them it would only be a minor annoyance. Pay for accounts? If Mmook spent ten dollars and earned one hundred it would still be a nice ROI. Maybe LL can come up with a solution. I truly hope that they do. But the proposed solutions to the problems I keep hearing may not be as simple to implement as people are making them out to be. On my end Mmook will be treated as spam by my E Mail. That took almost no effort on my part. It took less time to set that up than what it took for me to write this post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Core Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Oh look! The very user I've been talking about has come back to once again throw away anything that isn't a cry to Linden Lab! No, it is not "one step thinking" - it is reality and personal responsibility. If you cannot handle that, don't use the internet. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Core Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Perrie Juran wrote: Anya Ristow wrote: Lunar Core wrote: tell a user how to fix it on THEIR END one-step thinking mathematical fail I-got-mine solution Reminds me of the spam apologists of the 90's. Just delete it. Learn to use procmail. Blah blah blah. If you're not a shut-in and actually know people, look around you at the people in your life. Do they know how to filter their email? Should that be an obstacle to using SL? Ever hear of a company called google, and a product called gmail? That's right, people like spam filters. People *need* spam filters. My solution would be even simpler than yours. I could block all SL email. Done. No adding to filters ever again. I got mine. But some part of me still has hope for SL. I want it to be non-hostile to real people. I want it to be successful. I want it to be a place that isn't only for dweebs and their anti-social suggestions and their spam filters. Any effort LL makes is multiplied by the number of users they have. It's worth some effort to protect their platform and make it non-hostile for their users. I'm not sure I completely understand your post. But what makes us think that LL isn't looking into the problem? Many are assuming that LL shut down the private message function on My Second Life in response to the Mmook spam. The timing makes it look that way but I am not convinced it is the only reason. I have no evidence that I can cite, but I personally am wondering about the security of the Web Based services in general. And Instant Messaging In World. How the heck do you set up Spam Filters server side on something like that? Viewer side it would be plausible but it would need to be my choice whether or not I ever wanted to see the word F*ck in an IM. I sure don't want LL playing Chat Nanny for me. Could making new account registration harder on the Spammers? Possibly, but for many of them it would only be a minor annoyance. Pay for accounts? If Mmook spent ten dollars and earned one hundred it would still be a nice ROI. Maybe LL can come up with a solution. I truly hope that they do. But the proposed solutions to the problems I keep hearing may not be as simple to implement as people are making them out to be. On my end Mmook will be treated as spam by my E Mail. That took almost no effort on my part. It took less time to set that up than what it took for me to write this post! This bolded part a thousand times over. Frankly if people cannot take the rather small amount of time it takes to set up a filter for something like this, they do not need to be using the Internet. You will get Spam on occasion from various sources no matter what. Instead of crying to your ISP or any other service to handle it for you (and lets be realistic here, they're already handling it as best they can), people should be taking common sense steps themselves. Anya's continual "one step thinking" response is nothing more than a projection. It is "one step thinking" to demand that a service do everything for you. No other service is expected to supply the sort of "do it all for me" solutions that have been demanded by some of the most vocal users here. None. This is no different, Second Life is not some Special Snowflake that requires that sort of response. as another poster has pointed out, some of the third party programs already have an option to block all IMs that do not originate from your firend list. This option will not work for everyone but quite frankly, expecting the service owner to cover each and every use case is unrealsitic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephina Frostbite Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Laughs at your posts whining about whiners. Got to love a hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Core Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Learn the difference between whining and stating facts before laughing next time. Maybe then you will not be laughing at a hypocrisy that does not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anya Ristow Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 Lunar Core wrote: No, it is not "one step thinking" It's one-step thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anya Ristow Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 Aethelwine wrote: I remember reading the hypothesis the mmook spammers were going through the database of SL names alphabetically so maybe that is why those with names beginning with A are the ones complaining whilst those later in the alphabet are oblivious? Yeah, here's an Amanda who's been spammed: in-world spam Also, I received just the one. Maybe LL is on top of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Core Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Nope - it's reality. Running to Linden Lab, without making even one realistic suggestion, is "one-step thinking" of a sort that no other service is expected to listen to. Follow the advice you've been given or put forth a reasonable suggestion (no, charging for an account is not realistic or reasonable). Continually responding to common sense methods for spam control with your "one-step thinking" projectionist crap does nothing more than show the type of person you really are: One that expects everyone else to do everything for them. But hey - at least your sort keeps those lovely Identity Theft "protection" services in business! One born every minute! Edited to add: Oh and so you are aware: Even Blizzard cannot stop spammers of this nature. They've tried. Their response? Report and block the spammer. In the case of Blizzard, these spammers even go so far now as to try and hack/hijack existing accounts. Be very thankful that all you're getting is a minor annoyance (an IM or offline directed to your e-mail) as it could very well be far worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephina Frostbite Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 This is blantent pot calling kettle black. There are ways to get a point across with out being rude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Core Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 There are also ways of reading a post without inventing rudeness or hypocrisy. Learn them. Or go through life with the belief that everyone that is blunt with you is rude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anya Ristow Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 Lunar Core wrote: Nope - it's reality. Yep. Definitely. One-step thinking. There's your reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Core Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Thank you for confirming that all you are capable of is projecting your own nonsense onto anyone who dares to give you common sense advice. If you honestly expect each and every service provider to do everything for you, you will live in eternal disappointment. That is your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pussycat Catnap Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Anya Ristow wrote: I called it. I said there was no reason bots sending private messages couldn't instead send IMs, and that people who were suggesting just turning off private messages were one-step thinkers. I just got my first IM-to-email spam from mmook. Phil, you gonna suggest people turn that off, too? I will. The IM from the feeds is basically an ability to IM from out of world. That is how bots work it without ever having logged into SL to begin with. No need for that functionality to exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anya Ristow Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 Lunar Core wrote: Thank you for confirming that all you are capable of is projecting your own nonsense onto anyone who dares to give you common sense advice. If you honestly expect each and every service provider to do everything for you, you will live in eternal disappointment. That is your choice. One. Solitary. Step. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anya Ristow Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 Pussycat Catnap wrote: The IM from the feeds is basically an ability to IM from out of world. That is how bots work it without ever having logged into SL to begin with. No need for that functionality to exist. As far as I can tell, there is no longer any way to contact people via IM from the web interface. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when I select IM from your web profile it launches the SL viewer. That is, there's no web interface for IM. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Anya Ristow wrote: Pussycat Catnap wrote: The IM from the feeds is basically an ability to IM from out of world. That is how bots work it without ever having logged into SL to begin with. No need for that functionality to exist. As far as I can tell, there is no longer any way to contact people via IM from the web interface. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when I select IM from your web profile it launches the SL viewer. That is, there's no web interface for IM. Right? The IM function on the web profiles always opened the viewer, what you and Pussycat are talking about is the PM function, which was removed by LL. ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm Clarence Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Anya Ristow wrote: Lunar Core wrote: Thank you for confirming that all you are capable of is projecting your own nonsense onto anyone who dares to give you common sense advice. If you honestly expect each and every service provider to do everything for you, you will live in eternal disappointment. That is your choice. One. Solitary. Step. Look up the UCCSL. One. Solitary. Step. And they fell on their face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 I looked up your "one step thinking" phrase because I hadn't come across it before, and I found that it's not a well known phrase or saying. So, unless I'm mistaken, you use it to mean that people (including me) are suggesting a single step to take that will solve the problem. If a single step does solve a problem then it's ideal, and "one step thinking" is a huge positive. You wrongly use the phrase as though doing it is a negative. One-steps on this particular subject have been such things as report the spam to LL and let them come up with a solution (that's your one step), set up an email filter (that's a one-step from me and others), and restrict profile feeds (also me and others). So we've all come up with "one step thinking" solutions and, if any work, they are brilliant. When mmook turned to using IMs, then the single steps above, apart from yours, didn't cover all of it, and yours might be the only one-step that could actually work. It could be an example of successful "one step thinking". What I'm really saying is that if "one step thinking" can solve a problem then it's perfect and there is never any reason for anyone, such as you, to see it as a negative. Until IMs started to be used, the one-steps above were perfectly good positive solutions In the current circumstances, where both feeds and IMs are being used, your one-step hasn't worked yet, though it may do in the future, so we are left with multiple step thinking, such as set up an email filter, and restrict your profile feed, and contact LL, and encourage third party viewer producers to incorporate a function that allows us to block IMs based on certain words. In general The idea of setting the viewer to accept only IMs from friends isn't a solution for many people, not only because merchants need to allow enquiries and other IMs from non-friends, but also because probably most people prefer that they can receive IMs from strangers. I would guess that only a minority of people would want to set IMs to friends only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lunar Core Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Welcome. To. Reality. When all other service providers and entertainment providers (including Blizzard) manage to block Spammers from sending their messages through Instant message in an effective manner that reduces such events to negligible, let us know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pussycat Catnap Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Anya Ristow wrote: Pussycat Catnap wrote: The IM from the feeds is basically an ability to IM from out of world. That is how bots work it without ever having logged into SL to begin with. No need for that functionality to exist. As far as I can tell, there is no longer any way to contact people via IM from the web interface. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when I select IM from your web profile it launches the SL viewer. That is, there's no web interface for IM. Right? I've no "dog in the fight" that broke out in this thread - I'd only read the Original Post. There used to be a way to IM via the website profile. I've even used it once or twice: That was/is a gateway through which web-bots, which had not even installed the viewer, could spam users. Before, it did not open the viewer - at least as far as I recalled. That it does now is a good thing. The screenshot there is one of my alts, taken in a browser that has images disabled. I'm on a system with no SL installed right now - and that it requires the viewer means the button simply had no effect when I tried it. An automated bot would just register no response I suspect, and move on to clicking the other links on the page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillon Levenque Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Confirmed. I just tested it as well and in fact it would not let me send an IM from this PC, which has no viewer installed. I was able to post, but I couldn't message. That's kind of a pain (I hardly ever use that feature but it was nice to have the option) but I must admit I like the idea of at the very least putting some kind of a roadblock in front of the spammers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwine Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Just been spammed again which I have AR'ed and blocked like last time. What makes people think they aren't logging in world to send the spam? And how do I go about stopping it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now