Security orb height limits needs to be capped

[steph Arnott]

You sure see more than most in regards to this "are engaged in conflict,". Ever tried too read and not add yoiur emotions too  it?

[Kelli May]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

I realize it's Saturday (Sunday, even, in half of Asia) but there's the chance here to make this the Friday thread of all time. Now that Steph and bebejee are engaged in conflict, we should all just step quietly away and let the two of them snipe on. An all-out, no slur spared steel-cage death match of arrogance, ignorance, and entitlement.

---

We get to find out what happens when an irresistible moron meets an immovable tw*t.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Kelli May wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

I realize it's Saturday (Sunday, even, in half of Asia) but there's the chance here to make this the Friday thread of all time. Now that Steph and bebejee are engaged in conflict, we should all just step quietly away and let the two of them snipe on. An all-out, no slur spared steel-cage death match of arrogance, ignorance, and entitlement.

---

We get to find out what happens when an irresistible moron meets an immovable tw*t.

---

We all enjoy watching people make fools of themselves.

(Well actually I shouldn't say "We all."  Because really I don't.  But in Steph's case this bigot is making an exception).

[Phil Deakins]

---

bebejee wrote:

I was at a height where all you could see was haze, you dont expect security warning there, as for the PC talk, so not working.

---

So you weren't very high up - about 200m I think. You might not have known that these days (probably ever since you've been in SL) orbs can protect parcels all the way up. If you didn't know it before, you do now.

[Phil Deakins]

---

bebejee wrote:

Long enough to know how ridiculous some of you are with your RL like talk for a pixel game.

---

Not nearly a ridiculous as you complaining that your "pixel game" "fun" was ruined

[Phil Deakins]

---

steph Arnott wrote:

You post garbage.

---

Seconded.

[Phil Deakins]

---

bebejee wrote:

A free loader who has managed to make atleast 5t000-6000 L  by not putting in a cent of RL money, not working in SL, not doing business, not creating,  not couped up in a skybox scripting, must burn you like hell us freeloaders on here

---

Oh it burns. It really burns

When you make some money in SL, come back and tell us, because that's not money 

[steph Arnott]

You use the word "bigot" with no idea as to whom the person on the other side is? Is that normal for your type to make accusations with no proof? To me that is the exact meaning of bigotry. You need to look at yourself on that issue.

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Kelli May wrote:

---

We get to find out what happens when an irresistible moron meets an immovable tw*t.

---

 

If I didn't have a personal reason to keep the signature I use, I'd use that quote as my new one. Just realized we've both had our signatures for a long time (you probably longer than me) and both have to do with rocks. I like that. :-)

[CassieMaia]

You posted this statement of yours "Security orb height limits needs to be capped" in the General Discussion forum, so you shouldn't be surprised that people who don't use security orbs may have an opinion on the matter and may want to join in the discussion.  This is not the place for submitting complaints to LL or to offer suggestions for change to LL, if that was your intent in starting the thread.  

As far as I understand things, the only land one is "entitled" to fly over other than land personally owned, is public land owned by LL.  Any other land that you may be able to fly over is at the discretion of the individual land owner - it's a priveledge, not an entitlement. 

Personally, I do not have ban lines up or a security orb on my parcels, because I understand people like to explore, fly and boat.  However, I still support other people's choice to put up ban lines or to use security orbs, if they so desire - and they may have very good reasons for feeling that they need to do so.  I prefer to use the parcel ban list, if needed, on an individual basis (something I've only had to do once so far), but not all people who rent land from others have access to the parcel ban list, hence they may choose security orbs instead. 

I had a vague recollection that ban lines only extended so far up into the airways, but didn't realize that a person banned on the parcel ban list would be banned from all the above air space as well ... which did lead to a fleeting thought crossing through my mind ...  

ETA:  if you use the Firestorm viewer, you can set the mini-map to show the parcel lines of the sim you're flying over. 

[Drake1 Nightfire]

I see, so my idea of fun on MY LAND is to shoot down planes that enter my no fly zone and somehow your idea of fun supersedes mine? Tut tut.. My land, My rules. You fly, you die. I hope your blimp has defensive capabilities.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

steph Arnott wrote:

You use the word "bigot" with no idea as to whom the person on the other side is? Is that normal for your type to make accusations with no proof? To me that is the exact meaning of bigotry. You need to look at yourself on that issue.

---

It was obvious that Perrie was referring to himself as the "bigot" because that's how you referred to him in the past.

[Phil Deakins]

I didn't know that she called Perrie a bigot (she did??), but Perrie was obviously refering to himself.

[Perrie Juran]

"

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I didn't know that she called Perrie a bigot (she did??), but Perrie was obviously refering to himself.

---

To be clear she did not out right call me a "bigot."  What she said to me in a private message (which she gave me permission to make public) was:

"You are from another country than me, overlaying your countries social ways on others is not far off bigotry. Your idea of funny is to others rude. And you were unneseseraly rude and aggresive for no reason other than what, becouse you got a buzz?"

This was after I used the term "bull dinky" in response to something she said to a newer user.  It was one of the very first times I had ever responded to one of her posts.

[Phil Deakins]

Interesting. I don't think I've ever read a criticism of you in the forum. I don't think there has been anything to criticise. But Steph does criticise unjustly - a lot. Even people who write their first post. I don't understand her at all.

[Pamela Galli]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Interesting. I don't think I've ever read a criticism of you in the forum. I don't think there has been anything to criticise. But Steph does criticise unjustly - a lot. Even people who write their first post. I don't understand her at all.

---

She really knows how to pick her targets: Perrie and Whirly. Of all people.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Interesting. I don't think I've ever read a criticism of you in the forum. I don't think there has been anything to criticise. But Steph does criticise unjustly - a lot. Even people who write their first post. I don't understand her at all.

---

I've been criticised a few times both justly and unjustly.

I'm certainly not going to claim perfection.  I have my bad days also.

[nik Sak]

---

steph Arnott wrote:

"some arse holes security orb gave me 30 seconds" well as i pay over US$90 per week i think i have the right to be "some arse hole with a security orb".

---

Well, right or not, and orb or not, you are.

[DejaHo]

---

nik Sak wrote:

---

steph Arnott wrote:

"

some arse holes

security orb gave me 30 seconds" well as i pay over US$90 per week i think i have the right to be "

some arse hole

with a security orb".

---

Well, right or not, and orb or not,

you are

.

---

Now that's what I call nik'ing it in the sak.

 

[Phil Deakins]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

Interesting. I don't think I've ever read a criticism of you in the forum. I don't think there has been anything to criticise. But Steph does criticise unjustly - a lot. Even people who write their first post. I don't understand her at all.

---

I've been criticised a few times both justly and unjustly.

I'm certainly not going to claim perfection.  I have my bad days also.

---

Well, if you're not perfect, it leaves only Qie who is, in this forum. I'm running a bit short of heroes.

[Qie Niangao]

How much better the world would be
If only everyone agreed with me.

[Phil Deakins]

Exactly!

(I couldn't have put it better myself )

[Qie Niangao]

Oh, I forgot which thread this is. Something germane: I filed a jira request for script toggle of parcel privacty and whitelist access restriction settings, after Simon encouraged me to do so at his user group meeting yesterday.

[Phil Deakins]

What you requested sounds good. I voted - and watched.

I completed the things I said I'd add to my security device a few days ago but I didn't fully test it yet, so it's languishing on my workroom floor at the moment.

[Pussycat Catnap]

I don't get this...

OP wants security orb height limmt capped?

If I was to tamper with how these things worked I would do two things:

 

1. Remove parcel banlines from SL
   1. Or instead: Remove them for any land within 12m of linden-owned "protected" land that is below the water level or flagged as a road.
2. Change the scripted forms of parcel eject and parcel teleport home to not work BELOW 1000m.

- In other words, far from cap it, do the opposite, and make the orbs only work above the height where land can possibly be seen - the heights that are essentially "semi-space".

- And the banline thing... I personally think banlines should be pulled out of SL and only the scripted option in the sky, or estate level privacy, should work.

 

But that's only if I were to make a change at all...

 

The idea of capping it so that orbs only worked close to ground seems wildly crazy... it would encourage everyone who uses a skybox for privacy to move to ground - which would spike up lag. And it would encourage a lot more people to start getting orbs or using banlines, making ground level exploring very painful.

- We have enough banlines and orbs at ground as it is, we don't need changes that would add more.