Jump to content
Slee Mayo

Security Orb Creators and Owners

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Female Winslet said:

If I follow your rationale about the security orbs, I believe my response should be that I get to do whatever I want on my land and my neighbors cannot and should not force me to buy anything.

As it happens, that's not far from how I feel. If you want your parcel boarders respected, I'm happy to do that. But don't interfere with me respecting them. 

The parcel border tool I was referring to has nothing to do with security orbs. It simply shows the borders no matter what altitude you are at so that it's easy to check your borders while positioning a skybox.

The tool will rez a floor, or walls, or corner posts with particles indicating the border. Those rezzed objects can stay in place as long as needed. It does not work as a security orb at all. 

Edited by Blush Bravin
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

The parcel border tool I was referring to has nothing to do with security orbs. It simply shows the borders no matter what altitude you are at so that it's easy to check your borders while positioning a skybox.

I'm not seeing the connection between her post and the parcel border tool either. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Speaking as someone with no real dog in this fight as I dont live on mainland and where I live my land is mostly open to all and sundry as many forumites can attest after reading this I have to say if I did live on mainland I would be off to the marketplace right now to buy and orb and set it to zero just purely due to the entitled attitude shown by the flying crowd.

You flying over my property absolutely does affect me. While my land is mostly open to anyone I do occasionally set it to group only when I want some privacy I also turn off the avatars on other parcels can see you option. If you are floating over my property you are technically on my parcel and therefore negate that privacy setting. 

My land, my money, my privacy trumps your right to fly over don't like it go buy up land and build yourself some flight corridors

 

As a side note not setting your orb to 0 might actually put you in contravention of the tos if you are using sex furniture in a moderate area as I understand that the TOS requires you to take all steps to ensure adult activity is not observable to random passers by

Edited by KanryDrago
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

10 hours ago, KanryDrago said:

Speaking as someone with no real dog in this fight as I dont live on mainland and where I live my land is mostly open to all and sundry as many forumites can attest after reading this I have to say if I did live on mainland I would be off to the marketplace right now to buy and orb and set it to zero just purely due to the entitled attitude shown by the flying crowd.

You flying over my property absolutely does affect me. While my land is mostly open to anyone I do occasionally set it to group only when I want some privacy I also turn off the avatars on other parcels can see you option. If you are floating over my property you are technically on my parcel and therefore negate that privacy setting. 

My land, my money, my privacy trumps your right to fly over don't like it go buy up land and build yourself some flight corridors.

Wasn't part of the point that a lot of air travellers genuinely don't realise that you own the airspace past a certain point, as it is fine for aircraft to fly over private houses in RL? And also since it's not uncommon to see skyboxes stacked up by avaricious landlords? (If it wasn't, sorry. I can't be bothered to go back and read the whole thread again but I definitely had that impression.)

10 hours ago, KanryDrago said:

As a side note not setting your orb to 0 might actually put you in contravention of the tos if you are using sex furniture in a moderate area as I understand that the TOS requires you to take all steps to ensure adult activity is not observable to random passers by

Unless you can type and do other things at the speed of light, I really cannot see most passers by getting a peep show worth remembering in a 20 second window, or even a full minute. And now that we're on the subject of unsatisfying 20 second performances, I am of course itching to make another comment about Goreans, but I already derailed the thread earlier along those lines so I'll resist. Dammit, it's just that everything nasty and rubbish reminds me of them.

I don't recall seeing a lot of entitlement from travellers on this thread. Mostly they seem to be asking for enough warning to get out and not to be pinged right across the grid. Certainly I don't recall seeing anyone who said they would trespass on private space on purpose, but by all accounts there are some routes that are just very tricky to navigate and some vehicles/vessels that take some time to master.

Edited by Amina Sopwith
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@KanryDragoYour first part - land and water usage I have no problem with. Hell, I am one. Compromise, agreement, live and let etc... BigBeardy given right to fly over? I draw a line there. Road and water users are part of SL to me. FOMO or whatever the group was are thrrrrp entitled-ists. If that is a word :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, KanryDrago said:

I dont live on mainland

My point (which is not the main point of this thread) is that Mainland could have been a different place, a welcoming showcase of Second Life, once Estates were available to serve the more privacy-minded customers. That didn't happen, we are where we are, but there's still a pent-up demand for newbie-welcoming, vehicle-tolerant continents free of banlines and open to exploration -- a sort of SLB or Burning Man at continent scale and unspecified duration, available to any Premium member with tier to spare.

Problem is, Mainland is dotted with folks who rightly expect to be able to exercise all their "privacy" options. We know they can't be displaced to dedicate an existing continent to the "showcase" vision, lest SL incur all the drama and disruption of another Zindra ghettoization.

I wonder if the Lab would consider holding off on the next cookie-cutter Premium Homes continent and instead try a "showcase" open-access continent as the next addition to grid geography. (Possibly not, inasmuch as the market is largely "cannibal": a whole share of existing road-and-rail Mainland will want to move where no privacy-minded neighbors will restrict access. It may be that not many others will choose to join them.)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KanryDrago said:

You flying over my property absolutely does affect me.

How, Kamry? How does it "affect" you? 

I mean, ok, if they are strafing your house, sure. But at anything over 300 metres, you likely wouldn't even be able to see them, nor they you. Their momentary presence doesn't impact your performance, nor take up LI.

So please explain why it's so vital to defend your property against people who are in no meaningful way violating it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

How, Kamry? How does it "affect" you? 

I mean, ok, if they are strafing your house, sure. But at anything over 300 metres, you likely wouldn't even be able to see them, nor they you. Their momentary presence doesn't impact your performance, nor take up LI.

So please explain why it's so vital to defend your property against people who are in no meaningful way violating it?

I explained how it did, it negates my tick box to only be seen by avatars on the same parcel  as overflyers are on the same parcel and possibly in a mature area puts me in violation of tos as I have to ensure random passers by cannot see sexual activity in only mature areas

 

ah see you think you cant cam in over 300 metres away nope you can change that and cam in from any distance

 

Edited by KanryDrago
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

My point (which is not the main point of this thread) is that Mainland could have been a different place, a welcoming showcase of Second Life, once Estates were available to serve the more privacy-minded customers. That didn't happen, we are where we are, but there's still a pent-up demand for newbie-welcoming, vehicle-tolerant continents free of banlines and open to exploration -- a sort of SLB or Burning Man at continent scale and unspecified duration, available to any Premium member with tier to spare.

Problem is, Mainland is dotted with folks who rightly expect to be able to exercise all their "privacy" options. We know they can't be displaced to dedicate an existing continent to the "showcase" vision, lest SL incur all the drama and disruption of another Zindra ghettoization.

I wonder if the Lab would consider holding off on the next cookie-cutter Premium Homes continent and instead try a "showcase" open-access continent as the next addition to grid geography. (Possibly not, inasmuch as the market is largely "cannibal": a whole share of existing road-and-rail Mainland will want to move where no privacy-minded neighbors will restrict access. It may be that not many others will choose to join them.)

Do people who want to sail, fly , drive exceed mainland customers who wish to maintain the use of avatars can only be seen from this parcel flag? I have no idea but I imagine linden labs do and if they are not accomodating the flyers/drivers/sailors in preventing the 0 second orbs then I would guess that they see more money lost by people saying right then lets move off mainland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer generally about the sense of entitlement. This is my take

flyers/sailors/drivers are up in arms against something that linden labs allows. If you want to change things you need to get those people in the 0 second orb camp on your side. Berating them, calling them selfish doesn't do that it puts their backs up. You want these people to compromise with you I would suggest that maybe insults aren't the way to go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KanryDrago said:

ah see you think you cant cam in over 300 metres away nope you can change that and cam in from any distance

Some have a misguided sense of security thinking people can't cam in from long distances. I can stand on the ground or be flying 2000m above the ground and cam instantly to anyone in that parcel as easily as double clicking on the person's name in the people menu using the nearby tab. As long as a person is inside the parcel boundary they can see anyone anyplace within that parcel. 

 

1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

So please explain why it's so vital to defend your property against people who are in no meaningful way violating it?

I know in my case I'm not interested in defending my privacy from those who are innocently flying across my parcel. That's not why I have an orb. It's for the stalkers and harassers. Until there is a way to guarantee that no alt of one of my stalkers can get inside my parcel I will continue to have an orb. Unfortunately, the real fault here lies with those who grief others. Everyone looses in the end. It's either me getting harassed on my parcel or pilots being ejected from my parcel. Since I am paying monthly for that parcel I believe my rights outweigh that of the casual passerby.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Some have a misguided sense of security thinking people can't cam in from long distances. I can stand on the ground or be flying 2000m above the ground and cam instantly to anyone in that parcel as easily as double clicking on the person's name in the people menu using the nearby tab. As long as a person is inside the parcel boundary they can see anyone anyplace within that parcel. 

 

I know in my case I'm not interested in defending my privacy from those who are innocently flying across my parcel. That's not why I have an orb. It's for the stalkers and harassers. Until there is a way to guarantee that no alt of one of my stalkers can get inside my parcel I will continue to have an orb. Unfortunately, the real fault here lies with those who grief others. Everyone looses in the end. It's either me getting harassed on my parcel or pilots being ejected from my parcel. Since I am paying monthly for that parcel I believe my rights outweigh that of the casual passerby.

Precisely, letting anyone within your parcel boundaries =  no privacy from cams

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blush Bravin said:

Since I am paying monthly for that parcel I believe my rights outweigh that of the casual passerby.

Yes, because that's the deal you bought.

There could be a Second Life where no such deal were on offer. Or not on Mainland. Or not on all of Mainland. Or, of course, there could be no Mainland at all.

The Lab has to keep asking itself if it has the right product mix. They have lots of data we don't. I wonder, for example, who most increased their Mainland holdings after the tiers changed and bonus area increased. That might be a good market to target if it's underserved by the current products, or maybe a different growth market can be identified.

I think it would be very difficult to sell anybody on a different product, once they're invested.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

My point (which is not the main point of this thread) is that Mainland could have been a different place, a welcoming showcase of Second Life, once Estates were available to serve the more privacy-minded customers. That didn't happen, we are where we are, but there's still a pent-up demand for newbie-welcoming, vehicle-tolerant continents free of banlines and open to exploration -- a sort of SLB or Burning Man at continent scale and unspecified duration, available to any Premium member with tier to spare.

Problem is, Mainland is dotted with folks who rightly expect to be able to exercise all their "privacy" options. We know they can't be displaced to dedicate an existing continent to the "showcase" vision, lest SL incur all the drama and disruption of another Zindra ghettoization.

I wonder if the Lab would consider holding off on the next cookie-cutter Premium Homes continent and instead try a "showcase" open-access continent as the next addition to grid geography. (Possibly not, inasmuch as the market is largely "cannibal": a whole share of existing road-and-rail Mainland will want to move where no privacy-minded neighbors will restrict access. It may be that not many others will choose to join them.)

I can understand LL restricting Linden homes to Premium members but that bolded part smacks of elitism, imo. Even as a basic account I have spent thousands of real US dollars alone on land in SL. I'm not the only one. The more they restrict things to premium only, the more residents they will lose. It's also a bad business decision since they would be cutting their potential profits by a fair chunk.

Edited by Selene Gregoire
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how difficult it would be for Linden to create a layer of abstraction in the air, perhaps from 500ft, to 2000ft, where anyone piloting an air based vehicle would phase out of view, and everyone else not flying in a vehicle would likewise phase out of view from the pilot and occupants.  This would have two benefits, one being privacy, and two, while in this mode security orbs no longer can boot you out automatically, instead a default timer could be implemented.  Meanwhile, anyone who is not piloting a vehicle, would not be impacted at all.  

This way, no one would be infringing upon one another's enjoyment.  Technically, you would no longer be on anyone else's land because you would in effect be flying through an abstract layer of the atmosphere that only exists for pilots.

😁 
Of course, this will never likely happen. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, KanryDrago said:

To answer generally about the sense of entitlement. This is my take

flyers/sailors/drivers are up in arms against something that linden labs allows. If you want to change things you need to get those people in the 0 second orb camp on your side. Berating them, calling them selfish doesn't do that it puts their backs up. You want these people to compromise with you I would suggest that maybe insults aren't the way to go

Well yes, of course LL allows it. Nobody disputes that. The discussion is of the "you can, but SHOULD you?" ilk. What kind of culture do we want?

LL has chosen to allow this because if it doesn't, you don't have absolute control over your own land. I can see why the system doesn't create land contracts that state the owner must agree to anyone wandering into their parcel for a minimum of x seconds at any time. I get that and I understand why it works that way.

The "law" may need to be set up in such a way that it doesn't force you to host randoms. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't also work towards a culture that allows some leeway to account for genuine errors and a passable, explorable world. 

I suppose I could set up a system in my RL driveway that throws animatronic tarantulas or Sharpie ink over anyone who sets foot in it, without any warning at all. It's my land, after all. Will it deter burglars? Probably. But it'll also get the postman, the meter reader, the innocent person who accidentally walked into the wrong driveway and didn't realise until they got close enough to see the door number, the breakaway toddler and their parents, you get the gist. Can I legally do this? Probably.* Should I? Not so sure. Is anyone being entitled by having a discussion about it and suggesting alternatives? I don't think so. 

I like the ideas of a passable air passage at a certain height that wouldn't impose upon homeowners, and rebuilding the tighter public passages so that it's easier to navigate through them without impinging on someone's land. I also like the idea of a landowning culture that gives a reasonable warning to people who trespass and then, if they don't skedaddle, simply sends them to the nearest available public space. If all you want is to protect your land, what more do you need? 

I can't recall offhand details of insults in this exchange, but even if there have been some, I think most posters have been quite reasonable in expressing their thoughts on this matter. Certainly I don't think there's been an avalanche of abuse towards zero-second-TP-homers to the point where all arguments for alternatives become null and void.



*If you know I legally couldn't in your country, ok ok. It's a thought experiment. You know what I'm trying to say.

Edited by Amina Sopwith
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/2/2019 at 12:52 PM, AyelaNewLife said:

I haven't checked this thread in a few days, are we still going around in circles with the whole "landowners have the right to be bads, and you have the right to call them bads" thing still?

Is that a yes then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

I can understand LL restricting Linden homes to Premium members but that bolded part smacks of elitism, imo. Even as a basic account I have spent thousands of real US dollars alone on land in SL. I'm not the only one. The more they restrict things to premium only, the more residents they will lose. It's also a bad business decision since they would be cutting their potential profits by a fair chunk.

Yes, it's not obvious that Mainland ownership should be gated by a membership fee, like some pixel property Costco, but for now it is. And I think it's really only Mainland -- or some fully Linden-managed "estate" -- that is in question here.

(I mean, it would be a different discussion if some Estate owners were allowed to permit orbs and/or banlines and others weren't; instead, the market seems to work: Lots of Estates let renters have such security measures, but some don't.)

Maybe now would be a good time to argue for dropping the membership requirement for Mainland ownership -- but I kinda doubt it. They're trying to increase the share of revenue coming from non-Land products, and that presumably includes Premium membership fees.

Frankly, I'd rather try arguing to drop the one full-prim region pre-requisite for owning a Homestead that the big Estates cling to so fervently. Talk about elitism!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, KanryDrago said:

Speaking as someone with no real dog in this fight as I dont live on mainland and where I live my land is mostly open to all and sundry as many forumites can attest after reading this I have to say if I did live on mainland I would be off to the marketplace right now to buy and orb and set it to zero just purely due to the entitled attitude shown by the flying crowd.

You flying over my property absolutely does affect me. While my land is mostly open to anyone I do occasionally set it to group only when I want some privacy I also turn off the avatars on other parcels can see you option. If you are floating over my property you are technically on my parcel and therefore negate that privacy setting. 

My land, my money, my privacy trumps your right to fly over don't like it go buy up land and build yourself some flight corridors

 

As a side note not setting your orb to 0 might actually put you in contravention of the tos if you are using sex furniture in a moderate area as I understand that the TOS requires you to take all steps to ensure adult activity is not observable to random passers by

People on the Mainland don't "own" their "land:"

Second Life Mainland Policies

The mainland is a Second Life area in which Linden Lab is the estate owner and exercises elevated discretion regarding content and design. Special rules and policies apply to landowners and businesses on the mainland. The Mainland Policies are incorporated into Second Life’s Terms of Service.

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Mainland_policies

 

11 hours ago, KanryDrago said:

Do people who want to sail, fly , drive exceed mainland customers who wish to maintain the use of avatars can only be seen from this parcel flag? I have no idea but I imagine linden labs do and if they are not accomodating the flyers/drivers/sailors in preventing the 0 second orbs then I would guess that they see more money lost by people saying right then lets move off mainland

Linden Lab may be able to get the information on the "privacy" flag (which is comparatively new,) but where would they get information on number and setting of 0-second security orbs? Given that I run into them quite seldom on the Mainland and there are many full Mainland regions with private "owners" dedicated completely to vehicle operation, such as yacht clubs and airports, this may be a dangerous assumption for someone who wants 0-second orbs to continue to be allowed, on Mainland or anywhere.

Edited by Theresa Tennyson
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

People on the Mainland don't "own" their "land:"

Second Life Mainland Policies

The mainland is a Second Life area in which Linden Lab is the estate owner and exercises elevated discretion regarding content and design. Special rules and policies apply to landowners and businesses on the mainland. The Mainland Policies are incorporated into Second Life’s Terms of Service.

And yet, that very policy you quoted calls us landowners. The very reason I choose mainland over estates is that I actually do own my land. If I get land from an estate the estate owner owns the land and I only rent from them. While it's true that it's only virtual land it is seen as owned by Linden Lab. So whatever you want to call it .. owned or whatever .. it is mine for the duration of my paying tier or premium fees.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Blush Bravin said:

And yet, that very policy you quoted calls us landowners. The very reason I choose mainland over estates is that I actually do own my land. If I get land from an estate the estate owner owns the land and I only rent from them. While it's true that it's only virtual land it is seen as owned by Linden Lab. So whatever you want to call it .. owned or whatever .. it is mine for the duration of my paying tier or premium fees.

It can call you a strawberry shortcake but that doesn't mean your hair is whipped cream. Technically someone is listed as an "owner" if they're renting a parcel from a private estate as well. The important part is the part where it states that Linden Lab is the estate owner and exercises elevated discretion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The importance of the privacy flag shouldn't be underestimated. Before it's implementation I knew several people who rented homesteads simply because it was the only way to get privacy in SL. They paid the extra money just to be able to keep people off of their land. Once the privacy flag was implemented they felt comfortable enough with the new privacy feature to actually move off of the homesteads and into regular mainland or to smaller estate parcels where they could tick the privacy box and use an orb. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

It can call you a strawberry shortcake but that doesn't mean your hair is whipped cream. Technically someone is listed as an "owner" if they're renting a parcel from a private estate as well. The important part is the part where it states that Linden Lab is the estate owner and exercises elevated discretion.

As I said .. call it owned or whatever .. it is still just semantics and you're arguing a moot point. It doesn't matter what you call it. Linden Lab gives certain rights to ***********. One of those rights is using an orb.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Blush Bravin said:

As I said .. call it owned or whatever .. it is still just semantics and you're arguing a moot point. It doesn't matter what you call it. Linden Lab gives certain rights to ***********. One of those rights is using an orb.

The only place that "right" is described is the same place that also says that they should give "adequate warning." Somehow using an orb is a "right" and adequate warning is a "suggestion" even though they're literally in the same section of text in consecutive sentences.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The only place that "right" is described is the same place that also says that they should give "adequate warning." Somehow using an orb is a "right" and adequate warning is a "suggestion" even though they're literally in the same section of text in consecutive sentences.

Considering that the land owner has the choice to set privacy to public, group, or no one shows that the lab gives privacy rights to the parcel owner. Whether that parcel owner choose ban lines or an orb the right is given without restraint. I personally use an orb because in my many years of being in SL I've heard more complaints about ugly ban lines than orb use. Plus ban lines do not prevent my stalker from getting inside my parcel and bothering me. 

Edited by Blush Bravin
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...