Security Orb Creators and Owners

[Parhelion Palou]

Here's a solution: Create a Vehicle Owners Association group and everyone in it donate tier to the group. The group buys land to use for boating/driving/flying/pogo sticks so that everyone can use it. In the meantime, stick to land that's set for public use (explicitly stated by the parcel owner in the description or parcel name) or Linden-owned land. (As in the parcel owner is LL. No BS about who ultimately owns it because of course LL does - they can turn off the servers and it all goes away.) There's a lot of empty land on the mainland. Use that.

This has already been said: Talk (nicely) with people who have zero-second orbs. Some of them may have no idea that there is a delay setting. The "there ought to be a law!" attitude leads to trouble.

And finally, something appropriate to the thread:

 

Edited April 14, 2019 by Parhelion Palou
Dealing with nitpickers

[Emma Krokus]

7 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

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. 

How does your stalker get inside your parcel when you have banlines up - i didn't think that was possible?

Maybe I'm having a blonde moment...?

[Blush Bravin]

26 minutes ago, Emma Krokus said:

How does your stalker get inside your parcel when you have banlines up - i didn't think that was possible?

Maybe I'm having a blonde moment...?

You can fly up above the lines and into the parcel. He can fly up there and take pics of me and send me messages in local. If he's kept outside the parcel lines he cannot do this. Of course he and all the alts I'm aware of are blocked. But he has an army of alts I can't possibly keep up with all of them.

Edited April 14, 2019 by Blush Bravin

[Theresa Tennyson]

19 minutes ago, Parhelion Palou said:

Here's a solution: Create a Vehicle Owners Association group and everyone in it donate tier to the group. The group buys land to use for boating/driving/flying/pogo sticks so that everyone can use it. In the meantime, stick to land that's set for public use or Linden-owned land. (As in the parcel owner is LL. No BS about who ultimately owns it because of course LL does - they can turn off the servers and it all goes away.) There's a lot of empty land on the mainland. Use that.

 

Land, regardless of the "owner", that doesn't have ban lines up is set for public use - the default state of a parcel in Second Life is a checked box next to the statement, "Anyone can visit (unchecking this will create ban lines)."

 

[Solar Legion]

Sorry, no. The absence of ban-lines/revocation of the ability for every user to enter your parcel does not equate to public use.

It allows for such, should the one paying for the parcel wish to do so.

Seriously, this many pages and it is devolving into an "argument" over semantics ...

Parhelion has the right idea here.

[Theresa Tennyson]

3 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Sorry, no. The absence of ban-lines/revocation of the ability for every user to enter your parcel does not equate to public use.

It allows for such, should the one paying for the parcel wish to do so.

Seriously, this many pages and it is devolving into an "argument" over semantics ...

Parhelion has the right idea here.

What part of "Anyone can visit" is confusing to you?

[Solar Legion]

16 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

What part of "Anyone can visit" is confusing to you?

What part of my post did you not understand?

Read it again.

And again.

And again.

Reread it until you understand. Then stop trying to argue semantics.

ETA: To be absolutely clear here - no part whatsoever. I'm dismissing it entirely - as it should be - solely because you really ought to know full well that the access settings have no bearing whatsoever on intended use of a parcel.

How the parcel is arranged, its description and indeed being searchable (in some instances) denotes its status as public usage.

Edited April 14, 2019 by Solar Legion

[Alyona Su]

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Land, regardless of the "owner", that doesn't have ban lines up is set for public use - the default state of a parcel in Second Life is a checked box next to the statement, "Anyone can visit (unchecking this will create ban lines)."

 

Your statement is misleading and a gross misrepresentation of fact, words have meaning. "Use" and "Visit" are very different words and nowhere in the settings does it say "Anyone can use..."

If I walk into your RL yard am I "using" your home? If I don't want you "using" my furniture in SL I can set the access to Owner-only, or Group-only. If I want to allow you to use it I'll set it to Everyone. Visiting my home is one thing; using it is something completely different. "Anyone may visit..." is not the same as "Anyone can use..."

Edited April 14, 2019 by Alyona Su

[Solar Legion]

I see someone gets it.

[Theresa Tennyson]

14 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

What part of my post did you not understand?

Read it again.

And again.

And again.

Reread it until you understand. Then stop trying to argue semantics.

ETA: To be absolutely clear here - no part whatsoever. I'm dismissing it entirely - as it should be - solely because you really ought to know full well that the access settings have no bearing whatsoever on intended use of a parcel.

It didn't take me long to realize you're discussing a type of "landowner's rights" that didn't originally exist on Mainland, and as far as I can tell never were created.

Here's the version notes when restricting access to lots came into being (after Second Life was out of Beta, by the way, and prior to private regions being introduced):

https://secondlife.fandom.com/wiki/Version_1.1.0

Note this paragraph (highlighting mine):

Land Ownership

You now have more control over land you own. Select the land and choose About Land to see all of the new options – you can choose to limit access to your land to members of a group or people on a specific list, or explicitly ban people from your land. You can sell temporary access passes to your land. When the pass expires, the person will be asked to leave. If they don’t, they will be ejected from the land. Land access permissions extend 15 meters into the air, or about two stories. If you run into a piece of land that you can’t enter, you can always fly above it.

• If you’re flying around and see land surrounded by red horizontal stripes, that means it’s a piece of land you can’t enter. If the stripes are green, however, then the land owner is offering access passes for sales. Click on the stripes to get information about the land, and to decide if you want to buy a pass.

• Land owners can return objects on their land to the objects’ owners’ inventory. Right-click on the object and under “More >” select “Return…”

[Solar Legion]

That's nice. It's also irrelevant.

[Alyona Su]

1 minute ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

It didn't take me long to realize you're discussing a type of "landowner's rights" that didn't originally exist on Mainland, and as far as I can tell never were created.

Here's the version notes when restricting access to lots came into being (after Second Life was out of Beta, by the way, and prior to private regions being introduced):

https://secondlife.fandom.com/wiki/Version_1.1.0

Note this paragraph (highlighting mine):

Land Ownership

You now have more control over land you own. Select the land and choose About Land to see all of the new options – you can choose to limit access to your land to members of a group or people on a specific list, or explicitly ban people from your land. You can sell temporary access passes to your land. When the pass expires, the person will be asked to leave. If they don’t, they will be ejected from the land. Land access permissions extend 15 meters into the air, or about two stories. If you run into a piece of land that you can’t enter, you can always fly above it.

• If you’re flying around and see land surrounded by red horizontal stripes, that means it’s a piece of land you can’t enter. If the stripes are green, however, then the land owner is offering access passes for sales. Click on the stripes to get information about the land, and to decide if you want to buy a pass.

• Land owners can return objects on their land to the objects’ owners’ inventory. Right-click on the object and under “More >” select “Return…”

Huh... I'm looking really hard and still don't see anywhere in there the words "public use" - or the restricting of it. Can you please highlight that part for me?

[Theresa Tennyson]

3 minutes ago, Alyona Su said:

Your statement is misleading and a gross misrepresentation of fact, words have meaning. "Use" and "Visit" are very different words and nowhere in the settings does it say "Anyone can use..."

If I walk into your RL yard am I "using" your home? If I don't want you "using" my furniture in SL I can set the access to Owner-only, or Group-only. If I want to allow you to use it I'll set it to Everyone. Visiting my home is one thing; using it is something completely different. "Anyone may visit..." is not the same as "Anyone can use..."

I was replying to Parhelion's statement that vehicles should stay to land "set to public use." Those flags are the only place "use" can be "set." And for the purposes of Parhelion's statement regarding vehicles, "Anyone can visit" is the same as "Anyone can use."

[Solar Legion]

No, it isn't. But you already knew that.

Again, enough with the semantic "arguments" - you're being very silly now.

[Alyona Su]

Just now, Theresa Tennyson said:

I was replying to Parhelion's statement that vehicles should stay to land "set to public use." Those flags are the only place "use" can be "set." And for the purposes of Parhelion's statement regarding vehicles, "Anyone can visit" is the same as "Anyone can use."

 

(Highlight is mine) - We'll have to agree to disagree as your learned grammar and knowledge of the English language and mine and very different (Communications studies were my major.)

[Theresa Tennyson]

Just now, Alyona Su said:

(Highlight is mine) - We'll have to agree to disagree as your learned grammar and knowledge of the English language and mine and very different (Communications studies were my major.)

Is an airplane flying over land "visiting" it or "using" it?

[Alyona Su]

8 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Is an airplane flying over land "visiting" it or "using" it?

The perfect example: It is doing neither. Because in both First Life and Second Life the airspace above land extends only a certain altitude above it. In your example, it real life that 737 flying from New York to London at 25,000 feet in the sky flying over your house (and you know it because the shadow crosses your yard at high noon): did that plane visit or use your property?

As I've said, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I've studied communications at University. Here's some professional advice: you should not consider a profession in the legal industry. Because so much as an Oxford comma or lack thereof can have very real and costly outcomes: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/16/us/oxford-comma-lawsuit.html

[Solar Legion]

Ah yep, there's another attempt at semantics and a rather poor one at that ...

The vehicle and owner may well simply be passing through but they are still at the whim of the user paying for the parcel. Said user may well have chosen to allow the general public to pass through but have set up additional security to make it clear that sticking around is not an option.

Such granularity does not presently exist in the system level controls, thus the use of orbs and similar. users who have set their systems to cover the entire parcel and give little to no warning before ejection are indeed a problem - that really isn't (from what I have seen thus far) the bone of contention here.

What is however, is the attitude that being on Mainland should confer an automatic pass to any vehicle user to pass through a parcel. Some are being reasonable about this and actually acknowledge that their desire to take their vehicle where they choose does not trump the wishes of the users paying for the parcels they pass through.

Others ... not so much.

It is the prerogative of the user paying for the parcel to allow Access to everyone or not. It is also their prerogative to allow others to simply pass through while disallowing users sticking around.

That is all there is to it.

[DeepBlueJoy]

2 hours ago, Blush Bravin said:

You can fly up above the lines and into the parcel. He can fly up there and take pics of me and send me messages in local. If he's kept outside the parcel lines he cannot do this. Of course he and all the alts I'm aware of are blocked. But he has an army of alts I can't possibly keep up with all of them.

I assume you've attempted to report him/her/it to linden and nothing useful happened?

[Ethan Paslong]

1 minute ago, DeepBlueJoy said:

I assume you've attempted to report him/her/it to linden and nothing useful happened?

if they are newly made alts there's not a lot LL can do about it.
The already specificly banned ones will not be able to come in. For them the banlines reach up to 5000 m
 

Quote

Ban line height for "no entry" or "pay to access" (in other words, "allow public access" is turned off, or "allow group access" is turned on, in the parcel options) is the parcel's ground elevation plus 50 meters (except, if the region has been set to "Block Parcel Fly Over" in which case the access controls extend to at least 4096 meters). If a user is explicitly banned by name, the height is the parcel's ground elevation plus 5000 meters. On current viewers this is visible to the full extent.

 

[Blush Bravin]

12 minutes ago, DeepBlueJoy said:

I assume you've attempted to report him/her/it to linden and nothing useful happened?

Oh so many times .. over a period of about three years. I gave up reporting five years ago. He still shows up outside the parcel and has posted pics of my alt as recently as two months ago. Because I am sympathetic to those around me who might want to travel I had portioned off a tiny part of my parcel that is controlled by an orb. It had a 10 second delay and teleports to outside the parcel not directly home. It was my dressing room. I know that while I'm in that little area I don't have to be constantly on guard. The rest of my parcel was set to public. I recently sold that parcel though and have only retained a small parcel that is currently controlled by an orb. 

You may be thinking that my circumstances are rare with a persistent stalker, but it's not unfortunately.

[Selene Gregoire]

2 hours ago, Blush Bravin said:

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. 

There is only one reason I gave up my homestead. Money. After 2 years of having one, I could no longer afford $125 USD a month. Couldn't really afford it to begin with but it was worth it just to have my own place with my own rules so I could build to my heart's content.

[Blush Bravin]

1 minute ago, Selene Gregoire said:

There is only one reason I gave up my homestead. Money. After 2 years of having one, I could no longer afford $125 USD a month. Couldn't really afford it to begin with but it was worth it just to have my own place with my own rules so I could build to my heart's content.

In reality the reason my friends gave up their homesteads was money as well. They had been paying a very high price for privacy and would have just left SL had they not been given a cheaper option that allowed for the privacy they desired. 

I'm not into that kind of privacy but just because I'm not doesn't mean I can't see why it would be important to others. 

[Blush Bravin]

4 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

Couldn't really afford it to begin with but it was worth it just to have my own place with my own rules so I could build to my heart's content.

I can build to my hearts content on mainland. The only reason I ever rented a homestead was so that I could have estate rights and terraform and retexture as I liked. My homestead was always open to the public except for a small parcel that was set to private.

[Selene Gregoire]

2 hours ago, Blush Bravin said:

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. 

Springboarding your post.

People have been bitching about ban lines since 2003, so in come the orbs as creators see opportunity with dollars signs in their eyes. Then people started bitching about security orbs. They need to make up their freaking minds. In the mean time, the rest of us have to deal with all the bs instead of being able to enjoy SL. Nice, huh.