Jump to content
Slee Mayo

Security Orb Creators and Owners

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

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.

You apparently skipped page 14.

I really agree with most of what you're saying. My objection is when people start saying what they're doing are based on their "rights" when no such right exists, or when people describe "settings" when those settings don't do what they think they do.

Paying for a section of "land" in Second Life gives the payer certain "rights" to that parcel, which, just like real-life rights, are limited. Due to the nature of Mainland those "rights" are already even more limited than those of private region "owners." What this thread is about is largely determining where those limits are as far as people passing through those parcels.

I have no desire to spend any extended period of time on a piece of "land" that someone doesn't want me to be on, and I certainly don't say there's a "right" for me to be there. On the other hand, I don't feel their "ownership" grants them a "right" to teleport me home instantly when I've entered a parcel I have no way of knowing is restricted beforehand, nor do I see the practicality of needing to ask explicit permission to pass through from every "owner" whose parcel I encounter.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

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.

I concur with you, though the one (and only) "bitching" about security orbs from me are the ones set to zero-warning and TP home. May as well just put ban lines up. Even a ten-second warning is fair, though very short, but very fair.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

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.

Sadly, I will never underestimate the power of A***** to try to make someone else's life miserable.  That is sadly, how they roll.  I just wish that SL were more responsive to what is basically criminal behavior.  Of course, even if they were responsive, a determined creep could hide behind various protections and come back as someone else.  Sighs. You have my sympathy. You do not deserve any of what has happened to you.  NO idea what motivates such losers to torment people.

Please understand that I empathize with you deeply and I hope my question did not convey anything other than that.

Edited by DeepBlueJoy
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a whole slew of users on Ignore, Theresa - most for fairly good, if personal, reasons.

If this thread were indeed as you have described in intent, said intent was subverted very quickly by users who feel their personal desires outweigh/subvert/supplant the desires/intent of those actually paying for the parcels they're passing through.

Personal feelings are largely irrelevant here as well: Linden Lab allows these systems to exist and - thus far - has not punished users with highly restrictive (no warning) security systems. Like it or not, they allow them to exist and the very language quoted in this (and at least one other) thread is not worded in any way other than as a suggestion or general guideline.

As I said earlier, Parhelion has the right idea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

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.

I had my homestead set up the same way, for the same reasons. My cottage was off limits and my tenants were allowed to use orbs as long as they were set to tp outside of their area. I did not parcel the lots off so there couldn't be any banlines, except the ones around my cottage on it's own little island.

Funny thing is, I bought the homestead one day, logged out and went to bed, next day someone I did not know had set up a high prim treehouse! So before I could even get things set up someone was already abusing my generosity. Burn me once, shame on you. Burn me twice, shame on me. I refuse to be shamed when others are such @$$holes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

when I've entered a parcel I have no way of knowing is restricted beforehand,

This is why SL has banlines! LL saw this whole shebang coming and tried to avoid it 15 years ago. Unfortunately humans always find a way to stir things up no matter how many precautions are taken.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

This is why SL has banlines! LL saw this whole shebang coming and tried to avoid it 15 years ago. Unfortunately humans always find a way to stir things up no matter how many precautions are taken.

Except they didn't see it coming nor did they try to avoid it - from any direction at that.

Did they try and compromise? Yes, they did and still do by allowing user scripted security along with the visibility option added in at system level.

Unfortunately that does not seem to be enough for some vehicle users or explorers nor do they seem to understand just how very limited that visibility option really is. Heck, they don't seem to understand that while the person paying for the parcel can be a right arse and have a no warning system set up ... such is not the case for most.

Is being teleported home an appropriate response even after being given a warning and ample time to heed it? Until Linden Lab says otherwise, it is - personal feelings to the contrary or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Except they didn't see it coming nor did they try to avoid it - from any direction at that.

Sorry but I was here back then and before I signed up (2004) I was watching every move they made from Active Worlds. Almost everyone in AW was watching SL closely because we all wanted to leave AW for SL since SL's graphics were so much better among other things that were vast improvements over AW. There were plans for "parcel security" even before SL was open to the public.

 

I pretty much agree with you otherwise. In the meantime though, those who do use security orbs need to read the dang notecards and learn how to use them properly and with consideration for others. That is how to solve the problem. Unfortunately, not all humans are considerate or even compassionate.

Edited by Selene Gregoire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And none were implemented - so the statement stands.

Plans are worthless - in this context - if not implemented. Bringing them up is about as useful as trying to argue semantics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

And none were implemented - so the statement stands.

Plans are worthless - in this context - if not implemented. Bringing them up is about as useful as trying to argue semantics.

Um... so about when those banlines were introduced to SL... they've been there longer than I've been a resident. They were in place in 2003 before SL opened to the public. In other words, they've been there for people to use when SL was opened to the public. It's the privacy part of it that was introduced in recent years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

..........

Is being teleported home an appropriate response even after being given a warning and ample time to heed it? Until Linden Lab says otherwise, it is - personal feelings to the contrary or not.

I think the phrase "even after being given a warning and ample time to heed it?" part is important. "Zero" warning orbs are what most of us complain about.

For myself, I still remember my first day when I was all enthusiastic about "Wow, I can fly!" and then 'Plonk' I'm swatted out of the sky like a fly with no idea what had happened. My immediate emotion was hurt feelings that I had been rejected, but I later came to realize that what had happened wasn't personal.

Seems to me that we should not complain about just the land owners (some of whom are so clueless that they don't even know that setting ban lines will keep out their friends and alts) but with the orb creators themselves. How about a rule that you can't sell a security orb without a notecard discussing 'neighborly' behavior and recommending setting the transport site to a local public area so that explorers don't have to retrace all their steps? Does anyone make a security orb that has two layers - an inner 'zero warning' zone, and an outer zone with more warning time?

Also, could newcomer orientation sites include some information on ban lines and such? Don't know if I would have come back to Second Life after that first bad experience if I wasn't such a stubborn idiot.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Selene Gregoire said:

Um... so about when those banlines were introduced to SL... they've been there longer than I've been a resident. They were in place in 2003 before SL opened to the public. In other words, they've been there for people to use when SL was opened to the public. It's the privacy part of it that was introduced in recent years.

Unless I am rather missing something here, said banlines have never - outside of those explicitly denied access using the system level controls - extended up past a rather specific (and rather limited) distance from parcel ground.

The entire point/draw of scripted security systems is that they allow a level of granularity that does not exist at system level.

At system level you have the following options:

  • Allow Public Access
    • 18+
    • PIOF Only
  • Allow (Group)
  • Sell Passes
  • Explicit Access List
  • Explicit Ban List

That's it.

Scripted security systems allow you to leave Access set to public - so that users can pass through - while still ensuring they do not linger. This is a function that should have been implemented system side and wasn't - plans for it early on or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all boils down to this:

private.png.514b767218817b620a32899c45a69ab7.png

The lab gave us the option to check or uncheck the box "Avatars on other parcels can see and chat with avatars on this parcel." This ONLY works if you can restrict all access to your parcel at all altitudes. The lab knew this when they gave us the new feature. So if they didn't mean for us to use it, why give it to us in the first place? This includes flyovers otherwise the restriction is nullified. It's simply a matter of choice, a choice given to us by the lab. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Unless I am rather missing something here, said banlines have never - outside of those explicitly denied access using the system level controls - extended up past a rather specific (and rather limited) distance from parcel ground.

The entire point/draw of scripted security systems is that they allow a level of granularity that does not exist at system level.

At system level you have the following options:

  • Allow Public Access
    • 18+
    • PIOF Only
  • Allow (Group)
  • Sell Passes
  • Explicit Access List
  • Explicit Ban List

That's it.

Scripted security systems allow you to leave Access set to public - so that users can pass through - while still ensuring they do not linger. This is a function that should have been implemented system side and wasn't - plans for it early on or not.

You're not missing anything I can see. As I said I do agree with you. At the time, Philip felt the "extra features" weren't necessary so they were never coded. There's reason a few associate Philip, Second Life and social experiment. Leaving those features out was just one indication.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So if they didn't mean for us to use it, why give it to us in the first place?

Because residents have been bitching about it for years. They finally got large enough loud enough that LL had to listen.

Share this post


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

I think the phrase "even after being given a warning and ample time to heed it?" part is important. "Zero" warning orbs are what most of us complain about.

For myself, I still remember my first day when I was all enthusiastic about "Wow, I can fly!" and then 'Plonk' I'm swatted out of the sky like a fly with no idea what had happened. My immediate emotion was hurt feelings that I had been rejected, but I later came to realize that what had happened wasn't personal.

Seems to me that we should not complain about just the land owners (some of whom are so clueless that they don't even know that setting ban lines will keep out their friends and alts) but with the orb creators themselves. How about a rule that you can't sell a security orb without a notecard discussing 'neighborly' behavior and recommending setting the transport site to a local public area so that explorers don't have to retrace all their steps? Does anyone make a security orb that has two layers - an inner 'zero warning' zone, and an outer zone with more warning time?

Also, could newcomer orientation sites include some information on ban lines and such? Don't know if I would have come back to Second Life after that first bad experience if I wasn't such a stubborn idiot.

In a prior post I gave both my personal feelings on zero warning systems - those set to cover an entire parcel at any rate.

Personally I'd like to see such setups restricted (by hard worded and actually enforced policy) to use inside buildings/skyboxes. I myself use a similar setup at my Den (parcel rented out on an Island) though with more warning - a setup I'd mirror on Mainland once I can find a decent parcel at a decent enough price.

The only real way to do as you describe - an inner and outer layer - is to use more than one copy of a given security system:

  • Parcel encompassing system set at ground level/centralized location/anywhere on parcel
    • Individual systems set where needed/desired
  • Parcel encompassing system set to reasonable delay or otherwise shut off (criteria determined by parcel owner)

In my own setup, I turn on the parcel level before logging in or when I leave the parcel (when I remember to) or when I have specific company over and do not wish to be disturbed - said system is set (on all levels/setups) to ignore users in a specified group and with a Whitelist of individuals.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

Because residents have been bitching about it for years. They finally got large enough loud enough that LL had to listen.

Therefore they are large and loud enough that the labs are not going to doing anything about zero time orbs and negate that flag they put in. I suspect the percentage of sl that prefers the knowledge of absolute privacy far outstrips the percentage of sl vehicle users. You are better off suggesting something along the abstract layer someone else did earlier in thread which would allow the labs to implement you to fly anywhere without impinging on the privacy off others

Share this post


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

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.

Orbs are fine (assuming modern scripts) when given at least 30 seconds warning. AT LEAST. Two minutes is more reasonable, and ideally the orb should supply a particle beacon showing the quickest way off the parcel. If it can't do that, well, it's kinda junk, more trap than defense. Unfortunately, it appears most orb-owners are fine with that, so not a big market in doing it better.

Personally, I don't have a problem with whitelist banlines, either, as long as they're nowhere near Linden roads and waterways (especially not near a sim border) and as long as the owner is 100% sure that every abutter is fine with them and stays that way when those adjacent parcels change ownership. Otherwise, sure, the ability to do it is built-in to the land features but that doesn't mean the landowner isn't being a jerk about it. (And you have to admit, whatever you think of vehicle users and other vagabonds, not taking the neighbors' preferences into consideration on the Mainland is pretty much the definition of being a jerk.)

Also, honestly, if trying to deal with a serious stalker situation, Mainland is just not the right place, no matter how much you crank-up the land settings. That's completely independent of what effect those settings have on neighbors and passersby -- it's just the inherent limitations of Mainland: there's no such thing as a Linden Estate ban, so there's no effective IP address ban that silently triggers on Estates. It would be much more effective to band together with other folks needing extra privacy and rent a Homestead from an Estate catering to this market.

I doubt most Mainland orb owners and banline enthusiasts are responding to real stalker situations, though, so it's almost tangential to the thread.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you are going slower than a snail across a half sim (minimum), you won't need more than fifteen seconds to half a minute, going in a straight line (for aircraft (excluding balloons perhaps) at least). 45 seconds or so to give leeway to those making a turn.

Much the same can be said for roads and waterways.

Seriously. It doesn't even take that long when walking from one corner to the other unless you have a metric crap ton of obstacles in the way.

Quickest way off the parcel? Straight from one edge to the other - if your destination is in the direction you're already going. need to make a turn/already making a turn? Do it/complete it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Therefore they are large and loud enough that the labs are not going to doing anything about zero time orbs and negate that flag they put in. I suspect the percentage of sl that prefers the knowledge of absolute privacy far outstrips the percentage of sl vehicle users. You are better off suggesting something along the abstract layer someone else did earlier in thread which would allow the labs to implement you to fly anywhere without impinging on the privacy off others

There are no fly zones in RL so why not in SL. shiftyeyes.gif.f6a827854fdd453eeed2906d6b40f62b.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

There are no fly zones in RL so why not in SL. shiftyeyes.gif.f6a827854fdd453eeed2906d6b40f62b.gif

You cannot equate rl flying and sl flying however. The passenger in a jumbo jet 35000 feet over my house can't look down and see who I am in the hot tub with some young lady whereas in sl they can. I can easily see therefore why a lot of land owners wish 0second security orbs. The flyers should instead focus on persuading the labs to provide them with something like the abstract layer mooted earlier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Orbs are fine (assuming modern scripts) when given at least 30 seconds warning. AT LEAST. Two minutes is more reasonable, and ideally the orb should supply a particle beacon showing the quickest way off the parcel. If it can't do that, well, it's kinda junk, more trap than defense. Unfortunately, it appears most orb-owners are fine with that, so not a big market in doing it better.

Personally, I don't have a problem with whitelist banlines, either, as long as they're nowhere near Linden roads and waterways (especially not near a sim border) and as long as the owner is 100% sure that every abutter is fine with them and stays that way when those adjacent parcels change ownership. Otherwise, sure, the ability to do it is built-in to the land features but that doesn't mean the landowner isn't being a jerk about it. (And you have to admit, whatever you think of vehicle users and other vagabonds, not taking the neighbors' preferences into consideration on the Mainland is pretty much the definition of being a jerk.)

Also, honestly, if trying to deal with a serious stalker situation, Mainland is just not the right place, no matter how much you crank-up the land settings. That's completely independent of what effect those settings have on neighbors and passersby -- it's just the inherent limitations of Mainland: there's no such thing as a Linden Estate ban, so there's no effective IP address ban that silently triggers on Estates. It would be much more effective to band together with other folks needing extra privacy and rent a Homestead from an Estate catering to this market.

I doubt most Mainland orb owners and banline enthusiasts are responding to real stalker situations, though, so it's almost tangential to the thread.

Two minutes is not reasonable. If it takes you that long to make a decision of where and how to leave, you need professional help. Even I who is well known for procrastinating don't need that long. Twenty to thirty seconds is all that is needed with a maximum of 45 - 60 seconds.

If you've never been stalked, RL or SL (I had been, in RL, for more than 10 years) then you, quite bluntly, need to sit down and shut up about it. You don't know what we have to deal with. You can't know until you experience it. I hope you never do. It does scar you for life.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

You cannot equate rl flying and sl flying however. The passenger in a jumbo jet 35000 feet over my house can't look down and see who I am in the hot tub with some young lady whereas in sl they can. I can easily see therefore why a lot of land owners wish 0second security orbs. The flyers should instead focus on persuading the labs to provide them with something like the abstract layer mooted earlier

You're preaching to the choir. Lighten up a bit. I was teasing.

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...