Security Orb Creators and Owners

[Qie Niangao]

14 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

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.

Remember, the folks affected are not trying to be on the parcel at all, they are dropped there by the vagaries of sim crossing, with or without a vehicle, and may have no idea where the parcel boundaries are or even what direction they're now headed compared to how they were oriented before. In fact, they may not even be in the same region they were crossing into when they left the region where they last had control.

Maybe under those conditions you can collect your bearings and get out of a parcel in a few seconds, but I've never been a gamer so maybe that's why I can't. So if an orb gives me less than a minute's warning, I simply ignore it because the chances are vanishingly small of my being able to comply with whatever it thinks I should do.

[Solar Legion]

That, Qie, is a wholly different kettle of fish to what was being discussed.

[Qie Niangao]

5 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

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.

I have not. Well, a little in SL maybe, but not a big deal. I think, however, it's a mighty convenient card to play, disqualifying an informed suggestion about what technical measures might actually work under the circumstances. I wonder if you really mean to restrict the thread to only stalking victims.

Ya know, actually, screw it: y'all can have it for yourselves.

[Solar Legion]

Oh for ...

Edited April 14, 2019 by Solar Legion

[Selene Gregoire]

37 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

I have not. Well, a little in SL maybe, but not a big deal. I think, however, it's a mighty convenient card to play, disqualifying an informed suggestion about what technical measures might actually work under the circumstances. I wonder if you really mean to restrict the thread to only stalking victims.

Ya know, actually, screw it: y'all can have it for yourselves.

You're a bit too far out in the galaxy. Left field is located on the third planet from the sun in the Sol system.

[Brenda Archer]

For this to go on for 17 pages is proof we’re dealing with bad design.

What we really needed were small sized “regions” at a price and size similar to a 1024 on Mainland. A number of them could be put on one server.

It’s clear the Mainland is not really private (this used to be worse) by design.

 To get to my first Mainland home in 2005 I had to fly a long distance from a hub to Heaton. We couldn’t set home back then or have point to point teleport. My next door neighbor kept shooting me out of the sky with a cannon when I was trying to fly home and I had to file a ticket to get her to stop it. I don’t think she meant to be hostile to me personally, she just didn’t understand the effect of her scripts. 

We only got point to point teleporting after a ton of complaining and only got avatar parcel privacy after years of begging. None of this solves anything except for those of us comfortable with the collective nature of Mainland. There really, really needs to be a feature of tiny, totally private regions with ban by IP. 

In the meantime, I personally try not to be a difficult neighbor. 

I personally don’t put adult furniture on the ground, but always inside a skybox. As far as I know, if you’re inside a house or a box you’re covered for TOS in Moderate. If someone is camming through solid prims, that’s on him. 

Edited April 14, 2019 by Brenda Archer
Spelling

[Kia Kiyori]

11 hours 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...?

It happened to me very recently - with banlines up - and I put in a ticket asking how it was possible.

The answer came back that although my settings were correct so that absolutely no one but group members could access the land, somehow, one person did and it was surmised that it was either some kind of bizarre, momentary glitch, or he/she/it was using some kind of illegal thingamebob.

Just as an aside - to those with 'ban line angst': World > Show More > Ban Lines (select to either tick or untick) and hey presto! ban lines magically invisible (to you) forever.

 

[Selene Gregoire]

9 minutes ago, AnyaJurelle said:

Just as an aside - to those with 'ban line angst': World > Show More > Ban Lines (select to either tick or untick) and hey presto! ban lines magically invisible (to you) forever.

 

Ever run into a perfectly clean and clear sheet of plexiglass or safety glass? That's what's gonna happen if someone who is flying, driving, what have you and can't see those lines. Then the bitching will really get started. And all because they forgot they turned banlines off. Oops. 

[Kia Kiyori]

11 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

Ever run into a perfectly clean and clear sheet of plexiglass or safety glass? That's what's gonna happen if someone who is flying, driving, what have you and can't see those lines. Then the bitching will really get started. And all because they forgot they turned banlines off. Oops. 

Yes. My comment was, ofc, aimed at those who constantly whine about seeing ban lines in general. Point is, LL will never be able to please everyone all of the time. Goes with the turf. I don't boat or fly, but I do value privacy.

When you have a demented stalker who doesn't seem to understand the difference between pixels and reality and keeps creating armies of new alts just to haunt you, you'll use whatever tools are at your disposal to keep the jerk out.

Only way to (almost) please everyone is to make areas of the grid 'explorer friendly' and others 'not so much'  - and mark them accordingly on the world map.

Edited April 15, 2019 by AnyaJurelle
typo

[Selene Gregoire]

2 minutes ago, AnyaJurelle said:

LL will never be able to please everyone all of the time.

I've have said that I don't know how many times.

3 minutes ago, AnyaJurelle said:

When you have a demented stalker who doesn't seem to understand the difference between pixels and reality and keeps creating armies of new alts just to haunt you, you'll use whatever tools are at your disposal to keep the jerk out.

Yes, I did. And I wouldn't do otherwise.

4 minutes ago, AnyaJurelle said:

Only way to (almost) please everyone is to make areas of the grid 'explorer friendly' and others 'not so much'  - and mark them accordingly on the world map.

So pretty much what we have now with mainland and privates estates. Just they aren't indicated on the map by anything other than location. 

How would you go about "marking them on the map"? 

[Kia Kiyori]

2 minutes ago, Selene Gregoire said:

I've have said that I don't know how many times.

Yes, I did. And I wouldn't do otherwise.

So pretty much what we have now with mainland and privates estates. Just they aren't indicated on the map by anything other than location. 

How would you go about "marking them on the map"? 

No freaking idea. And anything I could think of, would invoke an army of objections anyway. It was just a thought.

[Female Winslet]

One point not being paid much attention to in this thread is that orbs send people *home*. That's not necessary to protect privacy in any universe. It's just a disruption to the traveler. If the issue is truly about keeping people off your land, then it's hard to see why simply moving people off your land would not be adequate.

On 4/13/2019 at 7:50 PM, KanryDrago said:

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

When I encounter the 0 second orb, I file an abuse report. When I file the abuse report, I provide LL with a citation to their own policy on orbs because I know there have been some Lindens who tell me there is no policy. Then I show them that policy and they go "Oh, I didn't know it was there." After a few days, I typically find that the 0 second orb is either gone or no longer set to zero second warning.

Contrary to what some of the "me me me" people have said in this thread, zero notice plainly is not the adequate notice in the policy. Why? Because of the mathematical concept of 0, as in nothing. If no warning at all were adequate, there'd be no need for a policy calling for warning.

What non-zero number is adequate is a point on which clarification is needed. I'm working on a draft policy proposal. It will seek to provide a warning amount that is sufficient for all parcels and all vehicle types.

13 hours ago, 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.

Subject to the terms and conditions of that usage.

10 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

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

Speaking as someone who has considered, pursued, and successfully obtained a career in the legal industry, this problem has been addressed in real life because the real life rule has been that you own the land all the way up to heaven and all the way down to hell (as it was colorfully put in medieval laws that descended into present day). This would not have allowed the aviation industry to exist because it would have made every overflight an incident of trespassing. So the law was changed. See prior discussion about it in this thread and if we really want to, we can have a far more detailed discussion of the ins and outs involved (technically, it's an easement, for example, but that's kinda beside the point). 

9 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

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.

I think I have a more realistic solution. Those who design security orbs need to not allow less than a certain amount of warning time. Zero warning should be made impossible. This should be easy enough to do.

7 hours 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

The passenger or pilot of an SL aircraft at any altitude would have to really work hard to do this while flying over. They tend to move fast. That's the point. Even with the ability to do something like right click and cam in as in Firestorm, it is difficult or impossible.

If they were, for example, in a helicopter, and they decided to hover over your land and snoop, that would be a different scenario. And one that no one is saying should be allowed.

7 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

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.

I have been stalked multiple times in RL, each of them for lengthy periods of time. So I daresay I know what it is like to deal with. And it, among other things that have happened to me, do indeed affect me going forward. 

But I also recognize that has nothing to do with SL and even less to do with the subject at hand, which is boating, flying, and driving. Not people parking on our land, staying there, and surveilling us, taking our photos, following us, leaving "gifts," cyberstalking us, sending us messages, and other such things that I've experienced with some of my RL stalkers. 

Edited April 15, 2019 by Female Winslet

[Blush Bravin]

Personally I think that right of ways need to be wider and more visible. The problem is how do you do that high in the sky for airplanes. It's rather easy to find the channels in bodies of water, though oftentimes those channels are too narrow and the edges jagged which makes navigation difficult. I also think pilots need to get over the idea of flying in a straight line from point A to point B. Maybe they could think of it like not flying through a storm or taking the path of a valley instead of going over mountain ranges. Seems like that could enhance the pleasure of flying.

[Blush Bravin]

4 minutes ago, Female Winslet said:

But I also recognize that has nothing to do with SL and even less to do with the subject at hand, which is boating, flying, and driving. Not people parking on our land, staying there, and surveilling us, taking our photos, following us, leaving "gifts," cyberstalking us, sending us messages, and other such things that I've experienced with some of my RL stalkers. 

Seriously!!! You think this doesn't happen in SL???? Really. You just destroyed any credibility you had with me. This is exactly what this is about.

[Female Winslet]

6 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Seriously!!! You think this doesn't happen in SL???? Really. You just destroyed any credibility you had with me. This is exactly what this is about.

One of the difficulties in this conversation is the persistence of one side insisting that the other side has said something they never said and then getting mad about that instead of addressing what was actually said.

For example, I never said stalking doesn't happen in SL. In fact, I've previously expressed sympathy for your situation in this very thread.

But I also recognize that being stalked in SL is not the same as in RL. In RL I don't have all the numerous ways of keeping someone away from me that I have in SL. In the ultimate case, I also don't have the ability to turn off my RL and make it disappear. Being stalked in SL is no fun. It's also not nearly the same thing as being stalked in RL.  

[Selene Gregoire]

21 minutes ago, Female Winslet said:

I have been stalked multiple times in RL, each of them for lengthy periods of time. So I daresay I know what it is like to deal with. And it, among other things that have happened to me, do indeed affect me going forward. 

But I also recognize that has nothing to do with SL and even less to do with the subject at hand, which is boating, flying, and driving. Not people parking on our land, staying there, and surveilling us, taking our photos, following us, leaving "gifts," cyberstalking us, sending us messages, and other such things that I've experienced with some of my RL stalkers. 

Were you in SL when RedZone was a thing? If not, then you are not aware of the fact that they were dossing residents and storing that information to grief people with. The guy who created RedZone? He was a convicted criminal.

So yes, it has everything to do with SL. And the 9mm that was aimed at my head and the  resulting bullet holes in the wall behind my head. That kind of stalker. The kind that will track you down no matter where you go, including online. Especially online.

[Blush Bravin]

10 hours ago, Female Winslet said:

One of the difficulties in this conversation is the persistence of one side insisting that the other side has said something they never said and then getting mad about that instead of addressing what was actually said.

 

10 hours ago, Female Winslet said:

But I also recognize that has nothing to do with SL and even less to do with the subject at hand, which is boating, flying, and driving.

 

Try being a little more consistent then. I quoted you. I didn't paraphrase - I quoted you. You may sympathize in words but in actions you aren't caring about the reasons why people genuinely feel a need for safeguarding their privacy. All you care about is your ability to enjoy your pixel airplane. You are putting that above all else. For some this is a point of real anxiety but your playtime in your airplane is more important. Talk about selfish. Go the **** around!

I apologize for the last two comments, which I have struck out. While I may think it I should not have said it. I confess to letting you push one huge and very sensitive button.

 

Edited April 15, 2019 by Blush Bravin

[Parhelion Palou]

This thread is making me way less sympathetic to vehicle owners, especially the ones who using flying vehicles.  It has helped boost my creativity as I come up with interesting things to do to ones over my parcel. If that was the point of this thread, then it's been achieved.

I still have an old balloon and a sailboat, though I don't have much time to use them. When I do use them I check the map first to find a route that keeps me off of people's property. Part of the fun is coming up with a way to do it. If there wasn't a way I'd pick a different destination. I've accidentally hit ban lines and orbs before, but I don't whine about the mean ol' land owners who broke my immersion.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Parhelion Palou said:

This thread is making me way less sympathetic to vehicle owners, especially the ones who using flying vehicles.

I don't think any of us are coming out very well here.

I don't have a horse in this race: I'm not a landowner. I haven't flown a vehicle in SL in at least 8 years, and have no plans to do so in the immediate future.

What's so depressing about everything I've read here is that there is absolutely zero sign of anyone trying to reach out and compromise, or even really understand the other side.

18 hours ago, Amina Sopwith said:

What kind of culture do we want?

It's an excellent question. Indeed, for me, it is the question. To judge from the above, the answer isn't going to be very edifying.

[Selene Gregoire]

2 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

What's so depressing about everything I've read here is that there is absolutely zero sign of anyone trying to reach out and compromise, or even really understand the other side.

I'm back to being chopped liver again? 

What needs to happen is a change in the current SL culture... or rather the attitudes that developed the current culture.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Selene Gregoire

[AyelaNewLife]

12 hours ago, Female Winslet said:

One point not being paid much attention to in this thread is that orbs send people *home*. That's not necessary to protect privacy in any universe. It's just a disruption to the traveler. If the issue is truly about keeping people off your land, then it's hard to see why simply moving people off your land would not be adequate.

And this is what I mean when I said that landowners have the right to be bads.

A zero-second security orb that boots people home does not stop people from entering your land. Banlines do that. Taking your banlines down is like leaving your front door open - it's an open invitation for travellers to enter your land. Slapping a zero-second to-home security orb behind that metaphorical open door makes you a poo. Now, as it currently stands, as a landowner you're legally allowed to be a poo in that manner; but I'm also allowed to point out that if it stinks and floats... yeah.

Unlike some in this thread, I don't have any problem with the stated goals of those that use these orbs. Want to keep people off your land, because you value your privacy? More power to you. But zero-second to-home orbs that cover your entire parcel is not an appropriate way to do this, at all. Putting up ban lines around your land? Sure, go for it. Orbs that simply punt people to the edge of your land, or give visitors sufficient time to respond to the implied "get off my lawn" of an orb countdown? Makes perfect sense, no complaints from me. A zero-second to-home orb that just covers your skybox flat, or your ground-level house? That's fair enough, no casual passerby is going to 'accidentally' enter such a place.

Giving no indication whatsoever that your land is private, allowing open access to said land, and then immediately bumping the unsuspecting visitor straight back home the moment they step over the parcel boundary? I don't think it's that much of a stretch to call such orbs griefing tools. You just can't justify such a thing, not when there's perfectly adequate alternatives that don't treat the visitor or unaware traveller with such spiteful contempt. But I also don't think that it's intentional. I imagine most people will use their orb on the default setting, and simply don't care about how that affects other people... and being a poo through laziness is better than being a poo through malice, I guess.

I don't know how LL could legislate for such nuance, though. Only thing I can think of is a total ban on the to-home portion of ejection orbs on the mainland - if they can be pushed off the edge of the parcel in question, they should be. But that's not an option with privately-owned regions, so the to-home ejection orbs should probably stay legal there... it's messy. And so we'll probably remain as we are now, with some overzealous landowners acting needlessly badly, and quarterly threads about how bad these people are.

See you all in June, I guess?

Edited April 15, 2019 by AyelaNewLife
I did typo

[Scylla Rhiadra]

8 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

I'm back to being chopped liver again? 

Oh, not at all. There are a few responses here that represent dynamic attempts to find a middle ground, including some of yours. Ayela's post, just above, is another good example, and Blush makes a perfectly valid point about harassment.

The thing is, there are options here, choices that can safeguard one's privacy without being a mere jerk about it. Some of the expressions of the "My Land, My Rules" crowd above definitely verge on jerkiness. And if you're tempted to be awful to everyone who wants to use a vehicle in SL because you don't like the tone of a few of the posts in this thread, then you could definitely use a bit of perspective.

8 hours ago, Selene Gregoire said:

What needs to happen is a change in the current SL culture... or rather the attitudes that developed the current culture.

Maybe. Some of this seems to be ideological: the dead hand of Adam Smith and that whole 200-odd year-old "Property Rights are EVERYTHING" perspective. Which is ironic as hell, as the very existence of a virtual world comprised, ultimately, of data that is in fact owned by a corporation should completely put paid to that illusion.

There have always been those in SL who are generous and open and community-minded. And there's never been a shortage of cranky, stick-waving old men either.

15 minutes ago, AyelaNewLife said:

But I also don't think that it's intentional.

I suspect that you're right, and that that's often, maybe even usually, the case. If so, educating people about this issue -- which is what this thread should be doing -- is the best answer.

But there are plenty of posts here that suggest that some are choosing to be miserable SOBs, merely because they've paid LL for the privilege to be so.

And that's what so disheartening.

[Nova Convair]

After reading here from time to time I came to the conclusion: waste of time and no need to listen any longer.

Depending on the situation and the average idiocy level of the trespassers I will choose something between "0 time kicker" and "no security at all" and will ignore any complaints.

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 minute ago, Nova Convair said:

Depending on the situation

What a startling idea!

[AyelaNewLife]

3 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I suspect that you're right, and that that's often, maybe even usually, the case. If so, educating people about this issue -- which is what this thread should be doing -- is the best answer.

But there are plenty of posts here that suggest that some are choosing to be miserable SOBs, merely because they've paid LL for the privilege to be so.

And that's what so disheartening.

I don't think it's particularly helpful that the big "educational initiative" of those mainland landowner pillars is so... extreme. Open rez rights is not a reasonable expectation to wave in landowner's faces, nor is the removal of ban lines; and the inclusion of the unreasonable makes ignoring the reasonable so much easier for landowners. A reasonable compromise would be "put banlines up instead of using an orb", or "set your orb to move visitors off your land, don't eject to home". It achieves the same thing - maintaining the landowner's privacy - without being a miserable SOB to any unsuspecting wanderers.