Jump to content
Constantine Linden

Security/Privacy and New Linden Homes

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Blush Bravin said:

not necessarily want their homes open to the public or prying eyes.

I have two of the new Linden Homes. I would love one to be open without any boundaries but I would like one to be private. I'd like to be able to retreat to my private dwelling without having to be on the lookout for interlopers.

You can't really stop the prying eyes.  But I'm going to say something that might assuage your concern a bit.  Think about the demographics of who is moving into these homes.  What Belliseria has is a bunch of people who wanted the Blake or Bay City lifestyle, but were turned off by the buy-in.   You've got a bunch of girly-girl fashionistas (and couples) filling up their cozy little homes with gacha'd tchotkes and putting in little gardens and whatnot.  And you've got some similar folks moved into the boathouses with their quality sailboats and motor vessels.  These are long term residents who have premium accounts and who spend money in SL.  These are not the sorts of people who interlope, they know the customs of SL.

And outsiders to the continent?  Well some of them are similar to the people who live there and will visit and socialize.  I don't think most griefers are going to waste their time messing around with private residences when they can head to a social venue or Caledon Oxbridge when there's no local "bouncer" around

21 minutes ago, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

I suppose it's too much to ask that people at least wait until the orbs are available, see how they work, and THEN complain?

Just had to do a bit of a joke:  Oh my sweet summer child....this...is...SL.  If the Residents pulled out the pitchforks for introduction of direct teleporting, the introduction of free accounts and the changes in stipends, the removal of ratings, the removal of dwell,...well, there's going to be friction about the issues we're discussing.  (I only read about the first two, but I experienced the rest)

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CronoCloud Creeggan said:

You can't really stop the prying eyes.  But I'm going to say something that might assuage your concern a bit. 

My concern is with a stalker for over 10 years. You can't assuage my concern at all. Besides my posts have been more about both sides trying to see the other's point of view. But I've given up on that. Unfortunately, clear sides have been drawn. There is no middle ground so therefore having to pick a side, I will pick the side of keeping SL as it has been for the past 15 years with options for security. I will stay in my Linden Homes and I will remember who has acted hatefully.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2019 at 5:00 PM, Constantine Linden said:

We want to thank everyone for the kind words they have expressed in the last 24 hours since Linden Homes has launched its first phase of homes. We are delighted so many of you are enjoying the homes, the decor, and especially the feel of community. As part of fostering that community feel, we are going to address two changes that are occurring over the next week or so (and explain our reasoning).

The first is that at 6am SLT on Wed April 17th, we are going to uncheck the box on the Linden Homes estate that allows parcel owners access restrictions to be more restrictive than the estate. Meaning: no ban lines. It's our belief that with a sense of community being a main goal of Linden Homes, ban lines send the wrong message. Parcel owners can still ban troublesome individuals by name on their parcel but they will not be able to put their land in virtual lock down by restricting access to group only.

The second goes hand in hand with parcel access, and that is security devices. We want to allow Residents to fly, walk, drive, sail and explore freely across Bellisseria without compromising Residents privacy and security on their own parcels. To that end we are allowing the use of security orbs. However, since many orbs can be set in ways that preclude even the most innocent of straying across a parcel boundary or being sent home even though you are 500m in the sky we are forced to come up with a compromise. 

You may use your personal security orbs or devices in Linden Homes for now, but early next week: we are going to provide you with an approved device via the Linden Homes Content Packs. It will work just as aggressively in protecting your homes from unwanted intrusion, but still reasonably allow Residents to explore without fear of being ejected or teleported home without warning. Once those are added to the Linden Homes Content Packs, the use of other scripted security devices will not be allowed and this will be noted in an update to the Linden Homes covenant.

 

So, to recap:

- Ban lines will go away for Linden Homes starting 6am SLT on Wed April 17th

- Linden-supplied security orbs will be distributed via the Linden Homes Content Creation Packs early next week

- Personal security orbs/devices will be allowed from the above date until approved security orbs are distributed (and not after)

 

We’re thrilled you’re enjoying Linden Homes and we’re excited for everything else to come!

That's great news! I was wondering how I was going to get a boat out of my boat house with all the yellow lines surrounding me.

Now...do this same thing on your old legacy estate...called "The Mainland" where Governor Linden reigns.

Imagine if ban lines (access only) could be GONE from the Mainland at large -- currently there are entire rivers that cannot be navigated due to "group only" access (such as in Keuka/Cayuga). 

Imagine if security orbs didn't knock you from plane or boat because you were merely flying or sailing near a lot with an aggressive orbs, but only could be set to the range of a building, and only eject, not teleport home (which more often than not leads to a crash).

Imagine! 

It could be done!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CronoCloud Creeggan said:

I am finding this thread....interesting.  Now perhaps I've lived a sheltered Second Life, but I've never used security orbs, or ban lines.  In fact, some of the places I've had parcels in, ban lines are forbidden as are security orbs below 512m.  I even leave rezzing on for non group objects.

The lack of them hasn't bothered me because I haven't felt the need for them.  In all my landed years in SL, the number of times I've had interlopers on my personal property is less than 10.   It was often a curious newbie who didn't know the ropes, and I gently explained to them the concept of private parcels. They usually TP'd out heading to someplace like the Caledon Oxbridge, The Shelter or NCI, that I directed them to.  When it wasn't a curious newbie, usually a direct "this is my private house, please leave, would do the trick followed by an eject if necessary.  I've only had to add one person to a ban list on one of my own personal parcels.

I've been an Estate manager as well, and I rarely ever had to use such powers to get rid of interlopers, more often troublemakers were disgruntled estate residents causing "drama".

So I must admit I'm finding it hard to believe that the lack of ban lines or limits to security orbs will lead to a plague of trespassing.  I don't know what kind of SL some of you live in, but that sort of thing is rare in my experience.  SL is full of oldbies who know the customs.  Sure there's people who grief, but they tend to do it to social venues where they have an audience, not personal homes.  (And I HAVE had to remove people from social venues) Heck, I haven't been griefed in a Sandbox in years, and in the old days that wasn't uncommon.

 

Yes, I agree.

I do not allow "group only" ban lines on my rentals and don't allow security orbs on the ground, and only allow them 500 m or higher in the sky. Any that I put in properties are for "eject" only and not "TP" home which is unnecessary.

I have run a rentals business for 15 years in SL and have been a target of intense griefing as you may know. But I continue to believe in open groups and open systems that don't create an archipelago of egos in bunkers.

MOST people are polite and do not enter others' homes. MOST people prefer the convenience of a group they can join without waiting for a landlord to come online, and which enables their friends to come and build or decorate or just show off creations or purchases without hassle.

As in real life, the benefit of an open society outweighs the negatives caused by crime and terrorism.

There's always a small percentage of tenants who are shocked when they read this on a lease and live in fear that someone will enter their house and use their adult furniture. I have come to see this is hard-wired behavior achieved by evolution that will not go away online in a virtual world, where you cannot get AIDS by definition.

So I accommodate it -- but with limitations (go in the sky). The reality is, most sims only have a few people on them for a few hours at any one time, and any intruder can easily be ejected with ban powers of the ordinary type -- or you can type a name in the ban list. The reality is, with different schedules and time zones, even on my most crowded sims with the smallest lots where there might be 30 tenants, only 3-4 of them are actually there at any given hour. So the overwhelming fear of intrusion, loss of privacy, and (evolutionary and societal) fear that, say, a male will not be able to determine the paternity of his children really are misplaced.

There's another thing. You can uncheck "avatars can see me" and be invisible outside the parcel. You can't get more privacy than that!

Edited by Prokofy Neva
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

I suppose it's too much to ask that people at least wait until the orbs are available, see how they work, and THEN complain?

I'd venture to guess that there's not that much need to wait. Security orbs have predictable abilities, and so do ban lines. Only a security orb set to immediate ejection would approximate what ban lines do, and the odds that LL has come up with a unique orb that does something else we aren't already familiar with aren't high. It'd be interesting if they did, of course. But if you're wondering why people are feeling confident with commenting and critiquing this now, it's likely because we're all quite familiar with what each option does and which shortcomings each has. Only something different from what's already available would be notable. LL hasn't given an indication they're about to offer anyone such a thing. 

On a note unrelated to your question, the thing I haven't seen mentioned (it's possible I haven't read every last post, but I've tried) but which is a key part of the LL-proposed scenario is that the private estates which allow orbs but disable ban lines also tend to have proactive estate managers who handle issues swiftly. For this new continent, LL seems to be offering only the half of that equation where people have less privacy, but not the half where problematic people are estate-banned quickly. The A/R process is a bit opaque to most of us, and doesn't tend to include a particularly rapid response (if any) in many cases. So of course, people who want more privacy now feel like they're hanging out in the breeze; they know what to expect from LL, and it isn't what private estate managers (the good ones) deliver.

So the key half of the equation that would make this more likely to work (keeping in mind that determined attackers collect alts) is entirely missing, unless LL is going to delegate people to such duties. 

Edited by Katarin Kiergarten
Spelling corrections and parenthetical clarification.
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, CronoCloud Creeggan said:

Just had to do a bit of a joke:  Oh my sweet summer child....this...is...SL.  If the Residents pulled out the pitchforks for introduction of direct teleporting, the introduction of free accounts and the changes in stipends, the removal of ratings, the removal of dwell,...well, there's going to be friction about the issues we're discussing.  (I only read about the first two, but I experienced the rest)

 

And let's not even start about the Adult Continent. xD

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Katarin Kiergarten said:

I'd venture to guess that there's not that much need to wait. Security orbs have predictable abilities, and so do ban lines. Only a security orb set to immediate ejection would approximate what ban lines do, and the odds that LL has come up with a unique orb that does something else we aren't already familiar with aren't high. It'd be interesting if they did, of course. But if you're wondering why people are feeling confident with commenting and critiquing this now, it's likely because we're all quite familiar with what each option does and which shortcomings each has. Only something different from what's already available would be notable. LL hasn't given an indication they're about to offer anyone such a thing. 

On a note unrelated to your question, the thing I haven't seen mentioned (it's possible I haven't read every last post, but I've tried) but which is a key part of the LL-proposed scenario is that the private estates which allow orbs but disable ban lines also tend to have proactive estate managers who handle issues swiftly. For this new continent, LL seems to be offering only the half of that equation where people have less privacy, but not the half where problematic people are estate-banned quickly. The A/R process is a bit opaque to most of us, and doesn't tend to include a particularly rapid response (if any) in many cases. So of course, people who want more privacy now feel like they're hanging out in the breeze; they know what to expect from LL, and it isn't what private estate managers (the good ones) deliver.

So the key half of the equation that would make this more likely to work (keeping in mind that determined attackers collect alts) is entirely missing, unless LL is going to delegate people to such duties. 

I am an estate manager, and my experience is that many of the residents who rely upon ban lines have little or no knowledge of security orbs and their effectiveness. I was the same years ago, until I actually tried using an orb. I’d encourage others to at least test one before declaring that they won’t work. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

I am an estate manager, and my experience is that many of the residents who rely upon ban lines have little or no knowledge of security orbs and their effectiveness. I was the same years ago, until I actually tried using an orb. I’d encourage others to at least test one before declaring that they won’t work. 

Security orbs can be only as effective as promptly as an estate's covenant allows, which as an estate manager I would assume you already know. Those here critiquing LL's offering of orbs are reasonably predicting that immediate ejection, or even relatively fast (5-10 seconds) ejection, will (obviously) not be options. 

It's perfectly warranted to critique this because a security orb with a significant delay between detection and removal will not do what ban lines do, period.

So there is no reason to wait to comment upon this shortcoming. We know what it is already. I am confused about why you are implying otherwise, though. Security orbs are not magic. Yes, they might work for some residents in cases where they use ban lines instead, but I am referring to the scenario LL has introduced, which is also used in sailing- and flying-friendly private estates, in which ban lines are disallowed and security orbs have a mandated time delay before they take action. That scenario is problematic, and obviously so, for those who want comprehensive, immediate protection.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Security orbs can be only as effective as promptly as an estate's covenant allows, which as an estate manager I would assume you already know. Those here critiquing LL's offering of orbs are reasonably predicting that immediate ejection, or even relatively fast (5-10 seconds) ejection, will (obviously) not be options. 

It's perfectly warranted to critique this because a security orb with a significant delay between detection and removal will not do what ban lines do, period.

So there is no reason to wait to comment upon this shortcoming. We know what it is already. I am confused about why you are implying otherwise, though. Security orbs are not magic. Yes, they might work for some residents in cases where they use ban lines instead, but I am referring to the scenario LL has introduced, which is also used in sailing- and flying-friendly private estates, in which ban lines are disallowed and security orbs have a mandated time delay before they take action. That scenario is problematic, and obviously so, for those who want comprehensive, immediate protection.

And there lays the problem, imho.

People are talking about trying a compromise, and, yet, can even agree with a small delay, which will be necessary in order for people to leave your property. Simple as that.

They desire the option that people can't enter it. Period. Ever.  Only a ban line can do that (or a ban list), and, therefore, there isn't any compromise. They want the "status quo" maintained. Simple as that.

Most of the suggestions I saw here clearly shows that in a way or another: Bring back ban lines; Create an entirely new continent just with ban lines; Recreate the whole continent again, making sure no ban lines will not get in the way of travelers;  Make a part of the continent with ban lines, etc... See the common trend here?

No compromise. Not really, when you look at it.

It's, in one form or another, basically bring ban lines. Just wrapped in a new "package".

On the other hand, you have a group of people that do not want any kind of physical unpassable barrier between them and their destination. They do accept having to "rush" through someone's property, but not having to go around it.

Basically, both groups are incompatible. Simple as that.

Hence why I said we should poll it. At least we get to know, really, who the majority is, and act accordingly. No fairer way to do it than that.

Still, I am hopeful that someone, somewhere, will come up with something. Who knows... ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Marsellus Walcott said:

And there lays the problem, imho.

People are talking about trying a compromise, and, yet, can even agree with a small delay, which will be necessary in order for people to leave your property. Simple as that.

They desire the option that people can't enter it. Period. Ever.  Only a ban line can do that (or a ban list), and, therefore, there isn't any compromise. They want the "status quo" maintained. Simple as that.

Most of the suggestions I saw here clearly shows that in a way or another: Bring back ban lines; Create an entirely new continent just with ban lines; Recreate the whole continent again, making sure no ban lines will not get in the way of travelers;  Make a part of the continent with ban lines, etc... See the common trend here?

No compromise. Not really, when you look at it.

It's, in one form or another, basically bring ban lines. Just wrapped in a new "package".

On the other hand, you have a group of people that do not want any kind of physical unpassable barrier between them and their destination. They do accept having to "rush" through someone's property, but not having to go around it.

Basically, both groups are incompatible. Simple as that.

Hence why I said we should poll it. At least we get to know, really, who the majority is, and act accordingly. No fairer way to do it than that.

Still, I am hopeful that someone, somewhere, will come up with something. Who knows... ;)

 

I thought I brought up a good solution. Create areas that are no fly zones. In those areas you can have ban lines and zero second orbs. Those areas could be clearly marked in the map so travelers know to stay clear of those areas. In all the other areas then it's open. No ban lines. That way the needs of both can be met.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Listen. Anti-Banline people. PLEASE! Let us keep this civil. I know both sides have said things that were too much, but frankly, I can only speak to my group.
Having said that. I think if a set of sims were off away from the rest that were considered "Secured" sims, then that way when you apply for your Linden home, you can select "Traditional" or "Traditional Secured." Or "Houseboat." Or "Houseboat Secured." And the secured ones are all clumped together to be together, so that both sides ultimately could get what they want.  Especially if these are not on the main paths of travel. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

I thought I brought up a good solution. Create areas that are no fly zones. In those areas you can have ban lines and zero second orbs. Those areas could be clearly marked in the map so travelers know to stay clear of those areas. In all the other areas then it's open. No ban lines. That way the needs of both can be met.

Ban lines again.

See?

Basically, the other group would have to compromise and accept that there will be some regions where their movement will be restricted. Remember that part of not wanting an unpassable barrier? They would have to compromise with that.

Try as you may, either you get away with ban lines, and have one group unsatisfied, or keep it, which will mean the other group won't be able to really go wherever they want without encountering a barrier.

Now, which group should get what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, BlackBlade Smit said:

Ok. Listen. Anti-Banline people. PLEASE! Let us keep this civil. I know both sides have said things that were too much, but frankly, I can only speak to my group.
Having said that. I think if a set of sims were off away from the rest that were considered "Secured" sims, then that way when you apply for your Linden home, you can select "Traditional" or "Traditional Secured." Or "Houseboat." Or "Houseboat Secured." And the secured ones are all clumped together to be together, so that both sides ultimately could get what they want.  Especially if these are not on the main paths of travel. 

Yes this would be a great option and then both sides could have want they want. Fully support this idea.

Edit to Add:

BlackBlade is from the camp of not wanting to have ban lines but also agrees having two areas separate would be a good idea.

I'm a moderate, that has been debating for the side of pro ban lines and I'm in agreeance with it too.

Blush is also a middle ground person that has been debating pro ban lines as well and is also in agreeance. This could work.

Edited by IthilwenRose
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

Very well, don't try the orbs and continue complaining instead. I won't waste my time pointing out (as others have) that as the land owner, you can just eject someone or add them to your parcel ban list "immediately". Or how about just hitting that red X in the corner of the viewer, that's immediate AND comprehensive! 

I think I'll go visit the happy Linden home owners in the photo threads. Sheesh.

I don't think you're even talking to me, here; if you've followed this entire thread you'd know where I come down on this, which is that given the functionality of each option, there is not going to be a way to please everyone, but neither side is inherently wrong, either, about what they want or why. We have technological limitations imposed upon us all, here. I see and have experienced both sides. It's a problem that they cannot actually meet under the available options. None of us here can fix that, which is part of the reason this is such a long, heated thread.

But you are still missing the fact that actively removing people, i.e. as someone else put it, having to individually opt them out of invading your home, is both inherently unfair and required if ban lines are not allowed. That takes a lot of work, allows intrusion to happen, stress to climb, and just generally sucks for those being intruded upon. Those who want to not have this problem in the first place, and it's completely fair to not want to have it, will not be happy with a delayed orb. So of course they will say so. Why wouldn't they? But a response of essentially "fine, be that way" isn't productive, here. Facts are facts. And facts are what I've brought up in response to your question. That can't be helped except by asking a more-informed question in the first place. Receiving correction about it (twice, as necessary) isn't an indication of a poor attitude on the part of the person doing the correcting. 

It's as if facts themselves are just not all that popular on this thread in some cases. I don't get it. Don't jump into the debate half-prepared if you don't want your arguments fairly critiqued as fallible, perhaps? What I see happening here is that those who are holding firmly to the erroneous belief that orbs will solve this for those who bought in wanting ban lines (that did exist when they got a new Linden home, btw), for which there is no technological substitute in SL that isn't something like an immediate-ejection orb, are just wishing away the arguments of those who have pointed out their shortcomings becasue they don't want to hear about how their desire for easy travel is going to harm someone else's enjoyment of their home. What's the point of doing that? How we feel emotionally about this is valid, but it doesn't necessarily intersect with what we can do technologically in the ways that will appease everyone. Promoting orbs as capable of something they can't do is a confusing approach to dialogue about this. Of course those assertions will be challenged; they're false. Orbs are not ban lines.


Have you actually been harassed to a meaningful degree? It doesn't sound like it. It takes a lot of work to cope with it when it's coming from many avatars in a place where you should be able to expect peace and privacy and are doing nothing to invite it. It pretty well wrecks any relaxation you might have had in that location. 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'll just speak real frankly here, then slip back into lurking this thread:

  • Neither side is going to change the other side's mind, so don't bother trying.
  • You cannot plan the future based on events of the past - this applies to both sides of the debate.
  • People are already proclaiming the Linden Security Orb a failure and yet, no one has seen or experienced it and how it will work.
  • People are making statements that are beginning to sound shrill; you raise your voice when to should reinforce your argument.
  • The new law of the land, this land, is laid down, deal with it or leave, grumbling about it does nothing, except in giving the impression to others that one is a whiner.
  • Neither side is going to change the other side's mind, so don't bother trying.
The simple fact is this: it comes down to, specifically-speaking, ban-lines. Make them invisible? They still function exactly as they would if they are visible. The issue isn't about seeing them, it's about what they do.
A commenter above (intentionally didn't bother quoting them) stated: "there is a great divide with no in-between" - which is not true. There is a lot of in-between.
As for the Orb scenario: Insta-TP-Home is rude and crude, there's no call for it unless the one employing it is a sadistic person inside. Having a fair warning delay is the polite way to do it and I agree: 60 seconds is too long. 10 seconds would be the sweet spot, I believe.
As for strangers using your sex-alter: set the permission do not allow everyone to use it (those thing do have their own in-built security, you know.) There's a thought right there. As for "peepers and creepers" that would only be bothersome if you're present in your home, no? Then stay aware of your surroundings, mini-map does wonders with alerting you when anyone is coming close. You see someone slip onto your property it's your choice; be nice and say hello, can I help you or right-click and insta-ban them. This is all simple-Simon stuff, people.
So as was said before: perhaps it would be better to simply wait and see what Linden Lab comes up with in their iteration of a security system, then (and only then) praise or deride it's virtues or lack thereof.
Because you cannot plan the future based on events of the past.
Edited by Alyona Su
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, BlackBlade Smit said:

Having said that. I think if a set of sims were off away from the rest that were considered "Secured" sims, then that way when you apply for your Linden home, you can select "Traditional" or "Traditional Secured." Or "Houseboat." Or "Houseboat Secured." And the secured ones are all clumped together to be together, so that both sides ultimately could get what they want.  Especially if these are not on the main paths of travel. 

As long as it's off the travel paths, I cannot see why this would not work if LL wanted to do it.

But I would suggest waiting. Fear is a normal part of change and whenever there is change, there are people proclaiming it will be a disaster. Usually there is no disaster. I don't imagine there will be here either. It will all calm down.

Edited by Female Winslet
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2019 at 9:59 AM, Randy Pole said:

A very sensible and welcome approach to what could have become quite a problem considering how close the houses and houseboats are placed together.

 

Never been a fan of ban lines - ugly things.  Not keen on over zealous orbs either so this is good news.

Over zealous Orbs... I have been on a few occasions exploring on protected land and had attempts of such an orb setup so badly attempting too send me home::( 

Yes I reported it by the way )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

As for the Orb scenario: Insta-TP-Home is rude and crude, there's no call for it unless the one employing it is a sadistic person inside. Having a fair warning delay is the polite way to do it and I agree: 60 seconds is too long. 10 seconds would be the sweet spot, I believe.

As for strangers using your sex-alter: set the permission do not allow everyone to use it (those thing do have their own in-built security, you know.) There's a thought right there. As for "peepers and creepers" that would only be bothersome if you're present in your home, no? Then stay aware of your surroundings, mini-map does wonders with alerting you when anyone is coming close. You see someone slip onto your property it's your choice; be nice and say hello, can I help you or right-click and insta-ban them. This is all simple-Simon stuff, people.
So as was said before: perhaps it would be better to simply wait and see what Linden Lab comes up with in their iteration of a security system, then (and only then) praise or deride it's virtues or lack thereof.
Because you cannot plan the future based on events of the past.

I agree, the insta-tp-home is rude and can result in crashes when it's done.  The 60 sec. time is a bit long, but I like when someone gives me at least 20 secs to turn around and get out of their area.  It gives plenty of time to remove yourself from that area and if someone is newer to flying, boating, or driving a car, they may need that 20 seconds to maneuver themselves properly.  

The one option you missed on your list of things to do is that you can choose to click the privacy button in About land, so people off of the land cannot see you at all.  There is nothing to look at, if you have that activated.  They can see the house and décor but they will not be able to see you anywhere on the land.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Happy past; future; now Easter!

  • could ban lines change from 130m to 16m above terrain or
  • personal ban space - 16-64m around 'person

/🍳 easters egg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/17/2019 at 11:36 AM, Gryphon Ronas said:

I couldn't agree more. But as you pointed out, it's a hallelujah thread, and dissenting opinions are not welcome.

Some of us just happen to like a bit of solitude. So if expressing that means we're not welcomed into the community, all I can say to that is, thank you.

 

I have some mixed feelings about this. Do I mind if ppl are flying across my parcel, high up in the air? Probably not. And I can see how having banlines everywhere would make the region inherently unwelcome (even to the current residents thereof, who'd only be able to stay on their own lot). At the same time, I do not want to find strangers inside my home, and I reserve the right to boot those (and if I no longer have that right, I'll fight for that right to be reinstated).

Also, what if you have a small skybox up high? I foresee the potential for harrassment there.

Personally, I like a bit of solitude myself. I'm on a private island that I closed off to the public. If for no greater reason than that I don't want other ppl lagging up my sim -- unless they're willing to share in the tiers. :) I get that the new boathouses and/or other landhomes cannot have such a restrictive region policy, but a bit of privacy is not bad thing.

Edited by kiramanell
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2019 at 2:10 PM, Blush Bravin said:

Because none of the others you've mention have been an issue for me. That's my experience. I'm not going to talk about something that's not an issue for me. 

My whole point was that though we won't have banlines .. I'm actually glad about that, and though we really have no idea at this point whether the supplied orbs will do the job for us, that we do still have the ban hammer. So for those of us who want to use it .. it's still there. So there's no need to panic, except that when I get accused of not wanting to be social or part of the community because I would have the nerve to use the ban on someone who is annoying me. 

It's really crazy that I would get attacked, and that's what it feels like when I'm basically told I don't belong and that I should leave because I will use the ban if necessary. 

I suspect the supplied orbs will actually do a better job since they will presumably act to a higher altitude than 60m above the terrain. I actually understand your issue from RL. We occasionally get Chinooks from a nearby Air National Guard base flying fairly low overhead and it shakes the entire house. I generally fly 100-200m above the ground since it's less to render that way and I learned to fly around the Blake where there is a suggested altitude minimum. THere are jerks who fly just as there are in any activity in SL.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2019 at 5:00 PM, Constantine Linden said:

We are delighted so many of you are enjoying the homes, the decor, and especially the feel of community. As part of fostering that community feel, we are going to address two changes that are occurring over the next week or so (and explain our reasoning).

Although the second part of the OP goes on to address the issue of access for vehicles on the new continent, it's interesting that this is how the post begins. I suppose it's possible to argue that the design of these new subdivisions is, in part anyway, motivated by a kind of social engineering: a desire to produce a sense of coherent community in SL, something that has certainly (I think) been lacking in previous incarnations of Linden Homes, and indeed throughout most of the residential areas of the mainland (although there are certainly exceptions).

Personally, I'm absolutely delighted: good city planning should try to produce coherent, prosperous, and diverse communities.

But it's also pretty clear that there is a sizable proportion of the resident population who don't want to be integrated into a community, or at least want it to happen only on their own terms. And I think that has to be respected.

So, maybe a good solution would be the one already suggested: LL might subdivide the continent into two parts, one of which privileges "privacy" (through whatever means, but within reason: I think that 0 second warning orbs that TP you home are akin to booby traps, and should be treated as a form of griefing). The other could employ this new, community- and travel-friendly approach.

I suspect that LL would need to create an incentive for people to choose the second option: my feeling (I might be wrong) is that most people would by default opt for privacy, because that is the dominant culture we have developed here. At the very least, though, reasonably sizable corridors for safe vehicular traffic should be established.

One question is, even putting aside whatever technical issues might be involved, whether LL would be willing to compromise on what seems to me a very clear intent to reshape mainland residential culture.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no need, the grid has an abundance of land upon which people can do pretty much whatever they want with any combination of access restrictions, scripted security and ban lists. Between this new managed community right the way through to private islands and homesteads, there is something for everyone depending on your tolerance for chaos.

If anything this new continent is what's been missing from the overall selection, it's not intended to be suitable for all needs and there is no way LL could ever cater to everyone all in one location.

As you can have full access control literally everywhere else on the grid, lets have one place where things are more open and see what happens. It might be great ... and if it's not, it's not like anyone is out of pocket buying the land or left feeling trapped with an 'investment' gone bad.

  • Like 8

Share this post


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

As you can have full access control literally everywhere else on the grid, lets have one place where things are more open and see what happens. It might be great ... and if it's not, it's not like anyone is out of pocket buying the land or left feeling trapped with an 'investment' gone bad.

On a personal level, I agree with you entirely. This will be the only place in SL where the securing of vehicle-friendly restrictions apply. And, ironically, the "My land, my rules, if you don't like it go somewhere else" thing has come back to bite the more extreme members of the pro-privacy group.

BUT . . . the argument can be, and has been, made that your solution means that those who are uncomfortable with the new rules are missing out on the attractive new Linden homes and environment, and also on the free prims that come with them.

It surely should be possible to come up with a solution that does not mean that those who value privacy more than community (or vehicles) lose out, or feel excluded.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, CoffeeDujour said:

It might be great ... and if it's not, it's not like anyone is out of pocket buying the land or left feeling trapped with an 'investment' gone bad.

Having watched this and other threads this week I am not so sure about this, given the number of people who abandoned mainland (which they bought) to get a new Linden home (some did this before they even knew the new homes had sold out) or signed up for premium thinking they knew what to expect.

  • Like 3

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...