Preventing prims from rezzing

[Phil Deakins]

Is there a way to prevent a tenant rezzing more prims than the accommodation's limit? In the case that I'm looking at, the tenant is one of many tenants on the same parcel, and the accommodations have varying prim limits, so it's not just an overall parcel control. I'm actually wanting to find an existing product or, failing that, an LSL method that would work. I can write the script but I haven't figured out a way that would do it.

Thank you for reading this.

[Lucia Nightfire]

There is no proactive means, ie, parcel or console setting to limit prims at a prim owner level.

The best you can do is use scripted prim return or a bot to check land impact per prim owner and either warn them or use a traveling sensor to find their objects and return them until the land impact goes back under allowed limits.

The worst you could do is have a prim allotment system that fills up the parcel with prims and releases prims when needed, but this method will negatively affect everyone once a single user goes over their limit.

There are feature requests for land impact limits per prim owner as well as for a way to get the last rezzed object keys by owner per inputted time range, but nothing came of it.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Lucia Nightfire

[Phil Deakins]

Thank you @Lucia Nightfire It seems it's not really possible. What my friend would like to do is place a 'limiter' in a tenant's accommodation to prevent them rezzing more than the allotment, but only after they've transgressed twice. It seems that it's not going to be possible they way she imagines (i.e. actually prevent rezzing), but your first suggestion might work, as she only wants to do it with repeated transgressors, so a system would not need to travel.

Thank you for your reply. It's appreciated.

 

[Wulfie Reanimator]

5 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Thank you @Lucia Nightfire It seems it's not really possible. What my friend would like to do is place a 'limiter' in a tenant's accommodation to prevent them rezzing more than the allotment, but only after they've transgressed twice. It seems that it's not going to be possible they way she imagines (i.e. actually prevent rezzing), but your first suggestion might work, as she only wants to do it with repeated transgressors, so a system would not need to travel.

Thank you for your reply. It's appreciated.

 

The most practical solution might be a simple warning system, which sends a message to the tenant and the owner. That way you can deal with the "transgressions" as they happen. Also keep in mind that rezzing things only for a short time (for example, avatar attachments for editing) might be falsely detected, so you might not want to have a fixed number of warnings.

[Phil Deakins]

Thank you for that, @Wulfie Reanimator. It does help.

[Qie Niangao]

Phil, just cuz I know you like bots, one thing that might be a little nicer than removing rezzed objects is to remove the tenant's ability to rez more stuff once they've gone over the limit, until they bring their Land Impact back down below that limit. The idea is that a standard llGetParcelPrimOwners script would task a bot to move the tenant between Group Roles that have / don't have the Ability to "Always allow 'Create Objects'" (and, of course, the parcel can't have the Option to Build set for Group). Seems as if it should work, but it would need some testing, particularly around how immediately a role change takes effect.

[Phil Deakins]

Very interesting idea, Qie (still my #1 poster ). I'll give that idea some thought. Well done on coming up with it.

@Qie Niangao Bots: I forgot to mention that I'm on with resurrecting my most recent bots system. I wrote several in my time. A friend wants some bots - character, not traffic. But it's been quite a while, and my latest system it was written 2 computers ago. Programming environments change over time and previous source code (solutions) won't always load into, and run from, the latest environment. So far I've managed to get hold of Visual Studio 2008 which should have helped but didn't, and I have a copy of 2005 that's no good for my latest system, but I'm having the best joy with 2019 - the current one. That surprises me, but I can use it.

Edited October 20, 2020 by Phil Deakins

[Lucia Nightfire]

11 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

Phil, just cuz I know you like bots, one thing that might be a little nicer than removing rezzed objects is to remove the tenant's ability to rez more stuff once they've gone over the limit, until they bring their Land Impact back down below that limit. The idea is that a standard llGetParcelPrimOwners script would task a bot to move the tenant between Group Roles that have / don't have the Ability to "Always allow 'Create Objects'" (and, of course, the parcel can't have the Option to Build set for Group). Seems as if it should work, but it would need some testing, particularly around how immediately a role change takes effect.

One downside is that the prim owner would have to relog before the new role's abilities kicked in through a capacities check. The only exception is ejection from a group, although there are "some" scenarios where group tags and abilities can remain until relog...

Until then, they can keep on rezzing. Also, it wouldn't stop group-set object rezzing, either.

Not being a downer, just laying out any issues.

[Qie Niangao]

41 minutes ago, Lucia Nightfire said:

One downside is that the prim owner would have to relog before the new role's abilities kicked in through a capacities check. The only exception is ejection from a group, although there are "some" scenarios where group tags and abilities can remain until relog...

Until then, they can keep on rezzing. Also, it wouldn't stop group-set object rezzing, either.

Not being a downer, just laying out any issues.

Yeah, I was worried about "how immediately a role change takes effect" and in a little cursory testing with an alt, it appears that the prim owner needs to change Active Group at least once before the changed Role takes effect; I'm sure a relog would do it, too. Either way, that's pretty far from instantaneous.

I hadn't even thought about scripted rezzers - I assume that's what "group-set object rezzing" is about - and I sure wouldn't be surprised if it continues to work even when the rezzer's owner has lost the role with the "Always allow 'Create Objects'" Ability. Trying to test it, though, it seems my alt's scripted, group-set rezzer throws an error when his Roles lack that Abililty; but it's certainly possible I overlooked something in testing.

[Phil Deakins]

Thank you @Lucia Nightfire and @Qie Niangao for following it on. The group role idea looked promising, but it does seem to take time before it kicks in, so it's not really what my friend WAS looking for. I say 'was', because what she wants can't be done.

Thank you everyone for the ideas and comments.

[Phil Deakins]

I'm now thinking that the group role idea might work. Not as intended, which was an immediate prevention of rezzing prims, but it might still be useful to my friend. I'm gonna get stuck into it :) Thank you @Qie Niangao for coming up with it.