Any Options Or Workaround To Deal With Ban/Eject Bots?

[Codex Alpha]

My account is 10 years old, I'm not new to SL, but it has been quite a few years since I did a big exploration. Most recently to find some land and to do my second favourite activity besides creating: exploring. And things have changed quite a bit. many more ban lines, many more sniping eject bots (and set at 0 seconds) - and yesterday with an instant ban as well...

The experience has changed somewhat from when I first joined SL, and it is noticeable so even if all of this existed prior and landowners were just as aggressive at 'protecting their goodies and privacy' before it certainly wasn't noticed. I guess I was fooled into thinking SL was an open place where people generally wanted to socialize, but in 2022 we're seeing they don't. More and more they're bringing real life property lines and silliness - and always claiming rampant abuse that simply isn't there - to rationalize their antisocial behaviour.

But hey I can work with that. I'm a patient and understanding person. I'm all for balance and solutions though. For the most part anyone I have ever known playing on Second Life had good intentions, yet were subject to the same things that eventually contributed to them leaving the platform - and most likely to never return. I just feel compelled to offer my opinion, feedback and suggestions for solutions because we need more people to speak up in support of improving SL (from all views and perspectives and end usage).

Just because someone is louder than someone else in any forum doesn't make them right, nor does it make them the majority opinion. I can also understand the needs of other people, their concerns and issues - and not always agree with them, so a happy medium and goal would be best.

Notice how no one has addressed my actual concerns, and instead just want to post about how it is their right, etc and that they need protection, etc but do not offer alternatives, or solutions so that both parties could be happy.

Yes: Allow ban lines, allow auto-eject, allow users to govern their lands as they see fit,  allow users to protect their investments/purchases

No: Do not allow 0 second ejects, Do not allow auto-ban on eject (bans must be manual), Match LL's algorithm for ejecting off the parcel to nearby parcel

I don't appreciate being framed as some troublemaker, some intruder, some invader, or some 'rude person' because I happened to enter someone's property in the course of freely exploring the world SL has to offer. By allowing me to do so within reason and fairness there are benefits to everyone.

• A land owner sold a 1024m parcel to me because I discovered it in a decent location and decent price (because I am not a big creator yet)
• A rental owner got a rental (until the region disappeared but most likely I got banned for an opinion expressed on the forums) because I discovered it exploring.
• A couple creators got some sales from discovering their little stores that normally I would never have found or looked at, and flew down to see what is up.
• You might meet someone you normally never would, isn't that a plus? No, getting screamed at and banned just for saying "Hello" is not reasonable (and this was a neighbour parcel to mine! haha)

The funny thing is, this was all done while constantly ramming into boundary lines, and occasionally being sniped by eject bots. I find it a bit weird that I have to fly full speed and not even pause just so I don't get sent home by some paranoid landowner and lose my place.

So I might as well post about it because MOST won't. They'll just say "This is stupid and annoying" or even be confused as to why they're suddenly getting sent home as they fly around - AND THEY LEAVE SL.

On 5/19/2022 at 3:43 AM, Anicha Heartsong said:

We need a "right to roam." Why can't we have more open public spaces in some areas, perhaps whole continents like that? People who want walls and force-fields around their patches of land to somehow 'protect' themselves  can go live in areas where there is no passing traffic at all.

 

I don't think we need to go as far as having a 'right' to roam. I guess I was ignorant thinking that SL was a world I could roam around in. Not once did I ever get the notion (when seeing SL marketing for the first time) that it wouldn't be open. I support people's rights to protect their property and goods, but not to the point where it disturbs other people's enjoyment of the platform - and 0 second eject and auto-ban bots are not that.

Also see my post about "LL could Consider On-Demand Parcels/Worlds" regarding another solution, that would serve those who are ban line and privacy focused - and the benefits of moving those users to a on-demand service instead where they can get what they want - and as a result the rest of the SL world is open to those who don't care that much and want others to visit.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Rowan Amore]

26 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

My account is 10 years old, I'm not new to SL, but it has been quite a few years since I did a big exploration. Most recently to find some land and to do my second favourite activity besides creating: exploring. And things have changed quite a bit. many more ban lines, many more sniping eject bots (and set at 0 seconds) - and yesterday with an instant ban as well...

The experience has changed somewhat from when I first joined SL, and it is noticeable so even if all of this existed prior and landowners were just as aggressive at 'protecting their goodies and privacy' before it certainly wasn't noticed. I guess I was fooled into thinking SL was an open place where people generally wanted to socialize, but in 2022 we're seeing they don't. More and more they're bringing real life property lines and silliness - and always claiming rampant abuse that simply isn't there - to rationalize their antisocial behaviour.

But hey I can work with that. I'm a patient and understanding person. I'm all for balance and solutions though. For the most part anyone I have ever known playing on Second Life had good intentions, yet were subject to the same things that eventually contributed to them leaving the platform - and most likely to never return. I just feel compelled to offer my opinion, feedback and suggestions for solutions because we need more people to speak up in support of improving SL (from all views and perspectives and end usage).

Just because someone is louder than someone else in any forum doesn't make them right, nor does it make them the majority opinion. I can also understand the needs of other people, their concerns and issues - and not always agree with them, so a happy medium and goal would be best.

Notice how no one has addressed my actual concerns, and instead just want to post about how it is their right, etc and that they need protection, etc but do not offer alternatives, or solutions so that both parties could be happy.

Yes: Allow ban lines, allow auto-eject, allow users to govern their lands as they see fit,  allow users to protect their investments/purchases

No: Do not allow 0 second ejects, Do not allow auto-ban on eject (bans must be manual), Match LL's algorithm for ejecting off the parcel to nearby parcel

I don't appreciate being framed as some troublemaker, some intruder, some invader, or some 'rude person' because I happened to enter someone's property in the course of freely exploring the world SL has to offer. By allowing me to do so within reason and fairness there are benefits to everyone.

• A land owner sold a 1024m parcel to me because I discovered it in a decent location and decent price (because I am not a big creator yet)
• A rental owner got a rental (until the region disappeared but most likely I got banned for an opinion expressed on the forums) because I discovered it exploring.
• A couple creators got some sales from discovering their little stores that normally I would never have found or looked at, and flew down to see what is up.
• You might meet someone you normally never would, isn't that a plus? No, getting screamed at and banned just for saying "Hello" is not reasonable (and this was a neighbour parcel to mine! haha)

The funny thing is, this was all done while constantly ramming into boundary lines, and occasionally being sniped by eject bots. I find it a bit weird that I have to fly full speed and not even pause just so I don't get sent home by some paranoid landowner and lose my place.

So I might as well post about it because MOST won't. They'll just say "This is stupid and annoying" or even be confused as to why they're suddenly getting sent home as they fly around - AND THEY LEAVE SL.

I don't think we need to go as far as having a 'right' to roam. I guess I was ignorant thinking that SL was a world I could roam around in. Not once did I ever get the notion (when seeing SL marketing for the first time) that it wouldn't be open. I support people's rights to protect their property and goods, but not to the point where it disturbs other people's enjoyment of the platform - and 0 second eject and auto-ban bots are not that.

Also see my post about "LL could Consider On-Demand Parcels/Worlds" regarding another solution, that would serve those who are ban line and privacy focused - and the benefits of moving those users to a on-demand service instead where they can get what they want - and as a result the rest of the SL world is open to those who don't care that much and want others to visit.

The reason you're probably getting the responses you are is because at least once a year someone comes in to discuss this exact same issue.  Pretty much the exact same concerns with the exact same 'fixes'.  Hence, the exact same responses.  

Being louder on the forums doesn't change things either way.  Pro or con.  What you CAN do and perhaps the only thing that MIGHT help is to file a New Feature request on the jira.  Or search there as I'm sure others have already done so.

 

https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/BUG-231016

Edited May 20, 2022 by Rowan Amore

[Love Zhaoying]

52 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

Notice how no one has addressed my actual concerns,

What does this mean, agreeing with you?

53 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

but do not offer alternatives, or solutions so that both parties could be happy.

Maybe you missed the point- if there were alternatives, we'd tell you.

I myself suggested "gee, it'd be nice if there was an option to just eject you to the closest public parcel".

It really seems that you just don't like the true, honest answers which you are being given. 

[Codex Alpha]

10 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

What does this mean, agreeing with you?

Maybe you missed the point- if there were alternatives, we'd tell you.

I myself suggested "gee, it'd be nice if there was an option to just eject you to the closest public parcel".

It really seems that you just don't like the true, honest answers which you are being given. 

You're just proving what I posted. You're responding to this by pointing the finger at me, rather than addressing (agreeing or disagreeing) with the points being made.

If you agree, then post yes i agree. If you don't, post I disagree (and why and provide solutions).

Speak for yourself as well, by using 'we' you act like you are the spokesperson for some undetermined group.

I will also post what I want and how I want, because the intention is to improve Second Life. If you are not part of that, and only want to stalk and follow all my posts so you can follow it up with pointless stuff, then push off.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[JeromFranzic]

On 5/19/2022 at 5:06 AM, Codex Alpha said:

I find it strange to have an open world where we can assume to travel freely but then be shot out of the sky and sent home by some random parcel we crossed.

 

If this is what you want, you might be better served by exploring the Open Simulator hypergrids. But OS still allows some of the same security options SL has in place. I have been booted out from certain hypergrids based on not having an account in some areas; I have accounts in OSgrid and Kitely. Doesn't bother me in the least, there's so much to explore and some creators like Luna Lunaria duplicate their goods in multiple grids. (BTW she started out in SL before doing much more in Open Sim. I'm a fangirl of her creations...  ) 

[Codex Alpha]

@JeromFranzic You're right, because I am alone in this. This is only me, and the solution would be to join the other 19 and leave SL.

LOL of course I'm posting with a bit of sarcasm, as suggesting "just leave" isn't really a constructive solution to an issue in SL is it ?

Edited May 20, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Gabriele Graves]

Perhaps adjusting your expectations would be a better alternative?

[Rowan Amore]

1 hour ago, Codex Alpha said:

If you agree, then post yes i agree. If you don't, post I disagree (and why and provide solutions).

Sure, people agree but there still is NO solution.  Been there, done that hundreds of times in these forums.  

Search security orbs/ban lines in the forums.  You're not the first.  The answers are always the same.

See my previous post.  File a jira.  

[Codex Alpha]

3 hours ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Perhaps adjusting your expectations would be a better alternative?

Argument right back at you? Who would be in the right over this?
I would assume someone who wants to improve the experience for EVERYONE and come to solutions, rather than just keep a bunch of paranoid, privacy hungry landowners abusing an eject system.

Why don't you change YOUR mind for a positive change hmm?

Edited May 20, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Rowan Amore]

No one is abusing the system, FYI.  Zero time orbs are allowed on the mainland.  Period.  Sending you home is allowed.  Period.

Flouncing about in a resident forum will not improve the experience for ANYONE. 

Go to LL inworld meetings, voice your concerns there where actual Lindens go.  File that jira.  

You could have everyone here agree with you but...it won't change anything.  

[Gabriele Graves]

24 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

Argument right back at you? Who would be in the right over this?
I would assume someone who wants to improve the experience for EVERYONE and come to solutions, rather than just keep a bunch of paranoid, privacy hungry landowners abusing an eject system.

Why don't you change YOUR mind for a positive change hmm?

Not everyone agrees that what you advocate would be an improvement for EVERYONE.  You are only seeing one side, your own.  You've been told this and yet your mind hasn't changed.

This isn't about my mind, you know nothing about it.  You don't even know where my opinions lay on any of this as I haven't said.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Codex Alpha]

6 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

No one is abusing the system, FYI.  Zero time orbs are allowed on the mainland.  Period.  Sending you home is allowed.  Period.

Flouncing about in a resident forum will not improve the experience for ANYONE. 

Go to LL inworld meetings, voice your concerns there where actual Lindens go.  File that jira.  

You could have everyone here agree with you but...it won't change anything.  

That's what forums are for though Also it was never my request to eliminate orbs or land protections. Please read the OP before responding next time.

[Rowan Amore]

22 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

That's what forums are for though Also it was never my request to eliminate orbs or land protections. Please read the OP before responding next time.

When you say someone is abusing an eject system, what else would you mean?

You also edited your original post.  😁

You also said this...

On 5/18/2022 at 4:01 PM, Codex Alpha said:

While exploring the mainland parcels, looking for land or rent, or just exploring sometimes I run into those parcel ban bots, and although they're supposed to give some reasonable time to leave the property most people seem to have them set at like 5 seconds...

then it teleports you home.

Not a big deal but sometimes you found something interesting nearby, or were looking at a plot of land, and have no idea how to get back to that.

Would prefer people just put ban lines around their properties, because then you can just fly around it, but flying through it they'll nail and teleport you way too quick, then you lost your place..

 

They don't have to give any time whatsoever.  

Most people hate the look of ban lines.  I know I do.  

The rest of my previous post stands. 

ETA:  And to answer your question as stated in the thread title, the answer is no.

Any Options Or Workaround To Deal With Ban/Eject Bots?

Edited May 20, 2022 by Rowan Amore

[Codex Alpha]

Oh well, I'm not in a court of law. It's just a post for LL to consider, and making a case best I can, and so it will have to stand as it is. Have a nice day.

[Coffee Pancake]

At the end of the day, no one has any right to enter another persons parcel, exploring or otherwise.

This is why mainland has ROADS.

[Love Zhaoying]

7 hours ago, Codex Alpha said:

You're just proving what I posted. You're responding to this by pointing the finger at me, rather than addressing (agreeing or disagreeing) with the points being made.

No, I'm not.

7 hours ago, Codex Alpha said:

If you agree, then post yes i agree. If you don't, post I disagree (and why and provide solutions).

Your question wasn't about agreeing or disagreeing.

7 hours ago, Codex Alpha said:

Speak for yourself as well, by using 'we' you act like you are the spokesperson for some undetermined group.

Unless stated otherwise, I always mean the "Royal We". In this case, I was making an observation regarding the responses in your thread - mine and others'.

7 hours ago, Codex Alpha said:

I will also post what I want and how I want, because the intention is to improve Second Life. If you are not part of that, and only want to stalk and follow all my posts so you can follow it up with pointless stuff, then push off.

No, I can also post what I want. I didn't tell you what to post, or not post - like you have done many times now.

Please don't be paranoid. I'm not following you. If I didn't think your posts interesting, I would not reply or comment. If my "pointless" replies are upsetting you, then I'm sorry that you're sensitive. Guess I struck a nerve, given your "push off" comment.

I'm apparently only allowed to comment if I agree with you - even if I'm trying to reply honestly, with brevity, using the knowledge which I have accumulated. 

I will try to annoy you less. 
 

[Codex Alpha]

31 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

At the end of the day, no one has any right to enter another persons parcel, exploring or otherwise.

This is why mainland has ROADS.

I never argued I had a right, or that I did not support land users from protecting their land or privacy as they see fit.

However because it exists, it makes exploring the mainland kinda dangerous now lol cuz getting sniped. Ban lines are almost better because at least all you do is bump  your head and you don't lose your place.

I also offered many reasons why free exploration is beneficial to everyone, and if you and others are so against it that perhaps LL should consider instance-loaded parcels instead. That way you can have your privacy and be the king/queen of your domain, and those who want to participate in Second Life's vast world will be able to do so.
Or other solutions.

It would be nice if you had an attitude to find a solution to something in your replies, rather than just doubling down on your position.

Now watch them double down LOL

Edited May 20, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Gabriele Graves]

17 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

This is why mainland has ROADS.

SL literally has way more publicly accessible land and water than anyone can explore in a reasonable time-frame on every continent.
And if empty land is a person's thing, there are huge swathes of abandoned granite land to roam freely over on one continent.
Not sure why the OP feels so restricted.

[Rowan Amore]

Yes because looking at a blank spot is what mainland is all about.  Just the road, nothing to explore.  Sounds awesome!  Huge swaths of land would just be..gone.

6 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

It would be nice if you had an attitude to find a solution to something in your replies, rather than just doubling down on your position.

And this is why I've told you repeatedly to FILL A JIRA.

You, me and the fence post coming up with a solution in a resident forum means nothing AT ALL.  

[Coffee Pancake]

2 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

I never argued I had a right, or that I did not support land users from protecting their land or privacy as they see fit.

BUT .. 

2 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

However because it exists, it makes exploring the mainland kinda dangerous now lol cuz getting sniped. Ban lines are almost better because at least all you do is bump  your head and you don't lose your place.

I also offered many reasons why free exploration is beneficial to everyone, and if you and others are so against it that perhaps LL should consider instance-loaded parcels instead. That way you can have your privacy and be the king/queen of your domain, and those who want to participate in Second Life's vast world will be able to do so.
Or other solutions.

It would be nice if you had an attitude to find a solution to something in your replies, rather than just doubling down on your position.

You then ague that you should have at least some right by citing a silent majority, appealing to authority and dreaming up solutions to make the problem land owners go away.

There is no right of way in Second Life. None at all. If you are on someone else's property, on foot, in the air, exploring or just passing though, your presence is permitted by their grace alone. Or not in the case of security orbs.

I would like to see a more robust systemic overhaul of parcel privacy that would make orbs cumbersome and redundant, but as that would only further impede your ability to "explore" I doubt this thread is the place to bring that up.

[Codex Alpha]

Edited May 20, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Rowan Amore]

Does that mean you're not going to file a jira?  The one and only solution that MIGHT help?  Ok

LL rarely pops into the resident forums to gather solutions to someone's issue.  Just sayin'.

You have a good day, too.

 

[Eowyn Southmoor]

Bit late to this convo but as an extensive traveller of SL's roads, waterways, and skies, I'll stick my 2 cents worth in.  Lack of experience, lack of planning, and failing to maximise the tools provided by the viewer are, in my opinion, 3 of the biggest reasons why people run into difficult with ban lines and orbs.  I started "exploring" SL in late 2014, so I've been doing it a while, and i spend anywhere from 2 to 5 hours per day still exploring the mainland continents (Bellisseria included).

This year alone, I've already spent 240 hours exploring.  Number of instant-eject orbs Ive run into: 2.  Number of banlines I've run into: 1.  I'm sure you'll all agree, that's a pretty small amount of inconvenience in 240 hours. This isn't achieved through luck, but by following some simple guidelines when travelling in SL.

As the OP asks for "options/workarounds", there's two pieces of advice I can give right away which will, with a little bit of experience, vastly improve air travel over continents.

Firstly, enable parcel lines in your mini-map.  Not sure if every viewer has this but many do - this is absolutely critical in helping to avoid trouble spots.  With parcel lines enabled, you'll soon be able to spot potential trouble spots in a region, as well as potential safe areas.  You see a set of perfectly square parcels all in an neat row - very likely they are owned/rented, and might have ban lines or orbs.  You see a large oddly shaped parcel in the middle of a region - very likely this is abandoned land, and perfectly safe to fly through.  With practise, you wont have many issues spotting semi-safe route over land.  I've personally flown over land in south Satori to reach Bellisseria at least 100 times now, never encountering more than 2 orbs on the way, both with generous (30 secs+) time.

Second bit of advice, and this is very much contrary to what others might say - always fly as LOW as possible, whilst still staying over the height of banlines.  The logic of this is fairly straightforward.  You will encounter vastly more skyboxes and skydomes above 300m, that you will below 300m, therefore you're likely to encounter vastly more orbs above 300m as well, since at that height they are the only effective security measure.  Most people who live on the ground and want security, use banlines - which for anyone flying, are very easy to avoid, as long as you pay attention to your altitude and remember that banlines go 50m up from whatever the terrain level is.  If the terrain is at 25m, then above 75m is "safe", but if the terrain is 210m, then you aren't "safe" until at least 260m. 

Also worth considering, a common mistake people make with altitude, is that they use the Z axis displayed at the top of their viewer to determine altitude.  This figure is NOT the height above terrain, but instead is the height above the region floor.  If, for example, you're flying along a low coastline at the same level as the water, your viewer will show a value of 70 on the Z axis, but this equates to 50m above terrain height, as any waters-edge land will be at 20m above the region floor (default water level in mainland is at 20m).  Compounding this issue is that many aircraft creators use that Z-axis value for their altimeters in their instruments or HUDS, meaning that you are always seeing a figure than is technically, 20m too low.

[Sid Nagy]

On 5/21/2022 at 1:16 AM, Codex Alpha said:

When you create an account, you agree to a ToS.
You did so as well.
So explore, discover, create are regulated and and sometimes limited by that ToS.
You will have to adapt to that. Like it or not, people own land and pay tier for that and get rights for that land in return. It is all in there.

The fact that one puts money in the platform as well, doesn't give the right to overrule the rights of others who decided to own land.
The landowners rights are in the ToS and covenants (covenants not available for every piece of land).
ToS and Covenants are the laws of Second Life. They overrule the opinions and expectations from individual customers.

If you want changes in the ToS, file a ticket in the jira and best start praying the Lab will ever pick your suggestions up.
And because your ideas interfere with long standing rights of other customers I would not hold my breath about it.
Chances of winning any lottery are bigger IMHO.
 

Edited May 22, 2022 by Sid Nagy
Small adjustments and additions.

[Love Zhaoying]

On 5/21/2022 at 4:11 AM, Eowyn Southmoor said:

Second bit of advice, and this is very much contrary to what others might say - always fly as LOW as possible, whilst still staying over the height of banlines.  The logic of this is fairly straightforward.  You will encounter vastly more skyboxes and skydomes above 300m, that you will below 300m, therefore you're likely to encounter vastly more orbs above 300m as well, since at that height they are the only effective security measure.  Most people who live on the ground and want security, use banlines - which for anyone flying, are very easy to avoid, as long as you pay attention to your altitude and remember that banlines go 50m up from whatever the terrain level is.  If the terrain is at 25m, then above 75m is "safe", but if the terrain is 210m, then you aren't "safe" until at least 260m. 

Also worth considering, a common mistake people make with altitude, is that they use the Z axis displayed at the top of their viewer to determine altitude.  This figure is NOT the height above terrain, but instead is the height above the region floor.  If, for example, you're flying along a low coastline at the same level as the water, your viewer will show a value of 70 on the Z axis, but this equates to 50m above terrain height, as any waters-edge land will be at 20m above the region floor (default water level in mainland is at 20m).  Compounding this issue is that many aircraft creators use that Z-axis value for their altimeters in their instruments or HUDS, meaning that you are always seeing a figure than is technically, 20m too low.

Thank you, I didn't know this!