LL Could Consider On-Demand Parcels/Worlds/Lands

[Codex Alpha]

This is related to my post about Being Insta-Ejected/Banned From Land Just For Exploring, and from the responses perhaps Linden Lab could consider moving towards a more on-demand instanced type world much like Sansar did.

Of course, I don't know if this is the prevailing attitude of Second Lifers in general, or just the individuals who frequently post on the forums - but perhaps this is something to discuss and for LL to consider moving forward.

Consider making parcels/lands/worlds (whatever you want to call them) more private by making them  'on-demand-only' instances much like was used in Sansar. I will refer to them as 'parcels' for now.

This means that worlds are no longer rendered in the 'open world' as is experienced when you explore regions in Second Life. For so many parcels inworld, ban lines are up or more draconian methods of ejection/ban bots are being more commonly used now.

Opinions expressed at least on the forums is that people want privacy, have the right to privacy, and should be able to eject and ban whoever they like for whatever reason.

I would propose that we grant such parcel owners their wish - and make their parcel private, only to them and their visitors - and remove their impact from the open world altogether.

After all, what can contribute to lag, fps drops, region drops, etc is rendering their 'private' land to the 'public' space. All their mesh, textures, and scripts that many have to 'derender' sometimes just to have a good fps in the area are pointless to waste bandwidth on - so why not derender any private space by default?

Disclaimer: This may or may not already be handled somewhat with private 'island' type parcels on the map. Take this post as applied to public areas that any SL'er can access.

The benefits:

For a general user:

• Those who like privacy will never ever be bothered by anyone ever again. They will have their private area without anyone ever entering their parcel uninvited ever again.
• For those exploring the grid, having less parcels to render will improve performance.
• For those exploring the grid, no interruptions, ejections to their home or other forceful actions will be encountered (or much less).
• FPS, etc improvements - or any other technical improvements on performance that would be obvious
• Private parcels will be derendered, so if you have a parcel beside or nearby them, your performance could go up as well
• No need to put your store, your house up in the sky to avoid others - you will never see them again with on-demand parcel loading service

For Linden Lab:

• Less resources used - as private parcels will be removed from rendering and impact on public lands
• Only serve up parcels marked as 'public' and stop wasting time rendering parcels that want to be inaccessible
• Improve the experience of the general SLer or new user who may be discouraged by not being able to move relatively freely
• Benefits should be obvious: A parcel is only loaded on demand

Perhaps LL could even consider a surcharge for privacy, versus public access, or charge less for privacy.

Seems to me if the prevailing attitude on Second Life is to be private, to 'leave me alone!' and to 'stay off my lawn', we should oblige them and save $$$ and resources and perhaps consider going to an on-demand service.

Even those who are quite open on their parcels don't even spawn on the ground, they may have their stores, parcels, etc up in the sky to avoid everyone else. This is a clear indication that there is a need, not only about privacy - but of being away from others to maximize FPS, etc - so yet another reason why on-demand could be desirable.

For me personally:

I would like to be able to have a larger parcel, and with more Li available. I would be interested in an on-demand world if it allowed more flexibility (and most importantly more prims per sq m)

• Is Land Impact limits real or arbitrary?
• Could an on-demand parcel/world be able to have more Li available and perhaps as a bonus because it ISN'T rendered inworld?

If this was possible, but the cost was an on-demand instance much like Sansar served up, and because of it I could get more Li for my bucks I would most certainly be interested.

After all, in a on-demand world, we could probably create and pay for packages for our unique situation, set our privacy and public access status, etc Might be a good thing to consider.

----------------

Responses are appreciated but please keep it fair and considerate, and without personal attacks. All we want is a better, more open and friendly, and smooth running SL.

[Gabriele Graves]

Many people on mainland don't care that you see their build, in fact mostly they want others to see it, it is the presence of other random avatars at random times actually being in their personal space that bothers them.  Some don't like that for only while they are themselves present on the the land but some don't like that at all in the same way that most people don't leave their RL doors, gates, etc. open for anyone to wander through and use their stuff when they are not there.  For them, this is their personal sanctuary and the presence of random others would violate it for them.

So for those people, hiding their whole build from public view wouldn't solve anything and be even undesirable.  They just don't want your avatar present on their land and using their stuff.

The idea of a having private space that is removed from public view and only visible to those they invite has been discussed at length before and would be quite popular but not as an all or nothing concept.  The people who would use private spaces to hide everything wouldn't be the kind of people whose builds you are trying to explore around at ground level today, it would all be in a skybox and the ground would be empty.  For the most part, the people who would use a private space would want it to be a relatively small area similar to skyboxes today but totally inaccessible/undiscoverable in addition to the stuff they have at ground level that is public view.  That still does not mean they want your avatar on that land at ground level, accessing that stuff though.

The biggest issues around access to land areas owned by other people are about flying over it or driving/sailing through it.  That is why security orbs are more popular than ban lines as ban lines that block anyone only work up to 50m above the terrain level and so cannot be used to stop people flying over the land higher than that.  Debate has rage over whether LL should declare a public fly zone over land which would mean it would be a TOS violation to block with an orb but after many years, that has failed to materialise except in Bellisseria which, though still a Linden Estate, is not considered to be mainland by them.  Driving/sailing access is really only an issue where people have land that is adjacent to public roads/waterways as it is easy to stray just a little over someone's land which is further exacerbated by ban lines being blocky and the fact there are no buffers to mitigate this between private land and public land.

Whether land is loaded on-demand or not isn't really the relevant to the issue of privacy, that is more of an efficiency thing when nobody is around to see it and whilst LL have bandied this idea around a few times in the past, we haven't seen anything come out of it so far, so presumably it isn't something they much care about in the grand scheme of things.

If all this seems overly complex, well it is, Welcome To Second Life.  This is part of what makes it unique and it won't be the only thing you encounter like this.  Trying to simplify it often is fraught with issues that are dealer breakers for many who spend their RL money here and so LL is often wary of changing too much at once, or even at all.

My advice would be to learn how to cam effectively and you will never need to step onto land that isn't accessible to you to explore the builds you see at ground level.  There is very little extra you gain by wandering through places people don't want you to be anyway.

 

Edited May 19, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Codex Alpha]

You didn't address a single thing in my OP.

[Gabriele Graves]

Sure I did but you apparently didn't understand it.

[Wulfie Reanimator]

On the face of it, having a private on-demand space would be neat. It doesn't even have to be for permanent residence.

 

But the more I think about it, this sounds a lot like the recent "variable sized sims" suggestion. Sims are currently kind of on-demand, an empty sim will essentially run in a throttled low-performance state and only continues running normally when an avatar arrives.

The most practical thing for LL would probably be to just expand how sims are currently created, so that these "on demand spaces" were sims with a temporary name (or no name) created at the empty areas of the current grid map. After they expire (eg. empty/timer), they'd get deleted. This system would have tons of drawbacks; it can't be cheap/fast to create a new sim instance, never mind all the technical issues we don't even know about.

I have a hunch that there couldn't even be an alternative way to do it without having to rework all of the "assumptions" about how the world works in SL's systems. Like, is it even possible for an active sim to not exist on the grid map currently? Or would that require a new feature on its own? Isolating a single parcel (any smaller than a full sim) just wouldn't be feasible based on everything I've read from the Lindens on this subject.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Wulfie Reanimator

[Codex Alpha]

Sure wulfie but the weird thing is, it's already happening anyway. It's just that we have the extra overhead of rendering their buildings and such in the world, and can't access it anyway.

For me I'd pay for a private on demand if it meant I could get more Li as a result, and if I was a privacy hound, one would think that would be an extra bonus. But I like to build and share, and so my only requirement is a valid account with payment on file. And I'm open to all visitors.

It's always that strange conflict some people engage in: they want privacy, they want to block and ban people.. but then rail against actually being private and on their own.

If SL isn't the open world that I thought it was, and open to exploration without needless snipes and blocks, and it seems in general that people want that privacy, why not move towards single instance servers then?

Edited May 20, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Coffee Pancake]

Second Life - Your bubble, billed by the hour.

 

[Wulfie Reanimator]

38 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

Sure wulfie but the weird thing is, it's already happening anyway. It's just that we have the extra overhead of rendering their buildings and such in the world, and can't access it anyway.

I'm not sure what you mean by "it's already happening," unless you mean people putting up banlines. If you/I/someone wanted to not waste time rendering parcels without access, that could be implemented in the viewer itself, no work from LL required unless you also want to actually make that parcel usable by someone else who wants to keep it public.

Your premise is valid: People want privacy. Banlines are annoying. On-demand private parcels would probably reduce the amount of banlines... And then there's the reality of the current state of the world we're living in.

38 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

For me I'd pay for a private on demand if it meant I could get more Li as a result, and if I was a privacy hound, one would think that would be an extra bonus.

It's going to take a certain amount of resources (memory, processing, asset server calls) for any object to exist in a sim, though. That's the main reason for the LI system's existence. The rendering cost doesn't really matter since the sim doesn't have to deal with that.

I think that's why LL got away with prims always being 1 LI in the past; the 'asset cost' of a prim was nearly constant regardless of how complex it appeared, because everything was rendered client-side from simple parameters. Things got a lot more complicated with the introduction of complex assets like poly-list meshes with multiple LODs, Characters, Animesh, etc.

38 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

If SL isn't the open world that I thought it was, and open to exploration without needless snipes and blocks, and it seems in general that people want that privacy, why not move towards single instance servers then?

Because LL has 20 years of systemic foundations to uproot. Even if they want to get it done, it's going to be another decade (based on how often current systems get updated) of hard work rebuilding the world we already have. I'm all for it, but...

Edited May 20, 2022 by Wulfie Reanimator

[Love Zhaoying]

On 5/19/2022 at 10:44 AM, Codex Alpha said:

This is related to my post about Being Insta-Ejected/Banned From Land Just For Exploring, and from the responses perhaps Linden Lab could consider moving towards a more on-demand instanced type world much like Sansar did.

Of course, I don't know if this is the prevailing attitude of Second Lifers in general, or just the individuals who frequently post on the forums - but perhaps this is something to discuss and for LL to consider moving forward.

Consider making parcels/lands/worlds (whatever you want to call them) more private by making them  'on-demand-only' instances much like was used in Sansar. I will refer to them as 'parcels' for now.

This means that worlds are no longer rendered in the 'open world' as is experienced when you explore regions in Second Life. For so many parcels inworld, ban lines are up or more draconian methods of ejection/ban bots are being more commonly used now.

Opinions expressed at least on the forums is that people want privacy, have the right to privacy, and should be able to eject and ban whoever they like for whatever reason.

I would propose that we grant such parcel owners their wish - and make their parcel private, only to them and their visitors - and remove their impact from the open world altogether.

After all, what can contribute to lag, fps drops, region drops, etc is rendering their 'private' land to the 'public' space. All their mesh, textures, and scripts that many have to 'derender' sometimes just to have a good fps in the area are pointless to waste bandwidth on - so why not derender any private space by default?

Disclaimer: This may or may not already be handled somewhat with private 'island' type parcels on the map. Take this post as applied to public areas that any SL'er can access.

The benefits:

For a general user:

• Those who like privacy will never ever be bothered by anyone ever again. They will have their private area without anyone ever entering their parcel uninvited ever again.
• For those exploring the grid, having less parcels to render will improve performance.
• For those exploring the grid, no interruptions, ejections to their home or other forceful actions will be encountered (or much less).
• FPS, etc improvements - or any other technical improvements on performance that would be obvious
• Private parcels will be derendered, so if you have a parcel beside or nearby them, your performance could go up as well
• No need to put your store, your house up in the sky to avoid others - you will never see them again with on-demand parcel loading service

For Linden Lab:

• Less resources used - as private parcels will be removed from rendering and impact on public lands
• Only serve up parcels marked as 'public' and stop wasting time rendering parcels that want to be inaccessible
• Improve the experience of the general SLer or new user who may be discouraged by not being able to move relatively freely
• Benefits should be obvious: A parcel is only loaded on demand

Perhaps LL could even consider a surcharge for privacy, versus public access, or charge less for privacy.

Seems to me if the prevailing attitude on Second Life is to be private, to 'leave me alone!' and to 'stay off my lawn', we should oblige them and save $$$ and resources and perhaps consider going to an on-demand service.

Even those who are quite open on their parcels don't even spawn on the ground, they may have their stores, parcels, etc up in the sky to avoid everyone else. This is a clear indication that there is a need, not only about privacy - but of being away from others to maximize FPS, etc - so yet another reason why on-demand could be desirable.

For me personally:

I would like to be able to have a larger parcel, and with more Li available. I would be interested in an on-demand world if it allowed more flexibility (and most importantly more prims per sq m)

• Is Land Impact limits real or arbitrary?
• Could an on-demand parcel/world be able to have more Li available and perhaps as a bonus because it ISN'T rendered inworld?

If this was possible, but the cost was an on-demand instance much like Sansar served up, and because of it I could get more Li for my bucks I would most certainly be interested.

After all, in a on-demand world, we could probably create and pay for packages for our unique situation, set our privacy and public access status, etc Might be a good thing to consider.

----------------

Responses are appreciated but please keep it fair and considerate, and without personal attacks. All we want is a better, more open and friendly, and smooth running SL.

Great idea! The topic, I mean.

Sorry, the rest was too long, didn't read.

[Coffee Pancake]

3 minutes ago, Wulfie Reanimator said:

I'm not sure what you mean by "it's already happening," unless you mean people putting up banlines. If you/I/someone wanted to not waste time rendering parcels without access, that could be implemented in the viewer itself.

It's harder than you might think ..

We went looking for an easy way to only render items on the current parcel, but the viewer has no concept of parcels, just the values for the one you're on. Further testing kinda underscored that it wouldn't result in a meaningful performance improvement for most people (and certainly not as pronounced as just opting to only render avatars on the current parcel).

One more bright idea on the scrap pile 😆

 

[Codex Alpha]

Well if they're using Amazon Workspaces or servers there is already ability to spin up an instance. I believe the last time I checked Kitely they were doing that - not sure what host they are using to do it, but the worlds dont spin up until someone visits them (Sansar style), and the worlds shut down 15 minutes after the last avatar leaves.

This is so they can save resources - it's a bit annoying when they don't spin up very fast, etc but the concept is there and that it can be done.

A private parcel can be it's own server instance. IMVU kind of does this too I believe. Only loads up an instance when needed albeit with much more limited interaction.

Pretty sure it can be done, but hey I'm just spitballing here.

I'm sure simply setting eject orbs to 30 seconds, and ejecting to a nearby parcel instead of Home would be a much simpler and easier solution. The original point of posting the OP was to address the hardcore posters who demand privacy and ban lines and have no problem with 0 second eject/insta bans.

[Gabriele Graves]

22 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

Well if they're using Amazon Workspaces or servers there is already ability to spin up an instance. I believe the last time I checked Kitely they were doing that - not sure what host they are using to do it, but the worlds dont spin up until someone visits them (Sansar style), and the worlds shut down 15 minutes after the last avatar leaves.

This is so they can save resources - it's a bit annoying when they don't spin up very fast, etc but the concept is there and that it can be done.

LL seems to prefer keeping regions ready to go which works well if you are on continents where multiple regions are visible from the one you are standing one.  Sure, they could spin them down but as you pointed out, it takes some time to spin up.  In addition to this it isn't a guarantee that a given region will come back after being spun down.  This is as evidenced on RRTs (Rolling Restart Tuesdays) where some regions just don't come back and at other times when people come to the forums or inworld groups to ask where their region has gone.  If it isn't reliable now, it will be worse with regions spinning up and down all over the place all the time.  What you save in running costs, you might spend in support costs.

LL doesn't need to have to do it either, they are making money hand over fist on private regions alone so the Amazon costs don't matter much to them or they would be desperately working on it.  Besides it isn't likely that any cost savings will be passed onto the customer base anyway.

Edited May 20, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Chic Aeon]

I am fairly confused about the title to this post and the OP itself.  The Lab will never do on demand sims for mainland as it would break the immersion factor which is (or at least historically has been) an etched in stone bit of criteria.

I thought years ago that on demand sims with less expensive costs would be a very good thing for everyone.  They might need to be limited to "no bots" so that folks wouldn't just plant folks there so that their regions would always be up but aside that very doable especially for residential. Ebbe made some comments that had me thinking it was considered at one point but it never happened.

 

Note that a 20K region in Kitely is $15 a month tier (at least I think that is still correct) and aside from a few things like advanced scripting and HIGH QUALITY INVENOTRY PURCHASES -- Kitely is pretty much just as good as SL.  Not perfect but if you compare the costs you can see why some folks are there.  

 

LL seems to be going in a different direction however and we'll see how the Premium Plus level works out -- and of course what it actually entails LOL.  

Currently people in SL can have all the privacy they want if they own or rent a sim. They can be completely closed off except for white lists so I can't see any advantage there. 

 

Again I am a bit confused on what this thread is supposed to be discussing. 

[Coffee Pancake]

20 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:

I am fairly confused about the title to this post and the OP itself.  The Lab will never do on demand sims for mainland as it would break the immersion factor which is (or at least historically has been) an etched in stone bit of criteria.

Agreed .. If someone wants a privacy bubble, they can snag a homestead surrounded by water and keep it group access only.

I do wish people could buy homesteads without needing a full region first, there is no reason to keep that stipulation.

 

[bigmoe Whitfield]

19 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Agreed .. If someone wants a privacy bubble, they can snag a homestead surrounded by water and keep it group access only.

I do wish people could buy homesteads without needing a full region first, there is no reason to keep that stipulation.

 

I'm not sure how much the cost is with how LL has it setup, to many people jumping on them like last time (when jack was around) is why they put the hard limit on them,  besides people abusing them for what they were intended.   if to many get them (land barons should be told these can not offer these in such a manner) it might start costing a good size chunk of change depending on their contract and their usage, would hate to pop the bubble and start getting the lab into hourly rates they might want to avoid per instance spin up.

[Mollymews]

1 hour ago, Chic Aeon said:

Again I am a bit confused on what this thread is supposed to be discussing. 

is a follow on to the other post referenced in the OP

Codex was exploring on the mainland and got sent home by a parcel security orb

this post is about how SL might be redesigned so that an explorer never accesses a mainland parcel that the owner wishes them to not access.  The following conversation then about: How could this done, if it was ever. And why it couldn't be done, if it was never

 

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Mollymews said:

this post is about how SL might be redesigned so that an explorer never accesses a mainland parcel that the owner wishes them to not access.  The following conversation then about: How could this done, if it was ever. And why it couldn't be done, if it was never

On the surface, it seems on-demand sims (if only present when someone with access is there) would make exploring pointless.

[Odaks]

Codex's theories seem to have started from a position of enabling free exploration without the risks of being sent home (which, we would surely all agree, totally ruins your experience), to one of chunks of the grid simply not being there at all until a whitelisted resident attempts access.

So, for long periods of time, Second Life's world will be full of holes, some at parcel level nestling in the middle of live parcels? I can't see how this could be applied at parcel level, so it could only work at region level? Thousands of regions are divided into parcels, so they are excluded?

I'm sure many of of us will have experienced the "fun" of actually managing to travel off-world accidentally! These "holes" would effectively be off-world spaces but, with luck, would simply cause a full-height, dead stop collision barrier.

Given the massive number of parcels and regions that are unoccupied for long periods of time, the grid would become an absolute nightmare of holes. Plotting a route would be almost impossible, and a hole could mysteriously appear ahead of you because the last avatar to leave turned the lights off on departure. That wouldn't be restricted to leaving by logging off. Nipping off to do a spot of in-world shopping would shut your parcel/region down. The World Map would probably end up being the most entertaining element of Second Life to watch!

I can't see that any of this could possibly aid the original objectives; only make things much, much worse. Surely this couldn't be what was intended. What am I missing here?

[Love Zhaoying]

21 minutes ago, Odaks said:

Codex's theories seem to have started from a position of enabling free exploration without the risks of being sent home (which, we would surely all agree, totally ruins your experience), to one of chunks of the grid simply not being there at all until a whitelisted resident attempts access.

So, for long periods of time, Second Life's world will be full of holes, some at parcel level nestling in the middle of live parcels? I can't see how this could be applied at parcel level, so it could only work at region level? Thousands of regions are divided into parcels, so they are excluded?

I'm sure many of of us will have experienced the "fun" of actually managing to travel off-world accidentally! These "holes" would effectively be off-world spaces but, with luck, would simply cause a full-height, dead stop collision barrier.

Given the massive number of parcels and regions that are unoccupied for long periods of time, the grid would become an absolute nightmare of holes. Plotting a route would be almost impossible, and a hole could mysteriously appear ahead of you because the last avatar to leave turned the lights off on departure. That wouldn't be restricted to leaving by logging off. Nipping off to do a spot of in-world shopping would shut your parcel/region down. The World Map would probably end up being the most entertaining element of Second Life to watch!

I can't see that any of this could possibly aid the original objectives; only make things much, much worse. Surely this couldn't be what was intended. What am I missing here?

"If I can't explore places, there may as well be giant chunks of the map missing."

[Codex Alpha]

18 hours ago, Mollymews said:

Codex was exploring on the mainland and got sent home by a parcel security orb

Multiple times, on multiple days - enough to piss me off enough to post about it.

9 hours ago, Odaks said:

Codex's theories seem to have started from a position of enabling free exploration without the risks of being sent home (which, we would surely all agree, totally ruins your experience)

Exactly!

It was also a suggestion for a possible solution to address those players who are adamant in maintaining their privacy, ban lines and enjoy ejecting people with 0 second ejects and even some auto bans.

That they would be better suited to an on-demand instance of their land, at whatever size they wish.

9 hours ago, Odaks said:

So, for long periods of time, Second Life's world will be full of holes, some at parcel level nestling in the middle of live parcels? I can't see how this could be applied at parcel level, so it could only work at region level? Thousands of regions are divided into parcels, so they are excluded?

I'm sure many of of us will have experienced the "fun" of actually managing to travel off-world accidentally! These "holes" would effectively be off-world spaces but, with luck, would simply cause a full-height, dead stop collision barrier.

Given the massive number of parcels and regions that are unoccupied for long periods of time, the grid would become an absolute nightmare of holes. Plotting a route would be almost impossible, and a hole could mysteriously appear ahead of you because the last avatar to leave turned the lights off on departure.

No! Why would it have to do that?

Effectively that parcel would be made available to anyone again, as the parcel gets freed up on "Mainland" that we can all public access, to their own instance which has nothing to do with the region anymore. There would be no holes. Their parcel is no longer represented by that virtual space in that region. They are off on 'private' servers, where they belong - because they want privacy so bad.

They are literally not there, they are in their own instance.

If Kitely can spin up regions, and Sansar can spin up small worlds on demand, and they're all using the same tech at AWS, then why not.

Of course don't ask me how I would do that. I'm not on LL's networking and server admin team

9 hours ago, Odaks said:

I can't see that any of this could possibly aid the original objectives; only make things much, much worse. Surely this couldn't be what was intended. What am I missing here?

You're missing several stubborn and quite aggressive posts by landowners/renters who assert that it's just too bad and that I and others have to put up with it, that we have no right to think we can fly over or land on their property, they have a right to see fit as they wish, LL says 0 second eject is fine they say, don't like it dont play they say, all sorts of things.

So I provided a possible solution that would allow free roaming by the masses of SLers, what benefits there were for everyone, and how LL could consider serving both people - EXPLORERS (that the main page advertises) and crazy privacy hounds (who seem to rent on Mainland, not a private server).

OR A MUCH SIMPLER SOLUTION: Disallow 0 second ejects and autobans. Stop ejects that send a player's avatar back home, losing their place in the world. 30 second ejects should be short enough to do the job, and give people time to fly over and out, etc. What's so hard to understand about that? Anytime you give someone power over another person's avatar, it better be fair and balanced. People have left and will leave over this, as to them it's just rude at the least, antisocial at best - and they don't come back

Edited May 21, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Mollymews]

43 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

OR A MUCH SIMPLER SOLUTION: Disallow 0 second ejects and autobans. Stop ejects that send a player's avatar back home, losing their place in the world. 30 second ejects should be short enough to do the job, and give people time to fly over and out, etc. What's so hard to understand about that? Anytime you give someone power over another person's avatar, it better be fair and balanced. People have left and will leave over this, as to them it's just rude at the least, antisocial at best - and they don't come back
 

the hard part is that this requires changing an existing offering for which people currently pay

the business calculation is: If we change the offering, how many people will stop paying tier vs how many roaming users will the business lose/not retain. Roaming accounts who may or may not be paying tier elsewhere or in the future. And how many new people will start paying tier so that others can roam the mainland

changing offerings (which is what this is about) is about the money, not so much anything else

 

a thing that may eventuate one day.  At a recent-ish User Group meeting, Linden mentioned that they were looking at bouncing vehicles off parcel banlines in the same way that avatars are bounced off.  Hit a banline on our vehicle, get bounced off, turn round and go another way

if this were to be done, then parcel banlines could be extended all the way up to 5,000 in every access circumstance.  Instead of holes in the contiguous landmass, there would be towers blocking passage.  If so then this would give a reason to obsolete script functions like llTeleportHome and llEject

e

edit delete stuff about Experiences as is not relevant

Edited May 22, 2022 by Mollymews

[Gabriele Graves]

@Codex AlphaWhat you are describing is the segregation of those who are happy with less controls over the land they occupy from the ones who want the current mainland controls over their land.

However we already have this segregation in the form of Bellisseria and Mainland.

Bellisseria is a Linden estate for those are happy to live with less controls and indeed the restrictions on orbs/ban lines are almost exactly what you are advocating.  Nobody can put up ban lines that capture everyone as such ban lines are disabled and orbs aren't allowed to auto-ban.  It is also a huge a set of land areas now and allows the ability to fly, sail and wander over all land and water areas, at least from a rule point of view.  Anyone who isn't following the rules is AR-able and will have their orbs removed.  Exactly what you say you want.

Mainland is the Linden estate area for all the other people who want to live on a Linden estate with more controls over land.
Here live the people you would make vanish from all view with the presumably enforced, private spaces.

By complaining about mainland, you are in essence complaining about the current segregation not being enough and wanting further segregation.  In essence saying people who want the land controls on mainland should be moved on to someplace else.

You advocate that it be new some new tech private spaces but it could be more easily solved with a continent just for people who want what they have on the current mainland.
I hope you see where I am going with this.

What would be the point of making another mainland when we already have one?

If those undesirables were moved on to another mainland-like continent so that mainland could be Bellisseria-ised, someone would be along in no time at all with exactly the same complaints about the new continent even though nobody forces them to live or travel there and there are other alternatives that match their desires more closely.

The segregation you require exists as two separate Linden estates currently and the solution to your perceived problem is to live and travel within Bellisseria.  You will generally get what you want except where there are rule breakers which you can AR.
 

[Codex Alpha]

OR A MUCH SIMPLER SOLUTION: Disallow 0 second ejects and autobans. Stop ejects that send a player's avatar back home, losing their place in the world. 30 second ejects should be short enough to do the job, and give people time to fly over and out, etc

You're not offering solutions, you're just offering scolding and condescension laced with accusations as to my intent or how I think of other people.

I will now no longer respond to you, thanks for your input.

Linden Lab can consider the OP, and take it or leave it.

 

Edited May 22, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Gabriele Graves]

7 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

OR A MUCH SIMPLER SOLUTION: Disallow 0 second ejects and autobans. Stop ejects that send a player's avatar back home, losing their place in the world. 30 second ejects should be short enough to do the job, and give people time to fly over and out, etc

You're not offering solutions, you're just offering scolding and condescension laced with accusations as to my intent or how I think of other people.

I will now no longer respond to you, thanks for your input.

 

Well, I was actually trying to help you and anyone else who it might benefit to see that there is an already existing solution to your problem which is the easiest solution of all.
Making accusations which claim I am making accusations amongst other things is just laughable.

It is your prerogative of course to not respond to my text, I don't expect you to, never have.  What I write isn't just for you but for anyone to read who may be interested to read it.

Edited May 22, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Coffee Pancake]

2 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

OR A MUCH SIMPLER SOLUTION: Disallow 0 second ejects and autobans. Stop ejects that send a player's avatar back home, losing their place in the world. 30 second ejects should be short enough to do the job, and give people time to fly over and out, etc

 

The simplest change that impacts the greatest number of people involved is no change at all. 

No one is going to welcome less authority over their land so a tiny handful of self entitled "explorers" will stop moaning on the forums.

LL are not going to change the rules and/or add a whole new offering to the product stack just to give you right of way.

 

You don't have right of way. The moment you enter someone else's parcel you are bound by their rules, even if those rules are "Bye Felecia". If you don't want to take that chance, limit your "exploring" to locations that are more permissive, like belli or one of the many private estates that explicitly cater to "exploring".

 

I'm sorry you don't like aggressive orbs that ban intruders and tp them home, but your attitude kinda makes the point for having one.