1 second Orb timing, is it necessary

[Codex Alpha]

2 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

The problem is not my desire to be spared the unwelcome intrusions of people who obviously have no concept of boundaries at all.

Talking like the entire concept of respecting other people's space and privacy is just weird and alien.

YIKES

 

I can respect your boundaries and still ask that you have a reasonable warning time on your orb, so that I may continue on my way (legitimately) and you still get the protection you need.

[Coffee Pancake]

Just now, Codex Alpha said:

I can respect your boundaries and still ask that you have a reasonable warning time on your orb, so that I may continue on my way (legitimately) and you still get the protection you need.

Obviously you absolutely can't if you're only willing to respect my boundaries on your terms.

[Bagnu]

I personally feel an orb that has height and width restrictions would be the perfect solution, Travelers don't lose their planes, and landowners get their privacy.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Obviously you absolutely can't if you're only willing to respect my boundaries on your terms.

Boundaries are a two way street. You obviously, by your own admittance, are unwilling to respect the boundaries of those who may accidently run into a piece of the parcel you rent. 

[Coffee Pancake]

Just now, Arielle Popstar said:

Boundaries are a two way street. You obviously, by your own admittance, are unwilling to respect the boundaries of those who may accidently run into a piece of the parcel you rent. 

Are you actually for real with this?

Read that back again .. the intruder who is violating someone's private space is having their boundaries violated.

REALLY?

[Ayashe Ninetails]

2 minutes ago, Bagnu said:

I personally feel an orb that has height and width restrictions would be the perfect solution, Travelers don't lose their planes, and landowners get their privacy.

I thought most did. Well, most have general range options anyway. I'm all for giving orbs more finely-tuned options and the ability to change what happens at multiple ranges. 

[Ceka Cianci]

1 hour ago, Jaylinbridges said:

No, none that I have seen come with a built in zero second security orb...

Welp! Big guy with shotgun and nuke it is, I guess.

Thanks for looking into for me though, I really appreciate it.

[Sammy Huntsman]

2 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

I thought most did. Well, most have general range options anyway. I'm all for giving orbs more finely-tuned options and the ability to change what happens at multiple ranges. 

Yep, but I am not all for telling people what to do with their orbs. If they choose to set it like that, that is totally and absolutely fine. If they choose to set it a different way, that is fine too. 

[Arielle Popstar]

Just now, Coffee Pancake said:

Are you actually for real with this?

Read that back again .. the intruder who is violating someone's private space is having their boundaries violated.

REALLY?

Yes REALLY. You should as a viewer dev be fully cognizant of the fact that lag, and a variety of other factors can accidently land one in an area where one was not intending to be. One should have the right to have the time to vacate the property of one who wishes privacy, without being unceremoniously tossed to who knows where. And you admitted to what is really no less then griefing people who might have flown way over your head with an airplane.

[Jaylinbridges]

10 minutes ago, Bagnu said:

I personally feel an orb that has height and width restrictions would be the perfect solution, Travelers don't lose their planes, and landowners get their privacy.

These orbs have been available since at least 2010.  Thomas Conover, one of the first advanced orb designers, has a custom box of any shape restriction option in his orbs for years.  He is no longer selling orbs in SL, although he sold many thousands of them before all the copycat sellers entered the market.

People don't use this customization because they are too lazy or stupid.  Easier to just select entire parcel and Warning time = 0 seconds.  Because - they can... 

 

[Coffee Pancake]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Yes REALLY. You should as a viewer dev be fully cognizant of the fact that lag, and a variety of other factors can accidently land one in an area where one was not intending to be. One should have the right to have the time to vacate the property of one who wishes privacy, without being unceremoniously tossed to who knows where. And you admitted to what is really no less then griefing people who might have flown way over your head with an airplane.

This discussion is about having the right to enter all parcels under the pretext of "exploring". Lag has nothing to do with it and at this point is just an attempt to excuse bad behavior.

One should .. whatever, the point is .. YOU DONT.

If you are on private land (and all land in SL outside of designated public spaces) is private land, you are subject to the rules of the land owner. This is a fundamental corner stone to devolved moderation in SL. The land owner is king on their land.

If that land owner doesn't want an "explorer" they are well within their rights to not have an "explorer" problem. They do not need consider the needs, hopes, dreams or boundaries of the "explorer". 

No. Means. No.

No isn't conditional or negotiated.

No. Means. No. 

Always.

[Ayashe Ninetails]

1 minute ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Yep, but I am not all for telling people what to do with their orbs. If they choose to set it like that, that is totally and absolutely fine. If they choose to set it a different way, that is fine too. 

Oh I agree. I just like having as many options as possible. I'd love to be able to let a person linger around outside for a much longer time with a more pleasant warning than the person who ruuuuuudely plants their butt on my couch who gets the insta-yeet. Not sure if that'd be a pain to script or what, but it might solve some of these issues. 

Or maybe it already exists. I've honestly stuck with my freebie default system and never checked (I'm over 3000m in the sky, so having people naturally wander by is more rare).

[Codex Alpha]

8 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

These orbs have been available since at least 2010.  Thomas Conover, one of the first advanced orb designers, has a custom box of any shape restriction option in his orbs for years.  He is no longer selling orbs in SL, although he sold many thousands of them before all the copycat sellers entered the market.

People don't use this customization because they are too lazy or stupid.  Easier to just select entire parcel and Warning time = 0 seconds.  Because - they can...

Yep and I guess I just won't engage in that activity anymore, which is one thing less that I can enjoy in SL. Between lag and these strange antisocial issues - there's not much left frankly. I'm the last hold out of our group of 20 - looks like they were right after all.

My latest explorations before dealing with these issues tat seem to be common now resulted in 1 x Land Rental discovered, 1 x Land Purchase discovered, and a few random products from stores that I would hae never heard of - but they got sales because of exploration.

That will be gone too now, because if this is how it's going to be - not  interested. But hey , I'm just one person right? Not important right?

Edited June 1, 2022 by Codex Alpha

[Bagnu]

9 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

These orbs have been available since at least 2010.  Thomas Conover, one of the first advanced orb designers, has a custom box of any shape restriction option in his orbs for years.  He is no longer selling orbs in SL, although he sold many thousands of them before all the copycat sellers entered the market.

People don't use this customization because they are too lazy or stupid.  Easier to just select entire parcel and Warning time = 0 seconds.  Because - they can... 

 

I set mine up for my entire sim. A network of 16 orbs. None set to eject, just detect. I can't remember what height I set them at, but had full control. Same with our apartment security in terms of controlling dimensions. But that IS set to eject. But that's one room. If someone crashes their plane into our tower, that's their problem.

Edited June 1, 2022 by Bagnu

[Arielle Popstar]

2 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

This discussion is about having the right to enter all parcels under the pretext of "exploring". Lag has nothing to do with it and at this point is just an attempt to excuse bad behavior.

One should .. whatever, the point is .. YOU DONT.

If you are on private land (and all land in SL outside of designated public spaces) is private land, you are subject to the rules of the land owner. This is a fundamental corner stone to devolved moderation in SL. The land owner is king on their land.

If that land owner doesn't want an "explorer" they are well within their rights to not have an "explorer" problem. They do not need consider the needs, hopes, dreams or boundaries of the "explorer". 

No. Means. No.

No isn't conditional or negotiated.

No. Means. No. 

Always.

And still, a 0 second warning with a boot to a destination where one did not wish to be is griefing, plain and simple and regardless if the Lab allows it or not. We both full well know the lab is wrong on many counts where their policies are negatively affecting user retention. This certainly one of them.

[Rolig Loon]

I've been lurking but haven't said anything because I don't really think there's a one-size-fits-all answer. There are just too many good reasons to want really strong time limits or no limits at all on orbs, and I can be persuaded by passionate arguments on both sides. 

To take just one example .... I noticed that only a few people -- I think all of them women -- have made the point that once you've been the victim of an assault, your feelings about personal security change dramatically. It's no longer a purely rational issue. You look over your shoulder and peek into shadows for years, even when your rational side says not to worry. I suppose someone could say that the smart move then is to move to a safer neighborhood. It would be, except that it's not always easy to tell the safe neighborhoods from the unsafe ones, and its unfair to expect people with genuine fears to move to isolated convents (or isolated private estates in SL).  Personally, I don't believe that the solution in RL is for assault victims to start carrying handguns, and I don't believe that the answer in SL is to let them use zero-tolerance security orbs.  But it's not for me to say what's right for other people with genuine fears.  I'm just saying that I understand and sympathize with their worries.  I can't see a middle ground that will satisfy everyone.

[Jaylinbridges]

6 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

And still, a 0 second warning with a boot to a destination where one did not wish to be is griefing, plain and simple and regardless if the Lab allows it or not. We both full well know the lab is wrong on many counts where their policies are negatively affecting user retention. This certainly one of them.

So now we are getting to the real crux of this issue.  What Linden(s) thought allowing zero warning orbs was a good idea and allowed them in the TOS by their omission? Were these the early Lindens, who thought they were making a shoot em up 3D game, and wanted to make safe zones, so the players could take a pee break and get another can of Red Bull?

Were they paranoid folks that brought their RL issues into SL and feared interactions?  Who on the Linden staff today still thinks the 0 second orbs are a great idea?  This is not a great idea, it is a mistake that could be corrected, just like Patch did in Bellisseria.  Arguing about this is a waste of time among ourselves.  No minds will ever be changed in this forum.  The Lindens need to change the rules so everyone feels safe in SL, including explorers.  Will they ever speak up?  SL19B is coming soon, and this is the one chance you might be able to ask them why they are still allowed on the mainland.  If you find yourself ejected and sent home because of your question, well you at least know where the problem is.

 

[Luna Bliss]

5 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

The Lindens need to change the rules so everyone feels safe in SL, including explorers.

Why doncha start a #MeSafeToo movement. Do some picketing around official places. Please invite me.

[Luna Bliss]

[Luna Bliss]

1 hour ago, Codex Alpha said:

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

As an explorer I would certainly rather be given a warning so I could fly away quickly and continue on my journey without such disruption.

Good, so we agree. Give people ample warning, and that was all that was asked.

No. I would rather be given a warning, but I'm perfectly okay not getting one, because my need to explore unimpeded is not more important than someone who needs privacy on their personal, paid-for home.

[Ceka Cianci]

I had a place on mainland when I first got here..  To understand an orb setting let alone everything else in the world to learn in that first month or so was pretty much asking a lot..

All I knew about the one that I had at that time was, it stopped someone from coming in and would bump them to the edge of the property. It wasn't mine but was set up by the person owned all the land..

There were places above us as well, like a club and some other place, So I don't think it was reaching thousands of meters above us..

All that one did was prevent them from coming on the small lot we had, so they never even had the chance to get on the land.

I think they could get a step or two, but that was it, then bumped back on to the edge of the land..

it would bump them about maybe this far..

[Coffee Pancake]

6 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

I can't see a middle ground that will satisfy everyone.

The problem is there are no shortage of public "explorer" friendly locations in SL, the vast majority of builds and homes are wide open for anyone to come and go as they please, especially when there is no-one home. It's easy to roam privately owned mainland for hours on end and not have a single problem, the whole of Belli is "explorer" friendly to all, and lets not even mention the thousands of public access private regions & estates .. Zindra gets more touchy but that's to be expected considering the intent behind Zindra.

The complaints here are from a few people demanding the rights to enter all locations without distinction under the guise of "exploration". It's not enough that they can already wander free to their hearts content almost everywhere. They are aggressively advocating specifically for the additional right to enter the few places they are not permitted because the owner of the location has chosen, for their own personal reasons, not to permit it.

That those last remaining few people should be forced to permit unwanted entry.

If that's starting to sound creepy in the worst possible way, that's because it absolutely is, those pushing for it here have demonstrated a complete inability to even consider that someone might have a boundary that doesn't in some way carve out an exception for themselves.

[Luna Bliss]

1 minute ago, Coffee Pancake said:

The problem is there are no shortage of public "explorer" friendly locations in SL, the vast majority of builds and homes are wide open for anyone to come and go as they please, especially when there is no-one home. It's easy to roam privately owned mainland for hours on end and not have a single problem, the whole of Belli is "explorer" friendly to all, and lets not even mention the thousands of public access private regions & estates .. Zindra gets more touchy but that's to be expected considering the intent behind Zindra.

The complaints here are from a few people demanding the rights to enter all locations without distinction under the guise of "exploration". It's not enough that they can already wander free to their hearts content almost everywhere. They are aggressively advocating specifically for the additional right to enter the few places they are not permitted because the owner of the location has chosen, for their own personal reasons, not to permit it.

That those last remaining few people should be forced to permit unwanted entry.

If that's starting to sound creepy in the worst possible way, that's because it absolutely is, those pushing for it here have demonstrated a complete inability to even consider that someone might have a boundary that doesn't in some way carve out an exception for themselves.

Another good requote.  And yes, creepy when people think they deserve domain over every single space in SL.   Little Kings.

[Sammy Huntsman]

19 minutes ago, Jaylinbridges said:

The Lindens need to change the rules so everyone feels safe in SL, including explorers.  Will they ever speak up?  SL19B is coming soon, and this is the one chance you might be able to ask them why they are still allowed on the mainland.

I don't think Explorers are not safe that is the thing, that and I don't think controlling how people set their orbs on ther own private property should be controlled by LL. There is plenty of space to explore, you don't need access to peoples private lands so you feel safe. Lol. What a joke. 

[Codex Alpha]

9 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

The complaints here are from a few people demanding the rights to enter all locations without distinction under the guise of "exploration". It's not enough that they can already wander free to their hearts content almost everywhere. They are aggressively advocating specifically for the additional right to enter the few places they are not permitted because the owner of the location has chosen, for their own personal reasons, not to permit it.

That those last remaining few people should be forced to permit unwanted entry.

If that's starting to sound creepy in the worst possible way, that's because it absolutely is, those pushing for it here have demonstrated a complete inability to even consider that someone might have a boundary that doesn't in some way carve out an exception for themselves.

 

Edited June 1, 2022 by Codex Alpha