1 second Orb timing, is it necessary

[Sammy Huntsman]

1 minute ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Heaven forfend someone enjoys an accident...

 

I was just asking a question. My whole post is basically around the fact that people can set their orbs to however they want. And that LL shouldn't have overarching control of how it should be set on mainland. 

[Theresa Tennyson]

2 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I was just asking a question. My whole post is basically around the fact that people can set their orbs to however they want. And that LL shouldn't have overarching control of how it should be set on mainland. 

I remember one of the last big threads we had on this topic. People were taking just the same tack as you are.

It was right at the start of the new Bellisseria project. In the middle of the life of that thread, LL took overarching control of how lot access and orbs should be set there.

It can be dangerous to be so completely wedded to the idea that you have rights that, ultimately, you don't have.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Yeah, this has got a little silly, in some measure because we don't all seem to be talking about the same thing. Are we talking about what is "courteous"? About our "rights"? About what we should do, or what LL should do?

I do think that this is a fascinating insight into the cultural divisions within SL, but I'm a bit surprised to note that my preconceptions about the ideologies of some of the participants don't always marry with what they've said here. A useful reminder that people are complicated!

So, here's what I think, and then I'm backing away.

First of all, some basic premises

• Second Life is not real life, and while analogies from the one to the other can be useful, equivalencies are silly. Your "land" in SL is neither actually land, nor is it really "yours" -- you are renting server space from a platform. Having someone show up in your living room uninvited in SL is not the same as walking into someone's actual house -- any more than SL "dancing" is real dancing, SL "sex" is real sex, or SL "assault" is the same as real assault.
   
• It follows also that no one has "rights" here, unless you want to call them "licensing rights," which are a very different thing. Your ability to do things on this platform is contingent upon LL's permitting them; these can be revoked at any time. What we are permitted to do here has nothing to do with natural "rights," and everything to do with what is feasible in code, and what LL has decided "works" well for their business model. Their decisions about what will make the most users happy, and the company most profitable, will continue to guide their policies on this.
   
• LL depends upon land sales for most of its revenue, but it is also designed for exploring. This is one of main reasons we have contiguous continents, railways, highways, navigable waterways, etc. Exploring is also part of LL's "business plan."

So, here are my general thoughts.

• I have no idea whether or not LL should change its rules surrounding orbs and such, because I'm not sure how much of a problem all of this really is. It's pretty seldom a problem for me, but when it is, it's annoying. I'm not sure that the best solution is a top-down imposition of new rules, however. I don't know.
   
• I don't think of people who open their sims, parcels, and buildings as "courteous." I seem them as generous. Thank you. I don't "expect" it, but I am grateful when that is gifted to me. And, let's face it, if there was not a critical mass of open sims, estates, parcels, etc., to visit, SL would be pretty damned dull.
   
• As a landowner, you have the "ability" granted to you by LL to be as tight and secure, within the limits of the tools provided, as you want. Granted. But if you are knowingly and unnecessarily making it difficult for people to travel highways, the air, the water, and such merely because you can, you're a jerk. And I am judging you for it.
   
• As an "explorer," you have the "ability," granted you by LL and the setup of continents on the mainland, to explore. Granted. But if you are knowingly and unnecessarily violating someone's privacy -- using "sit" to enter locked houses, for instance, or pushing on into a parcel despite an orb warning -- then you're a jerk. And I'm judging you for it.

So there you are.

You have the "right" to be a jerk. Or the ability and the option to be a courteous and/or generous member of the community.

Actually, that really is rather like RL, isn't it?

Edited June 6, 2022 by Scylla Rhiadra

[Gabriele Graves]

To state the obvious (but sometimes it needs stating):

The answer to the question of what mainland access rights we will have in the future will only come in the form of action or inaction from LL.  Until then all we can do is talk about what we think should/should not happen.

[Arielle Popstar]

29 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

But if you step on someone's property on accident, if they have the strict orb rules. Should you be able to enjoy it unhindered? Or should they have a right to kick you back home? I mean I would say the second one, as I mean once you step into that threshold. You are taking a risk and guess what part of that risk is to deal with the consequences. So if someone isn't so lenient and decides they want to be strict and firm on their security and privacy. That is their right. You shouldn't have a say on how that goes. I am sorry but that is the way things are. But what you are saying is that Lindens should have overarching control on orbs and set regulations, that just make explorers happy. It doesn't take into account the person who owns the orb. Tell me how is that fair? 

After your previous posts about the care and attention you pay to both ensure your privacy while at the same time configuring your orb to be reasonable with someone who may step onto your parcel, I fail to see why you are arguing in this thread being that those of us promoting the idea of a non 0 sec orb, are not at all implicating that your particular setup is in any way an issue. Look again at the ban lines I posted in the a recent picture that covers over half of a waterway out to open water and tell me whether you feel that it is reasonable or not and whether that it is necessary to protect your privacy.

[Love Zhaoying]

20 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

The score is, Cheesecake!

I just had caramel cheesecake!

[Love Zhaoying]

5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Yeah, this has got a little silly, in some measure because we don't all seem to be talking about the same thing. Are we talking about what is "courteous"? About our "rights"? About what we should do, or what LL should do?

It's not clearly? 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

2 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

It's not clearly? 

It is not.

[Love Zhaoying]

2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

those of us promoting the idea of a non 0 sec orb

Both of you? 
The OP is about "1-second" orbs, which one changed it to "0-second orbs", you or the other one?

[Sammy Huntsman]

3 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

After your previous posts about the care and attention you pay to both ensure your privacy while at the same time configuring your orb to be reasonable with someone who may step onto your parcel, I fail to see why you are arguing in this thread being that those of us promoting the idea of a non 0 sec orb, are not at all implicating that your particular setup is in any way an issue. Look again at the ban lines I posted in the a recent picture that covers over half of a waterway out to open water and tell me whether you feel that it is reasonable or not and whether that it is necessary to protect your privacy.

Well, there are people's houses on the water. So should they not be allowed to protect their little piece of land? Or do they need to just leave it open access, so boaters can come through? I don't see a problem. I mean ban lines are ugly. But you can turn that off in settings. 

[Gabriele Graves]

5 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

After your previous posts about the care and attention you pay to both ensure your privacy while at the same time configuring your orb to be reasonable with someone who may step onto your parcel, I fail to see why you are arguing in this thread being that those of us promoting the idea of a non 0 sec orb, are not at all implicating that your particular setup is in any way an issue. Look again at the ban lines I posted in the a recent picture that covers over half of a waterway out to open water and tell me whether you feel that it is reasonable or not and whether that it is necessary to protect your privacy.

That's not an orb.  This topic is about orbs isn't it?  Are ban lines the problem now too?.  Should all security for a parcel on mainland be removed for the "right" to travel?

Edited June 6, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Scylla Rhiadra]

4 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

After your previous posts about the care and attention you pay to both ensure your privacy while at the same time configuring your orb to be reasonable with someone who may step onto your parcel, I fail to see why you are arguing in this thread being that those of us promoting the idea of a non 0 sec orb, are not at all implicating that your particular setup is in any way an issue. Look again at the ban lines I posted in the a recent picture that covers over half of a waterway out to open water and tell me whether you feel that it is reasonable or not and whether that it is necessary to protect your privacy.

In my view, the above person is most likely an entitled jerk.

But, hey, that's their "right."

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Both of you? 
The OP is about "1-second" orbs, which one changed it to "0-second orbs", you or the other one?

Okay back on topic, however the owner of said orb wants to set their orb. That is their choice. I mean that is what I have been stating the whole time. I don't think I went off topic. 

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Scylla Rhiadra said:

In my view, the above person is most likely an entitled jerk.

But, hey, that's their "right."

Yeah entitled to have privacy, on wherever their house is. I don't see a problem for someone to protect themselves from intruders. I am sure they could maybe edit their orb a bit. But other than that, they are well within their right to. 

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Gabriele Graves said:

That's not an orb.  This topic is about orbs isn't it?  Are ban lines the problem now too?.  Should all security for a parcel on mainland be removed for the "right" to travel?

Not sure what the problem with those ban lines is, assuming the water wasn't navigable in the first place.

Me, I'd hide the ban lines. Not sure why you'd want to look at them.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 minute ago, Gabriele Graves said:

That's not an orb.  This topic is about orbs isn't it?  Are ban lines the problem now too?.  Should all security for a parcel on mainland be removed for the "right" to travel?

There is an orb that follows the ban lines. It has booted me to another sim when my sailboat bumps into it.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

3 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Yeah entitled to have privacy, on wherever their house is. I don't see a problem for someone to protect themselves from intruders. I am sure they could maybe edit their orb a bit. But other than that, they are well within their right to. 

They are using the tools that LL has granted them to their utmost extent -- which, of course, their payment for the land entitled them to.

They are still being jerks. I see nothing to be gained from blocking off half of the channel.

Edited June 6, 2022 by Scylla Rhiadra
Ugh

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Not sure what the problem with those ban lines is, assuming the water wasn't navigable in the first place.

If the water is not navigable, it's not an issue.

Arielle is suggesting that it is, however.

[Gabriele Graves]

I don't know why there is even an argument about people's right to be a jerk.  That's one of those inalienable ones.  We don't have to like it but there it is and it is our opinion only that a person is or is not.  People will be jerks regardless, we cannot stop them being jerks.  If we remove all things people can be jerks with, we will literally have nothing left.  Technical measures, social measures, nothing has cured humanity of the jerk nor will it ever so we have to be careful about the steps we take and make sure we are not throwing the baby out with the bath water when we try to limit the impact of jerks.

Edited June 6, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Ceka Cianci]

10 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I just had caramel cheesecake!

I may go get me a sonic Cheesecake shake.. Those are awesome and a real big cheat for me on my diet.. hehehe

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Gabriele Graves said:

I don't know why there is even an argument about people's right to be a jerk.  That's one of those inalienable one.  We don't have to like it but there it is and it is our opinion only that a person is or is not.  People will be jerks regardless, we cannot stop them being jerks.  If we remove all things people can be jerks with, we will literally have nothing left.  Technical measures, social measures, nothing has cured humanity of the jerk nor will it ever so we have to be careful about the steps we take and make sure we are not throwing the baby out with the bath water when we try to limit the impact of jerks.

Agreed! I'm not arguing about it. I am judging them for it.

[Gabriele Graves]

3 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

There is an orb that follows the ban lines. It has booted me to another sim when my sailboat bumps into it.

You weren't discussing the orb when you posted though, you were discussing the visible ban lines and asking if that is reasonable.

[Ceka Cianci]

7 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Both of you? 
The OP is about "1-second" orbs, which one changed it to "0-second orbs", you or the other one?

It was the same guy that undercut 8 minute abs, releasing his version called, 7 minute abs to corner the market..

I knew that guy was around here somewhere! It just took time for him to show his face. \o/

[Gabriele Graves]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I am judging them for it.

That's fair enough and I wouldn't dream of impinging on your right to do so.  Judge ahead.

[Love Zhaoying]

5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

If the water is not navigable, it's not an issue.

Arielle is suggesting that it is, however.

"I'm mad because I can't drive my boat right here." Very critical, must drive boat right there!