Security orbs and navigable waters

[Tomas McConaught]

*don't post the dead horse gif* *don't post the dead horse gif* *don't post the dead horse gif*

 

Why not?

You have no more right to tell me what to post than I have to tell you, which I have not done.

 

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

35 minutes ago, Tomas McConaught said:

*don't post the dead horse gif* *don't post the dead horse gif* *don't post the dead horse gif*

 

Why not?

You have no more right to tell me what to post than I have to tell you, which I have not done.

 

 

Umm, I was talking to myself. But thanks for the permission.

[Tonya Souther]

On 7/20/2022 at 6:38 PM, Gabriele Graves said:

If someone decides to sail in the waters over LL protected land then they can be sure that their journey will be unimpeded until that protected land stops.  If they decide to sail instead over private land, which there was no need to in this case,  just because some of it is open and can be navigated today does not follow that a) it will always be the case and b) that the whole of their journey will be unimpeded.

The problem is that there's no way to tell until you're too close to it to avoid crashing into the otherwise invisible barrier.

Me, I'd go farther, and put channel marker buoys on both sides of the open water,  As it happens, I've purchased a plot bordering Linden water, and have dedicated a channel down through it...with markers on both sides. Stay between the channel markers and you'll be fine.

You see, I believe in being a good neighbor, so the adjacent parcels are just as welcome to use the channel sa the renters in my lands.

[Tonya Souther]

On 7/20/2022 at 7:41 PM, Coffee Pancake said:

Yes but it's actually not invisible because they have the frikin mini map on screen.

They can see the perfectly fine channel to sail down with the parcel mini map (that if you're on a third party viewer, that's the enhanced mini map that myself and kitty created back in 2012 specifically to help people get around the private land we all have).

 

I guess you missed that they're sailing a sailboat. Sailboats have to tack in order to sail close to upwind. If you look at the picture, you will see both that they are at the very corner of the banned parcel and that they are on a tack that takes them back toward the center of the channel.

Further, you must have missed the poster saying that the pink didn't show up on the minimap until it was too late to avoid.

Do try to keep up, mrrrr?

[Tonya Souther]

On 7/21/2022 at 4:00 PM, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

I am never going to buy this argument, sorry. This gets brought up over and over in complaint threads in the forums, but the bottom line is, the person who owns the parcel makes the rules (subject to TOS, of course). All the rest is just noise. 

They do indeed make the rules.

And when they do so in an unfriendly manner, they get to take the heat for that, too.

If you're going to restrict access to your land, then put up No Trespassing signs. Preferably, ones not as obnoxious as a ban line.

[Tonya Souther]

On 7/21/2022 at 5:11 PM, Gabriele Graves said:

In principle it is unethical to enter if they don't want you there and you knowingly enter anyway.  If you don't know and/or you enter by mistake, then it isn't unethical.  This doesn't seem terribly difficult to grasp to me so I have to assume that this is more in the being obtuse, semantics and point scoring category than it is a genuine interest in wanting to understand.

I've got no problem with this statement.

But if they don't tell me they don't want me there, then they don't get to complain about my trespassing before telling me it's private property and giving me a chance to leave peacefully.

[Tonya Souther]

On 7/21/2022 at 6:34 PM, Rowan Amore said:

They found their access to open water blocked by someone who owned the channel.  They felt they had the right to use that channel even though it was owned by someone else.

When the channel was blocked, it had been open to use for the several days I had had land in the area.

It was also named "[region] Channel - 15 Minutes Traverse Time".

And there was no sign posted, just an invisible ship blocking it. No ban line, no warnings, no security orb, nothing.

What inference would you draw from that name and those circumstances, not having been steeped in the culture of landowner godlike powers prevalent in this discussion? Me, I inferred that as long as I didn't stay in the channel more than 15 minutes, but rather traversed it directly and as expeditiously as reasonable and prudent (no, that doesn't mean run my race boat down it at 70+ knots), there would be no problem.

Edited July 26, 2022 by Tonya Souther

[Rowan Amore]

48 minutes ago, Tonya Souther said:

When the channel was blocked, it had been open to use for several days.

It was also named "[region] Channel - 15 Minutes Traverse Time".

And there was no sign posted, just an invisible ship blocking it. No ban line, no warnings, no security orb, nothing.

What inference would you draw from that name and those circumstances, not having been steeped in the culture of landowner godlike powers prevalent in this discussion? Me, I inferred that as long as I didn't stay in the channel more than 15 minutes, but rather traversed it directly and as expeditiously as reasonable and prudent (no, that doesn't mean run my race boat down it at 70+ knots), there would be no problem.

Is there other protected mainland with a time limit?  

I would have inferred that it was not a protected channel from day one and anticipated that at some point, it may not be a viable access to open water.    When it was open, did you pause and check if it was indeed, protected water?   If I were purchasing a parcel at a premium price because I wanted access to open water, you can bet your behind I'd be checking to be sure it actually did have OPEN access.  The seller may not have even been aware.  

I'm glad the owner was reasonable.  The next owner may not be.

[Gabriele Graves]

4 hours ago, Tonya Souther said:

The problem is that there's no way to tell until you're too close to it to avoid crashing into the otherwise invisible barrier.

This is hardly the fault of land owner.  If you care passionately about it, open a JIRA and ask LL to make changes to make this data available to the viewer earlier.

4 hours ago, Tonya Souther said:

Me, I'd go farther, and put channel marker buoys on both sides of the open water,  As it happens, I've purchased a plot bordering Linden water, and have dedicated a channel down through it...with markers on both sides. Stay between the channel markers and you'll be fine.

You see, I believe in being a good neighbor, so the adjacent parcels are just as welcome to use the channel sa the renters in my lands.

I am sure your neighbours and others appreciate you did this.  However it doesn't make anyone a bad neighbour if they don't choose your approach and decide to block access over their land instead.  It's this kind of polarising attitude that is a huge part of the problem.

3 hours ago, Tonya Souther said:

They do indeed make the rules.

And when they do so in an unfriendly manner, they get to take the heat for that, too.

If you're going to restrict access to your land, then put up No Trespassing signs. Preferably, ones not as obnoxious as a ban line.

If when you say "take the heat" you mean "coming to the forum to gripe about it" anyone is free to do that but if you're suggesting that people should expect threats or abuse of any kind for blocking their land then those "giving the heat" or normalising that behaviour are the ones who are way out of line.

It doesn't make someone unfriendly just because they decide to block access over their land just like it doesn't mean that someone is unfriendly because they decide to lock their gate in RL.  They have their reasons.

In addition, not everyone considers ban lines to be obnoxious.  I would rather encounter ban lines than an orb personally.  I can at least edit my boat back into accessible land and there is a good chance that it will still work OK.

3 hours ago, Tonya Souther said:

But if they don't tell me they don't want me there, then they don't get to complain about my trespassing before telling me it's private property and giving me a chance to leave peacefully.

Sure they get to complain, anyone can complain even if it isn't justified, a fact this very topic itself proves.

Nobody has to take any measures for the convenience of anyone else even if others such as yourself feel they should have to.  Characterising people who don't do things the way you want as bad, unfriendly, unneighbourly etc. is just wrong.
You can disagree all you like but it's still wrong.

All the loaded words in these complaints make it seem way worse than it could ever possibly be.  It's obvious this is the very purpose of using them.  It blows it all out of proportion and makes it seem like there some substance to it all when in fact it's hardly a serious issue at all, it's minutiae.

Bottom line is that there are easier places to choose to sail without any of these issues where anyone can travel for many regions on open water.  If a person chooses places where there is private land and there could be restrictions, then they should expect that their sailing may not be trouble free.  If they want easy then they should make the easy choice, if they want a challenge then they can choose the challenging choice.

It's not rocket science and if a person chooses the challenging option, they only have themselves to blame if if it, in fact, challenging.

Edited July 26, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[belindacarson]

3 hours ago, Tonya Souther said:

I've got no problem with this statement.

But if they don't tell me they don't want me there, then they don't get to complain about my trespassing before telling me it's private property and giving me a chance to leave peacefully.

Still a sense of entitlement, did you visit the location I suggested to see It in black and white that you actually don't have any right to cross private land? Personally I suspect you'll wind upon everyone's ban lists due to this

[Aethelwine]

23 minutes ago, belindacarson said:

Still a sense of entitlement, did you visit the location I suggested to see It in black and white that you actually don't have any right to cross private land? Personally I suspect you'll wind upon everyone's ban lists due to this

Your suspicions fortunately entirely wrong.

The route the thread is about is entirely through private parcels about 10 of them and has been open for 5 years or more. There are other routes on mainland through private parcels like at Argybargy and Phenywheny.

Those going through there regularly are not on any ban lists as a result, the majority of landowners on protected waterway understand the benefits of allowing access.

 

[Aethelwine]

52 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

It doesn't make someone unfriendly just because they decide to block access over their land just like it doesn't mean that someone is unfriendly because they decide to lock their gate in RL.  They have their reasons.

You still seem to be missing the context of this thread. Let me bring you back to an earlier post:

This directly relates to the situation outlined by Tonya in the OP.

imagine a waterway maintained by 10 private landlords. They each own water parcels that allows access through them.

Some of them have paid considerably more than the going rate for the parcel based upon the collective understanding that there is a shared incentive to keep the waterway open. That is why the land is higher value than it would otherwise be.

Now imagine one of the parcels is now up for grabs.

The question to consider is what should you do?

A) Should you buy the land for well over the normal asking price and then block the channel?

B) Should you buy the land at whatever cost is showing and block the channel?

C) Suppose you spot it is available for free, you guess maybe they are inexpertly trying to transfer it to an alt but you can seize this opportunity and grab it and then put up your banlines.   

Surely none of those options are things anyone should do. They can do it of course, but the issue isn't whether they can, the issue is should they?

Even if you answer they shouldn't to just one of them, then the point is made. There is more to what someone should do than a consideration of what they can do.

 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Aethelwine

[Gabriele Graves]

I'm not missing the context of anything and never was.  I suggest it is the other way around.

Edited July 26, 2022 by Gabriele Graves

[Aethelwine]

3 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

Is there other protected mainland with a time limit?  

I would have inferred that it was not a protected channel from day one and anticipated that at some point, it may not be a viable access to open water.    When it was open, did you pause and check if it was indeed, protected water?   If I were purchasing a parcel at a premium price because I wanted access to open water, you can bet your behind I'd be checking to be sure it actually did have OPEN access.  The seller may not have even been aware.  

I'm glad the owner was reasonable.  The next owner may not be.

The area in question has land values about a fifth of what you would get with protected open water access. The difference between 40,000L$ and 200,000L$ considerable, it reflects the risk but is also a lot higher than you would otherwise pay.  

Edited July 26, 2022 by Aethelwine

[Tonya Souther]

1 hour ago, Aethelwine said:

The area in question has land values about a fifth of what you would get with protected open water access. The difference between 40,000L$ and 200,000L$ considerable, it reflects the risk but is also a lot higher than you would otherwise pay.  

Indeed so. As it happens, I'm selling the parcel in question, and expect to take a loss on it (for a nontrivial amount of US$)...although there are actually four exits to protected Linden water, this thread has convinced me that, even if most people are good neighbors, it only takes one to spoil things, and some people only care for themselves, not for the good of others.

Edited July 26, 2022 by Tonya Souther

[Aethelwine]

1 hour ago, Tonya Souther said:

Indeed so. As it happens, I'm selling the parcel in question, and expect to take a loss on it (for a nontrivial amount of US$)...although there are actually four exits to protected Linden water, this thread has convinced me that, even if most people are good neighbors, it only takes one to spoil things, and some people only care for themselves, not for the good of others.

A couple of the other owners along the route have been offering to buy up my parcels to extend their control of it. If you can leave off selling until later today I can give you their names so you can see if you can get a deal with them. 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Aethelwine

[Coffee Pancake]

13 hours ago, Tonya Souther said:

I guess you missed that they're sailing a sailboat. Sailboats have to tack in order to sail close to upwind. If you look at the picture, you will see both that they are at the very corner of the banned parcel and that they are on a tack that takes them back toward the center of the channel.

Further, you must have missed the poster saying that the pink didn't show up on the minimap until it was too late to avoid.

Do try to keep up, mrrrr?

 

It is not a sail boat and it does not need to tack, it is a collection of scripted prims.

If your wonky boat can't sail in a straight line from time to time, that's on your wonky boat.

There are many huge open spaces for you to play "wonky boat simulator" to your hearts content, however not all spaces are suitable. Stop trying to blame your toys for only going sideways, especially when you (of all people) should know better than most about how all this BS works.

 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Coffee Pancake

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

 

It is not a sail boat and it does not need to tack, it is a collection of scripted prims.

If your wonky boat can't sail in a straight line from time to time, that's on your wonky boat.

There are many huge open spaces for you to play "wonky boat simulator" to your hearts content, however not all spaces are suitable. Stop trying to blame your toys for only going sideways, especially when you (of all people) should know better than most about how all this BS works.

 

SL sailboats don't use the physics Wind to move via their physics Sails?

Huh.

[Aethelwine]

9 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

SL sailboats don't use the physics Wind to move via their physics Sails?

Huh.

There is an SL provided wind, but it is mostly just used for animating flags as it changes randomly from region to region. Sail boats in SL use an emulated wind created by scripts that give physical motion to the boats and Sails. The main systems in use are derived from Tako, bwind, Zephi or WWC. Most recently Lalia has created a new GLW wind system released at the recent Expo. They provide a framework for the way the wind works, that the boat scripts translate in to motion and effects on the Sails. 

[Love Zhaoying]

5 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

22 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

SL sailboats don't use the physics Wind to move via their physics Sails?

Huh.

There is an SL provided wind, but it is mostly just used for animating flags as it changes randomly from region to region. Sail boats in SL use an emulated wind created by scripts that give physical motion to the boats and Sails. The main systems in use are derived from Tako, bwind, Zephi or WWC. Most recently Lalia has created a new GLW wind system released at the recent Expo. They provide a framework for the way the wind works, that the boat scripts translate in to motion and effects on the Sails. 

I apologize, but I was using sarcasm. (I was not surprised that "wind" does not drive sailboats via Havok physics.)

Sorry!

[Qie Niangao]

16 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

It is not a sail boat and it does not need to tack, it is a collection of scripted prims.

If your wonky boat can't sail in a straight line from time to time, that's on your wonky boat.

There are many huge open spaces for you to play "wonky boat simulator" to your hearts content, however not all spaces are suitable. Stop trying to blame your toys for only going sideways, especially when you (of all people) should know better than most about how all this BS works.

It is not an avatar and doesn't need shoes, it is a collection of triangles.

You don't enjoy SL sailing, I get that. Just please don't tell me my pastime isn't a valid use of the platform. 

[Tonya Souther]

47 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

It is not a sail boat and it does not need to tack, it is a collection of scripted prims.

If your wonky boat can't sail in a straight line from time to time, that's on your wonky boat.

There are many huge open spaces for you to play "wonky boat simulator" to your hearts content, however not all spaces are suitable. Stop trying to blame your toys for only going sideways, especially when you (of all people) should know better than most about how all this BS works.

 

"Ceci n'est pas une pipe".

In the context of SL, it's a sailboat. Sailboats can't sail upwind in a straight line...well, they can, but not in the direction of the wind. They have to zigzag across it. There's nothing wonky about that; it's basic physics, and is one of the very first things anyone sailing a sailboat learns.

I do know how this works. I also understand that there's little point in sailing a sailboat in SL that doesn't act like a real one. That's part of the challenge (and one I have yet to master, myself).

[Keiko Kiyori]

My neighbor has and object that is completely covering a proteced linden road. I have ARed it several times but its still there.

[Persephone Emerald]

1 hour ago, Keiko Kiyori said:

My neighbor has and object that is completely covering a proteced linden road. I have ARed it several times but its still there.

Send me a LM and I'll AR it too. Maybe if several people report the object, someone will remove it. 

[belindacarson]

3 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

Send me a LM and I'll AR it too. Maybe if several people report the object, someone will remove it. 

Or you could just message SuperTom about it.