can they forfeit my rental?

[Paul Hexem]

And here comes the lock.

I gotta get mine in- anyone that thinks someone deserves to be a victim, in SL or otherwise, because they like a specific politician is part of the problem, and virtually proves said politician correct.

"Someone that supports [dumb person] deserves [bad thing]" is exactly the sort of thing that will make me go vote for [dumb person], even if I totally disagree with 'em.

[Dyna Mole]

Ummm ... the thread has suddenly wandered off the topic ("Can they forfeit my rental?").  Please, this is not a place for discussing politics.

[fabiansongs]

2 minutes ago, Dyna Mole said:

Ummm ... the thread has suddenly wandered off the topic ("Can they forfeit my rental?").  Please, this is not a place for discussing politics.

respectfully agreed, Dyna. can't help it if they want to start doing it.

[Persephone Emerald]

3 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Shocked as I am to find myself agreeing with Chaser, this is an important point. I'd say the "system is broken," but actually it's never worked as it should.

I thought about mentioning to the OP the "name and shame" rule here near the beginning of this thread, but decided not to because the system as it currently stands is terribly unbalanced.

The "free market" approach to this kind of dispute only works, even by the standards of those who support it (of which I am emphatically not one) if the power of the seller / landlord is balanced against the power of the consumer to let "word of mouth" govern the marketplace. The theory is that if "bad players" are bad enough frequently enough, they will go out of business as "word of mouth" gets around about their behaviour.

But if you disable the ability to spread that word, then frankly you are robbing the consumer of the one lever they should have at their disposal. More to the point, you are creating a structural, systemic imbalance in the system that ensures that it cannot, and never will, function as it is supposed to.

Now, I'm not of the opinion that anyone should be able to come here and simply name anyone they feel has done them wrong. That would turn this place into a chaotic hell hole.

So . . . my conclusion is that we need some form of top-down regulation for this kind of thing.

I agree with your points, but I don't see much top-down regulation happening for these kinds of problems.

The problem stated by the OP isn't about politics, consumer rights or personal freedom. It's about ethical vs. unethical practices within an economic system. A Free Market Capitalistic system requires freedom to go both ways, for the seller and the buyer, for the employer and the employee, etc. What we end up with most of the time in RL is a market in which some interests (usually those with money and political power) have legal protections against the consumer or employee, while consumers and employees also get a few legal protections against some egregious abuses. 

In RL the consumer or employee has the power to voice their grievances, to quit their job, and to vote their politicians out of office.  In SL we have a generally benevolent dictatorship, ruled by generally good intentions and financial incentives. LL doesn't want to upset their top spending users, but they don't want to upset all the rest of us either. The big guys do get special breaks (just like in RL), but I don't think that is the motivation for the problem here. I think it has more to do with the cost of trying to regulate creator-consumer relations in SL. Linden Lab cannot afford to regulate things the way a tax-supported RL government could, so we end up with a kind of quasi-libertarian capitalist system, with most protections in place more to protect the "government" than to protect the individual.

This makes sense though because in most situations an individual in SL doesn't risk much, while the company itself could risk millions (an existential threat) if some legal cases were to go against them.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Persephone Emerald

[Coffee Pancake]

9 minutes ago, Dyna Mole said:

Ummm ... the thread has suddenly wandered off the topic ("Can they forfeit my rental?").  Please, this is not a place for discussing politics.

I think that question has been well and truly answered.

They can.

They did.

There is no recourse.

Don't pay your rent forever in advance ... especially if you plan on inviting all your neighbors to a "rub their face in it" political boat event.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Coffee Pancake

[fabiansongs]

3 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

I agree with your points, but I don't see much top-down regulation happening for these kinds of problems.

The problem stated by the OP isn't about politics, consumer rights or personal freedom. It's about ethical vs. unethical practices within an economic system. A Free Market Capitalistic system requires freedom to go both ways, for the seller and the buyer, for the employer and the employee, etc. What we end up with most of the time in RL is a market in which some interests (usually those with money and political power) have legal protections against the consumer or employee, while consumers and employees also get a few legal protections against some egregious abuses. 

In RL the consumer or employee has the power to voice their grievances and to vote their politicians out of office.  In SL we have a generally benevolent dictatorship, ruled by generally good intentions and financial incentives. LL doesn't want to upset their top spending users, but they don't want to upset all the rest of us either. The big guys do get special breaks (just like in RL), but I don't think that is the motivation for the problem here. I think it has more to do with the cost of trying to regulate creator-consumer relations in SL. Linden Lab cannot afford to regulate things the way a tax-supported RL government could, so we end up with a kind of quasi-libertarian capitalist system, with most protections in place more to protect the "government" than to protect the individual.

This makes sense though because in most situations an individual in SL doesn't risk much, while the company itself could risk millions (an existential threat) if some legal cases were to go against them.

oh both of you have the points. But some one has just found that somewhere in the covenants it says that the landlords had the right to forfeit the deposit a tenant paid. If you scroll up you will find it. So they are going to say to me 'read the fine prints dude.". hahaha!

[Pixie Kobichenko]

21 minutes ago, fabiansongs said:

I love the American people. They are so warm and nice. It pains me to see that you can't even get some decent powder milk for the babies.

 

[Finite]

9 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

Imagine yourself in the shoes of a Governance person trying to enforce a freeform covenant written by some SL landlord. I for one do not want my tier paying to run a Linden "land court" responsible for interpreting rules drawn up by videogame players.

I guess that's pretty analogous to what a Supreme Court must do when they act as the final appeal for lower (provincial, state) jurisdictions, but I'd rather my taxes didn't pay for that, either.

Honestly I wish SL did more to protect customers and creators alike. I wouldn't mind it at all if my tier or prem+ subscription paid towards that. I see other sites, specifically dealing with 3D models that do far more to protect both customers and creators than SL does (which is absolutely zero). So I guess the lessoned learned here is that the OP should have lost enough money to take it to small claims court and subpoena SL for discovery purposes to get them to at least act?

 

[fabiansongs]

Just now, Pixie Kobichenko said:

 

you're the walrus, I'm the egg man Gogogechooo!

 

[fabiansongs]

11 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

I think that question has been well and truly answered.

They can.

They did.

There is no recourse.

Don't pay your rent forever in advance ... especially if you plan on inviting all your neighbors to a "rub their face in it" political boat event.

hahahaha! words of wisdom! Is it the coffee or the pancake or both?

[AquariusUraniborg]

Yeah this is a tough lesson to learn. I'm a returnee to SL after a good 10 years away. My first landlord was a Christian sim (I am one in RL so it seemed an obvious choice - schoolgirl noob error), I was evicted for using a Bible app. It had a listening script so I could call all passages in text on demand. They had a no listening scripts policy. I had no refund. They banned me.

SL is the Wild West. Once you understand that the laws that apply in the real world do NOT apply here you'll make your experience much more pleasant.

And I never rented ever again and went premium within 24 hours of coming back. Premium all the way. Linden Labs will treat you much better on average than a faceless person behind a screen who is not at all as they represent themselves to be.

[animats]

1 hour ago, Lindal Kidd said:

I expect this is the bit that keeps thousands of SL businesses from getting hit with fines and penalties from the Late Great State of California. There's no "debit or credit charge or funds transfer."

When SL started, "digital currencies" barely existed, and for a long time they were things like "iTunes points", petty cash for small transactions. Then came cryptocurrencies. With billions of dollars worth of virtual currencies moving around, the definitions have been firmed up. Ten years ago, you might have been able to take the position that Linden dollar transactions were not a funds transfer. But not any more. There's now been plenty of litigation. Income in virtual currencies is taxable. Stealing virtual currencies is theft. Fraud in virtual currencies is fraud.

Here's IRS guidance. The IRS views sales in a digital currency as equivalent to a sale in US dollars at the fair market value of the digital currency.

Useful Wikipedia article.

[kali Wylder]

48 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

 

[fabiansongs]

3 minutes ago, AquariusUraniborg said:

Yeah this is a tough lesson to learn. I'm a returnee to SL after a good 10 years away. My first landlord was a Christian sim (I am one in RL so it seemed an obvious choice - schoolgirl noob error), I was evicted for using a Bible app. It had a listening script so I could call all passages in text on demand. They had a no listening scripts policy. I had no refund. They banned me.

SL is the Wild West. Once you understand that the laws that apply in the real world do NOT apply here you'll make your experience much more pleasant.

And I never rented ever again and went premium within 24 hours of coming back. Premium all the way. Linden Labs will treat you much better on average than a faceless person behind a screen who is not at all as they represent themselves to be.

Same here Aquarius, I go premium now and get a decent house.

8 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

 

you're the walrus, I'm the egg man Gogogechooo!

 

[Rowan Amore]

Gonna blame it all on bad memory.

[Alwin Alcott]

23 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

Gonna blame it all on bad memory.

now you sound like our prime minister .. has no active memory on that case, or lost the note where the info was on....

[Persephone Emerald]

2 minutes ago, Alwin Alcott said:

now you sound like our prime minister .. has no active memory on that case, or lost the note where the info was on....

...or the phone texts...

[Da5id Weatherwax]

This is why I buy my land and pay tier to LL rather than rental to an estate owner.

All the rentals in SL I've ever seen have a clause in there that if they evict you they wont refund anything. I am sure there are more "ethical" landlords out there who will do it, and some that will even do so WITH that clause in the agreement, depending on circumstances (reasonable approach IMHO, cover your tail with the clause but try and do good business)

But something bothers me. Isn't this exactly the kind of behavior that a certain wing of the political spectrum lauds and applauds as "smart business"? (Although, the "business smarts" of anyone that can bankrupt a casino might be somewhat questionable, but I digress) Wasn't there a recent GOP president who has a massive track record of stiffing anyone he did business with whenever he could? From banks to cleaning staff, right across the board, and calling it "smart"? Doesn't the entire party say "caveat emptor" and say that if you entered into such an agreement its on you? Free market and personal responsibility and all that? The free market seems to be working in this case, doesn't it? At least, I'm sure that the OP will never do business with those folks again....

[Silent Mistwalker]

2 hours ago, Persephone Emerald said:

...or the phone texts...

 but... HER EMAILS!!!111!!!!

[Finite]

2 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

 

It’s you. There are multiple parts to the Keystone pipeline. The ones that were in operation when Biden took office still are. What he did was stop construction of the XL phase, which was 8% compete at the time. It wouldn’t transport a drop of oil for years in any case and has absolutely nothing to do with gas prices today.

Lol and here I thought these people supported truckers. If that thing was ever completed hundreds of truckers would have been replaced by 3 guys sitting around for 8 hours a day playing candy crush on their cellphones.

[Da5id Weatherwax]

2 minutes ago, Finite said:

Lol and here I thought these people supported truckers. If that thing was ever completed hundreds of truckers would have been replaced by 3 guys sitting around for 8 hours a day playing candy crush on their cellphones.

Nonono.. that's not how it works. They convince some truckers to support THEM. but... THEY have never supported anyone who does an honest day's work such as a farmer, miner, trucker or teacher in their entire history of existence.

it's like...
"We lie to these guys until they support us, then we screw 'em over and lie to them about the lies and they still support us. We don't need to support them at all"

[Persephone Emerald]

3 minutes ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

Nonono.. that's not how it works. They convince some truckers to support THEM. but... THEY have never supported anyone who does an honest day's work such as a farmer, miner, trucker or teacher in their entire history of existence.

it's like...
"We lie to these guys until they support us, then we screw 'em over and lie to them about the lies and they still support us. We don't need to support them at all"

They screw over their little guy supporters, then convince them that somebody else did it.

[Da5id Weatherwax]

1 minute ago, Persephone Emerald said:

They screw over their little guy supporters, then convince them that somebody else did it.

Indeed, but if we do a little digging - like maybe lift up this piece of astroturf here and see what's crawling about underneath, what do we find? Singapore, and travels to NY "for investments" - sounds like a financial-services kinda dude to me, I've spent enough years adminning their computer systems to spot 'em. Which part of the group do you think? Deluded "little guy"or one of the greedy ones who knows exactly the stink of the BS they are peddling?

[Persephone Emerald]

1 minute ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

Indeed, but if we do a little digging - like maybe lift up this piece of astroturf here and see what's crawling about underneath, what do we find? Singapore, and travels to NY "for investments" - sounds like a financial-services kinda dude to me, I've spent enough years adminning their computer systems to spot 'em. Which part of the group do you think? Deluded "little guy"or one of the greedy ones who knows exactly the stink of the BS they are peddling?

They're almost all little guys to the guys at the top. Unless someone has Koch or NRA level power, these politicians don't really care about the people who vote for them. - It's not just one party to blame though. It's a system to blame. The most egregious "look at the monkey" politics just seems to come mostly from one US political party IMO.

[Arielle Popstar]