how are people still entering my property?

[Artorius Constantine]

Also the word "adequate" is very vague and way open to personal interpretation. It should say they "must provide 15 seconds to leave before TPing" or whatever amount of time they decide on. I know flying, there's not many plots people wouldn't be far beyond in 15 seconds.

[Love Zhaoying]

So much use of "adequate" is giving me feelings of inadequacy! 

Edit: I just invented a new word, "Inadequeasy"!

Edited May 12, 2023 by Love Zhaoying

[Zalificent Corvinus]

8 hours ago, Artorius Constantine said:

Instant TPing of people is against the TOS.

No. It isn't.

 

8 hours ago, Artorius Constantine said:

You are required to warn people and give them time to leave before TPing them.

No, we're not REQUIRED to, it is SUGGESTED that "generally, you should" but it's not a REQUIREMENT.

 

5 hours ago, diamond Marchant said:

Similarly, there is no good reason to put an orb in open airspace above your parcel, as this does not increase security or privacy.

Back when, some damn fool decided that while NAMED bans exclude people to a height of 5000m, generic banlines only work to 50m, so with no orb, you have no way of denying entry to repeat offending criminal trespassers, who DELIBERATELY violate the LLToS by harassing you with their unwelcome presence in your skybox. People don't want Griefy McGreiferpants loitering in their home for 15 seconds, before being GENTLY pushed out with huge padded gloves, and then allowed to come right back in again, and again, and again, in a "friendly manner", as it is in the Bellicosian Anti Privacy Zone.

That's why many Mainlanders WILL NOT live in Bellicosia. If ban lines worked properly, all the way to 5000m, we wouldn't NEED orbs at all. As for the zero seconds warning part.

 

3 hours ago, Artorius Constantine said:

There's no good reason for a zero second eject

Amount of time Fanatical Vehicle Users spend considering if they should violate the ToS by harassing home owners - ZERO Seconds

Amount of time my orb spends considering punt kicking them and auto-adding to the Named banlist - ZERO seconds.

To coin a phrase repeatedly used by a Fanatical-Vehicle-User-Against-Property-Rights, in "one of those 35 page threads that did not go well"

"A fair and reasonable compromise"

 

[diamond Marchant]

49 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

you have no way of denying entry to repeat offending criminal trespassers, who DELIBERATELY violate the LLToS by harassing you with their unwelcome presence in your skybox

Protecting a skybox with an orb is prudent. My statement concerns empty airspace, typically well below skyboxes. I realize that some put skyboxes at low altitudes but I find that unnecessary.

[Artorius Constantine]

Z, As I said before, not gonna argue about it because that's pointless, your opinion is your own and you're welcome to have it, and your message just proves Love's point about the wording. However, 'should' doesn't mean "Only if I feel like it", it means they SHOULD. It doesn't say "Optionally" or "If you don't mind". It says they should. But your comment "violate the TOS by harassing home owners" is what made me reply... Flying through the air over someone's virtual plot in no way harasses or inconveniences anyone. It affects no one and is most definitely NOT against the TOS in any way. You are simply misinformed or choose to ignore the intent of the policy. And you may want to do some research on the English language. Should doesn't mean optional.

Definition of the word Should,

should

used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness...

[Jaylinbridges]

2 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

People don't want Griefy McGreiferpants loitering in their home for 15 seconds, before being GENTLY pushed out with huge padded gloves, and then allowed to come right back in again, and again, and again, in a "friendly manner", as it is in the Bellicosian Anti Privacy Zone.

So, set your skybox orb to 0 seconds, and ban on their 2nd try.  Any decent orb can be set to just cover your skybox, or a sphere larger than your skybox, without killing all the air space from sea level to 10,000 meters. I use two orbs for my parcel.  One covers the entire parcel to the top, but has a 30 sec  warning and then TP's then Home.  The one around my skybox platform is set to 1 second.  I have not had any skybox visitors for over a year.  I get bots visiting my land all the time, but it's an empty beach, so who cares?  They still cannot see into my skybox when on my beach.  If I know they are a bot, I can send them home and perma ban them.  They cannot return, again and again as you think. 

Edited May 13, 2023 by Jaylinbridges

[Teresa Firelight]

I am kind of the opposite. My mainland is open for anyone to visit and i dont mind guests at all. I dont use orbs or banlines on mainland...

That being said, I have only had offensive people 5 or 6 times in the past 15 years. When I get one, I just eject and ban.

Most people in sl are nice.

Most pilots that happen to fly over my place are not at all interested in looking around or trying to find if I am dressed or not.... mostly they are just trying to get from point A to point B and dont really notice me or my landscaping/furnishings.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

2 hours ago, diamond Marchant said:

Protecting a skybox with an orb is prudent. My statement concerns empty airspace, typically well below skyboxes. I realize that some put skyboxes at low altitudes but I find that unnecessary.

When the Flying-Fanatics convinced the Moles to build a maritime invasion route as part of that "connect the continents" nonsense, over the 7 days after it opened, we had 5 trespassers.

Every one of them came in at 2500 m give or take.

In Bellicosia, the free-fly zone is 500m-2000m. These people we all DELIBERATELY looking to encounter skyboxes and orbs so they could file fraudulent AR's. 2 of the 5 were so engrossed in flying, they failed to notice I was home, and screamed through at max knots, heading for the end of the road nobody uses. 2 more DID notice my green dot on the map, and STOPPED in my airspace to subject me to abusive IM's for having a skybox and thus "interfering with aviation traffic", the 5th, stopped, crash dived to 400 m, THEN spammed my IM's with hate for having a skybox, AND preventing off-road motor sports at ground level by not only having banlines but for DARING to build on my own land.

Another fanatic, after I gave up on being nice to over 1 years worth of abusive trespassers, and installed an orb, subjected me to an abusing IM calling me a "f***ing noob", telling me orbs were illegal, ordering me to take it down, demanded I pay them the L$ they hadn't earned in fares roleplaying as an airline pilot (for passengers they didn't in fact have, no banned passengers by the orb), then threatened to organise a conspiracy of fanatics to subject me to abusive IM's and ban me from every one of the airports and boat docks I never use. And, yes, flying at 2500m "looking to pick a fight with skybox owners".

Another fanatic, claimed they always flew through my airspace every week ( blatant lie, as they would have been punted and banned 8 weeks earlier), and demanded I unban them, add them to the orb's guest list AND invite them to my land group, so they could make full use of my 500 spare LI to rez their own emergency airstrip, on MY land.

 

2 hours ago, Artorius Constantine said:

But your comment "violate the TOS by harassing home owners" is what made me reply... Flying through the air over someone's virtual plot in no way harasses or inconveniences anyone. It affects no one and is most definitely NOT against the TOS in any way.

Empirical evidence says "fly into banlined property at 2500m, intent is to annoy, harass, pick a fight, and file fraudulent AR's. In addition, read the harassment and inconveinience listed above, a small sample of why I put in a zero second orb.

 

2 hours ago, Jaylinbridges said:

So, set your skybox orb to 0 seconds, and ban on their 2nd try.  Any decent orb can be set to just cover your skybox, or a sphere larger than your skybox, without killing all the air space from sea level to 10,000 meters. I use two orbs for my parcel.  One covers the entire parcel to the top, but has a 30 sec  warning and then TP's then Home.  The one around my skybox platform is set to 1 second.  I have not had any skybox visitors for over a year.  I get bots visiting my land all the time, but it's an empty beach, so who cares?  They still cannot see into my skybox when on my beach.  If I know they are a bot, I can send them home and perma ban them.  They cannot return, again and again as you think. 

1. My orb bans people who enter ABOVE 100m, AND who intrude more than 2m into the parcel, and does not reach above 5000m which is the over-fly height for named banlist people.

2. If you want to give people 30 warnings and second chances, you do you, I ran out of patience a couple of years back.

3. After two years, less than 30 people have been punted and banned, these people are an insignificant minority, constantly DEMANDING their non-constitutional un-right to have more say about other peoples land then the people paying for that land.

4. Bellicosia's covenant forbids the use of properly working orbs, orbs are required to be cripple-ware editions that cannot punt kick and cannot auto-ban, hence my choice of words.

" loitering in their home for 15 seconds, before being GENTLY pushed out with huge padded gloves, and then allowed to come right back in again, and again, and again, in a "friendly manner", as it is in the Bellicosian Anti Privacy Zone"

 

[Love Zhaoying]

2 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

When the Flying-Fanatics convinced the Moles to build a maritime invasion route as part of that "connect the continents" nonsense, over the 7 days after it opened, we had 5 trespassers.

Every one of them came in at 2500 m give or take.

In Bellicosia, the free-fly zone is 500m-2000m. These people we all DELIBERATELY looking to encounter skyboxes and orbs so they could file fraudulent AR's. 2 of the 5 were so engrossed in flying, they failed to notice I was home, and screamed through at max knots, heading for the end of the road nobody uses. 2 more DID notice my green dot on the map, and STOPPED in my airspace to subject me to abusive IM's for having a skybox and thus "interfering with aviation traffic", the 5th, stopped, crash dived to 400 m, THEN spammed my IM's with hate for having a skybox, AND preventing off-road motor sports at ground level by not only having banlines but for DARING to build on my own land.

Another fanatic, after I gave up on being nice to over 1 years worth of abusive trespassers, and installed an orb, subjected me to an abusing IM calling me a "f***ing noob", telling me orbs were illegal, ordering me to take it down, demanded I pay them the L$ they hadn't earned in fares roleplaying as an airline pilot (for passengers they didn't in fact have, no banned passengers by the orb), then threatened to organise a conspiracy of fanatics to subject me to abusive IM's and ban me from every one of the airports and boat docks I never use. And, yes, flying at 2500m "looking to pick a fight with skybox owners".

Another fanatic, claimed they always flew through my airspace every week ( blatant lie, as they would have been punted and banned 8 weeks earlier), and demanded I unban them, add them to the orb's guest list AND invite them to my land group, so they could make full use of my 500 spare LI to rez their own emergency airstrip, on MY land.

 

Empirical evidence says "fly into banlined property at 2500m, intent is to annoy, harass, pick a fight, and file fraudulent AR's. In addition, read the harassment and inconveinience listed above, a small sample of why I put in a zero second orb.

 

1. My orb bans people who enter ABOVE 100m, AND who intrude more than 2m into the parcel, and does not reach above 5000m which is the over-fly height for named banlist people.

2. If you want to give people 30 warnings and second chances, you do you, I ran out of patience a couple of years back.

3. After two years, less than 30 people have been punted and banned, these people are an insignificant minority, constantly DEMANDING their non-constitutional un-right to have more say about other peoples land then the people paying for that land.

4. Bellicosia's covenant forbids the use of properly working orbs, orbs are required to be cripple-ware editions that cannot punt kick and cannot auto-ban, hence my choice of words.

" loitering in their home for 15 seconds, before being GENTLY pushed out with huge padded gloves, and then allowed to come right back in again, and again, and again, in a "friendly manner", as it is in the Bellicosian Anti Privacy Zone"

 

Very insightful, thank you very much for this!

[Qie Niangao]

So here's part of the Bellisseria covenant:

Quote

== Security ==

  *Linden Homes do not have the ability to set your parcel access to group access only (which creates ban lines for everyone else). You can still eject and manually ban people by name in the parcel access settings in About Land options.
  *Security devices are only allowed if they comply with the following restrictions:
     -Minimum of 15 seconds warning time (no shorter)
     -Eject from parcel only (not teleport them home)
     -Effective range cannot include the airspace between 400m and 2000m (to allow for people to fly overhead but not in the airspace where skyboxes are allowed)
     -Does not add names of ejected persons to the parcel ban list automatically

To be clear, this doesn't say there's anything wrong with flying at any altitude. It says that flyers above 2000m or below 400m may be subject to security systems because they may be in view of spaces where builds are permitted. (Elsewhere it explains that "[s]kyboxes, platforms or other floating objects are only allowed above 2000m to keep the skies clear of physical/visual obstructions and casting ground shadows.")

There are plenty of other regions in Second Life more conducive to "privacy" role-play.

I have a Bellisseria houseboat with a little skybox. An alt has a trailer with another little skybox. Very, very occasionally, somebody flies past and we might exchange pleasantries. Nobody has ever complained about either skybox, nor anything else.

If I wanted drama and aggravation, I'd install a security system.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

19 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

So here's part of the Bellisseria covenant:

To be clear, this doesn't say there's anything wrong with flying at any altitude. It says that flyers above 2000m or below 400m may be subject to security systems because they may be in view of spaces where builds are permitted. (Elsewhere it explains that "[s]kyboxes, platforms or other floating objects are only allowed above 2000m to keep the skies clear of physical/visual obstructions and casting ground shadows.")

There are plenty of other regions in Second Life more conducive to "privacy" role-play.

I have a Bellisseria houseboat with a little skybox. An alt has a trailer with another little skybox. Very, very occasionally, somebody flies past and we might exchange pleasantries. Nobody has ever complained about either skybox, nor anything else.

If I wanted drama and aggravation, I'd install a security system.

Nobody claimed that there;s anything wrong with flying at any altitude specified in the Bellicosian Covenant, except you, so you can refute your own claim to make a point, except you don't have a point.

However the Belli-Cov does state no orbs between 400m and 2000m (I mis-remembered the lower limit as 500) creating a FreeFly-Zone. But this isn't about Belli, it's about Bellicosians ASSUMING all Mainland works the same as Belli, and CHOOSING to fly in the Skybox & Orb Zone because they are looking for "illegal in Belli" orbs to file fraudulent AR's against.

This certainly isn't about "privacy roleplay", but about the refusal of arrogant vehicle fanatics to accept that people's SL homes are NOT automatically public access spaces provided for their amusement, and that crash-landing their fighter jet in somebody's living room is not in fact the height of humour, and universally greeted with good grace, and that subjecting home owners to insults, threats, and repeated attempts to deliberately bypass parcel security measures, because the home owner marked their parcel as "Not open to the General Public" is deliberate harassment, and a clear ToS violation.

And security ends drama.

Butthole trespasses, orb punts and bans, butthole IM's to complain, butthole gets muted, butthole get's AR'd for harassment, drama over.

 

[Qie Niangao]

35 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

And security ends drama.

Butthole trespasses, orb punts and bans, butthole IM's to complain, butthole gets muted, butthole get's AR'd for harassment, drama over.

And there's so much drama to end.

[Rowan Amore]

2 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

 

Nobody has ever complained about either skybox, nor anything else.

If I wanted drama and aggravation, I'd install a security system.

I actually have a security orb on my mainland.  It has a 20 sec warning time.  I've had this.particular spot for about 3 yrs.  Nobody has complained at all about it.  Even when people have tped to me using their radar, I simply immediately eject and ban, not saying a word.  Still, no one has said a word to me.

Some people probably encourage the drama.  

[Artorius Constantine]

19 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

Empirical evidence says "fly into banlined property at 2500m, intent is to annoy, harass, pick a fight, and file fraudulent AR's. In addition, read the harassment and inconveinience listed above, a small sample of why I put in a zero second orb.

"Empirical Evidence" is not the TOS nor is it in any way the official LL position. It's simply your opinion. So you told a blatant lie to try and support your opinion. Not a good way to convince anyone that your position is valid. Unless you can show us the text in the TOS that says flying in SL is against the TOS or where it says Vehicle Users violate the ToS by "harassing" home owners just flying over their land. And just a side note, it's obvious you have issues with people that fly airplanes, no clue why, none of my business and don't want to know, but I never said anything about a vehicle. I said I like to fly. I don't use vehicles. I just like to fly around SL since I can't in RL. I love flying around like friggin Superman, it's one of my favorite things to do. And generalizations such as "Every one of them came in at 2500 m give or take." are the same as making blanket statements about any group of people. I generally fly around at under 1000 meters to enjoy the scenery and watch for interesting builds to check out so by myself I disprove that statement. You can't judge "Every one of them" by the actions of a few, or a couple, or one. Do what you gotta do to make yourself happy man, it's a fantasy word for you to enjoy, ll doesn't care about your 0 second orb and frankly, neither do I, but you may want to try to avoid spreading all the hatred. It's not good for your digestion. And I'm out of this, the water is getting way too deep for me to swim in.

[Teresa Firelight]

On 5/13/2023 at 3:03 AM, Zalificent Corvinus said:

And security ends drama.

Butthole trespasses, orb punts and bans, butthole IM's to complain, butthole gets muted, butthole get's AR'd for harassment, drama over.

 

Not bothering folks flying above your property for the 10 or 15 seconds as they continue on their route is another way to end (or should I say never start) drama.

There is more than 1 way to avoid drama here

You can take your option -- it is afterall your land and your decision. But I prefer my approach for my property.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

15 hours ago, Artorius Constantine said:

"Empirical Evidence" is not the TOS nor is it in any way the official LL position. It's simply your opinion. So you told a blatant lie to try and support your opinion. Not a good way to convince anyone that your position is valid. Unless you can show us the text in the TOS that says flying in SL is against the TOS or where it says Vehicle Users violate the ToS by "harassing" home owners just flying over their land. And just a side note, it's obvious you have issues with people that fly airplanes, no clue why, none of my business and don't want to know, but I never said anything about a vehicle. I said I like to fly. I don't use vehicles. I just like to fly around SL since I can't in RL. I love flying around like friggin Superman, it's one of my favorite things to do. And generalizations such as "Every one of them came in at 2500 m give or take." are the same as making blanket statements about any group of people. I generally fly around at under 1000 meters to enjoy the scenery and watch for interesting builds to check out so by myself I disprove that statement. You can't judge "Every one of them" by the actions of a few, or a couple, or one. Do what you gotta do to make yourself happy man, it's a fantasy word for you to enjoy, ll doesn't care about your 0 second orb and frankly, neither do I, but you may want to try to avoid spreading all the hatred. It's not good for your digestion. And I'm out of this, the water is getting way too deep for me to swim in.

empirical evidence isn't "A lie", it's what is observed in the field. EVERY ONE of the nomadic tos violators who entered my parcel, and STARTWED drama by IM'ing me with hate messages, came in around 2500m. If you dont like that, too bad.

Also I didn't say flying isa tos violation, I said that THOSE particular flyers violated the ToS by committing AR'able harassment, which IS a Tos violation. Somebody enters my parcel, then IM's me to spew hate, is a tos violator. If you dont like that, too bad.

 

The only "lies" here are claiming "should" = "must", and claiming that punt kicking people is a tos violation. Those threads that "did not end well" tend to have an LL voice stating that land owners CAN punt kick and that zero second orbs are legal. That's why they don't end well... For you... You always lose... Puntkick still legal, zero seconds still legal.

 

2 hours ago, Teresa Firelight said:

Not bothering folks flying above your property for the 10 or 15 seconds as they continue on their route is another way to end (or should I say never start) drama.

There is more than 1 way to avoid drama here

You can take your option -- it is afterall your land and your decision. But I prefer my approach for my property.

Is this International Low Comprehension Day?

Before ORB: A dozen cases of nomad griefer trash, entering the parcel, and subjecting me to personal abuse, AFTER which I had to waste my time manually punt kicking and banning the trash.

After Orb: 30 trash auto puntkicked and banned, only two then IM'd with abuse.

Orbs end drama. Trash enter with ill intent, orb punts and bans, most accept they wont win, the few that dont get muted and AR'd.

Easy.

[diamond Marchant]

1. For me, the value of this thread was learning about how the "no see" privacy option really works.

2. Griefers gonna grief. Am sorry that people get griefed.

3. Mainland rules allow a resident to deploy banlines and orbs in their parcel.

4. I trust Linden Lab Governance to ignore/dismiss frivolous ARs from griefers. I also trust them to deal with griefers.

5. I sail, drive, and fly alot and do so in communities of like minded residents. We only wish to travel and have no intention of griefing or trespassing.

6. Vehicle travelers are aided by visual cues that signal "do not enter here".

7. It is my opinion that connected protected water is a good because it reduces the chance of encountering hazards to navigation.

8. Because residents crash in Second Life while in vehicles, those vehicles may continue on and crash into structures or banlines. These are accidents.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, diamond Marchant said:

1. For me, the value of this thread was learning about how the "no see" privacy option really works.

2. Griefers gonna grief. Am sorry that people get griefed.

3. Mainland rules allow a resident to deploy banlines and orbs in their parcel.

4. I trust Linden Lab Governance to ignore/dismiss frivolous ARs from griefers. I also trust them to deal with griefers.

5. I sail, drive, and fly alot and do so in communities of like minded residents. We only wish to travel and have no intention of griefing or trespassing.

6. Vehicle travelers are aided by visual cues that signal "do not enter here".

7. It is my opinion that connected protected water is a good because it reduces the chance of encountering hazards to navigation.

8. Because residents crash in Second Life while in vehicles, those vehicles may continue on and crash into structures or banlines. These are accidents.

Hey, nice list!

[Love Zhaoying]

16 hours ago, Artorius Constantine said:

"Empirical Evidence" is not the TOS nor is it in any way the official LL position. It's simply your opinion.

I understood it ("Empirical Evidence") to mean their "actual experience".  

However, I have low comprehension so, am often and chronically wrong!

(Iz dum lyon)

[Rowan Amore]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I understood it ("Empirical Evidence") to mean their "actual experience".  

However, I have low comprehension so, am often and chronically wrong!

(Iz dum lyon)

It's generally information gathered to prove a hypothesis.   What I see is personal observation that proves nothing overall since I've not had the same experiences and neither has anyone I know.  We all have random people wandering into our parcels but none, whatsoever, have been at the level of harassment cited above.  None, nada.  

One would need to observe vast amounts of data to call it "empirical data".  Otherwise, it's just one person's experience.  

[Love Zhaoying]

28 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

It's generally information gathered to prove a hypothesis.   What I see is personal observation that proves nothing overall since I've not had the same experiences and neither has anyone I know.  We all have random people wandering into our parcels but none, whatsoever, have been at the level of harassment cited above.  None, nada.  

One would need to observe vast amounts of data to call it "empirical data".  Otherwise, it's just one person's experience.  

But, if one is the center of the universe, or the world revolves around them, or they interpret everything in the context of their own experience, then to them, the only reality is the one they observe!

 

[Artorius Constantine]

3 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I understood it ("Empirical Evidence") to mean their "actual experience".  

However, I have low comprehension so, am often and chronically wrong!

(Iz dum lyon)

Yeah that's a good definition. In this case it's an opinion formed from one persons personal experience, so it would be the empirical evidence of one individual, which in 99.9% of the  cases would be considered an invalid sample size for any meaningful results to be produced. Since everyone has a different experience in SL, and there's a LOT more than just one person in SL, it's not empirical evidence of the actual conditions. I highly doubt anyone has done any actual scientific study of a statistically significant number of residents to gather actual empirical evidence of any real value nor is there any proof that all airplane owners are harassing people by crashing into their land and cursing them out. It sounds to me like this person is a repeat victim of some blankity-blank griefer or griefer group and that has caused an irrational and unshakeable hatred for anyone in an airplane. The addition of the fact this flyer allegedly "then IM's me to spew hate" tells me it's more than likely personal and this is an ongoing situation with that person.

[Always Incognito]

One has to contemplate a Second Life where all parcels and regions were guarded by orbs and banlines. Only clubs and shops were open to the public, were you are supposed to pay for the services. Would that be a fun, immersive and exciting virtual world? Some things may be taken for granted... 

[AmeliaJ08]

On 5/11/2023 at 7:05 PM, Lindal Kidd said:

 

--

 

 

Edited May 17, 2023 by AmeliaJ08