What Would You Like to Remove From Second Life Permanently?

[Zalificent Corvinus]

3 hours ago, Lewis Nerd said:

Ban lines and "security orbs", especially those that eject you to home with no warning, with absolutely no indication that someone is paranoid enough to set their land to 'private' in the first place.

It's just a game. 

Things to remove from SL.

Over-entitled people who espouse the Griefer's Charter, especially with regard for OTHER people's property.

 

"It's JUST a game, so I can do whatever I want, to whoever I want, where ever I want, when ever I want, with no repercussions!"

[Dorientje Woller]

One simple thing, as it has happened again this week: the removal of the inability to return an item that has being left behind in my home from some visitor that got kicked out of the place by the security orb.

[Extrude Ragu]

Sim crossings.

Yes I know it's not practical to simulate the entirety of SL on one computer.

But we could make simulators like 10x bigger so we didn't have to cross them so much. Computer processing power has moved on since SL's inception 20 years ago

[Love Zhaoying]

3 hours ago, Lewis Nerd said:

If you've just got what looks like a Linden or marketplace home, it has zero interest to me, but given that you can use camera controls to "look inside" areas you are excluded from, the whole concept of 'security ' is a joke anyway.

Things to remove completely from SL: people who get their jollies from "looking inside" homes that would otherwise be "private".

Just ewwwww.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

2 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

he ceiling in this pic is an instance:

I've done the same in the past, putting a plain seamless painted plaster diffuse on walls, and adding a decorative normal map from an embossed wallpaper texture set to it.

I'm partial to the JuBran sets on the MP, they usually have some on special offer, every week for 1 L$., over the years that adds up to a substantial pool of diffuse/normal/specular maps to play with.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

30 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Things to remove completely from SL: people who get their jollies from "looking inside" homes that would otherwise be "private".

Just ewwwww.

Remember that oddball who demanded that people in Belli shouldn't be allowed to use non-Mole brand 3rd party home and garden items, because it "broke his immersion" when he had to wait for several seconds, for the custom content to rez in when he was perve camming other people's Belli homes.

Same guy who refused to teleport anywhere because "slurls are not secure and using one means ChiCom Hackers from Moscow will take over your PC, and send North Korean Death Commandos to burn your Bible" if you dared teleport anywhere.

 

[steeljane42]

4 hours ago, Lewis Nerd said:

Ban lines and "security orbs", especially those that eject you to home with no warning, with absolutely no indication that someone is paranoid enough to set their land to 'private' in the first place.

It's just a game.  There's nothing you can do in game that has any bearing on real life.  Therefore there's no need to aggressively ban anyone from flying around and looking for interesting builds.  If you've just got what looks like a Linden or marketplace home, it has zero interest to me, but given that you can use camera controls to "look inside" areas you are excluded from, the whole concept of 'security' is a joke anyway.

And this is one of many reasons why I set my region to private the moment I bought it and teleported in, and same was for the homestead I was renting for a while before I've decided to upgrade. Maybe someday you and people with your mindset will understand one simple thing, and it's the: I simply don't want other people/avatars around my place, unless I've invited them personally. I don't really need any other "reason".

But that's probably a lost cause for some of you/them. Reminds me of an ancient introverts/extroverts thing. Certain (not all, thankfully) extroverts just can't possibly understand how in the world someone does not want to talk and/or "do stuff together" at any given moment, and start with "What's wrong? Why are you like that?" and similar kind of questions. While the answer/reason is usually all the same: I just don't want to.

---

As for the topic itself. Flexi hair. All of them, old school ones and newer which are sometimes a mix of mesh and flexi. I know there's some flexi hair fans around the forums, but to me they did look awful from my very first days in SL 11 years ago.

[Love Zhaoying]

59 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

Remember that oddball who demanded that people in Belli shouldn't be allowed to use non-Mole brand 3rd party home and garden items, because it "broke his immersion" when he had to wait for several seconds, for the custom content to rez in when he was perve camming other people's Belli homes.

Same guy who refused to teleport anywhere because "slurls are not secure and using one means ChiCom Hackers from Moscow will take over your PC, and send North Korean Death Commandos to burn your Bible" if you dared teleport anywhere.

 

Nope!

[Arielle Popstar]

47 minutes ago, steeljane42 said:

And this is one of many reasons why I set my region to private the moment I bought it and teleported in, and same was for the homestead I was renting for a while before I've decided to upgrade. Maybe someday you and people with your mindset will understand one simple thing, and it's the: I simply don't want other people/avatars around my place, unless I've invited them personally. I don't really need any other "reason".

But that's probably a lost cause for some of you/them. Reminds me of an ancient introverts/extroverts thing. Certain (not all, thankfully) extroverts just can't possibly understand how in the world someone does not want to talk and/or "do stuff together" at any given moment, and start with "What's wrong? Why are you like that?" and similar kind of questions. While the answer/reason is usually all the same: I just don't want to.

Fine if someone buys themselves a private island in the middle of nowhere but a different matter when someone buys or rents a little postage stamp sized property beside a main thoroughfare, seemingly for the express purpose of being able to use a 0 sec orb on any unsuspecting passerby who happens to stray over their ban line. The way it sounds from some of the 0 sec boot orb fans it is almost like a sport to them rather than any real need for protecting their privacy.

If one wants privacy to a degree that requires such an orb, then maybe a parcel in a busy, built up area is not a good plan. Some of us feel that such orbs should be removed from high traffic areas in SL as it affects the enjoyment of others who like to explore the grid.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

2 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Some of us feel that such orbs should be removed from high traffic areas in SL as it affects the enjoyment of others who like to explore the grid.

Define "high traffic". I live on a parcel that was nowhere near ANY Official roads, railways, or waterways, on a mostly empty region.

Then some over-entitled jerk published a map, with recommended aviation routes, and one of those routes runs through MY living room.

Is my living room now a "High Traffic" area?

Will the "Association of Privacy Hating Tos Violating Harassment Repeat Offenders Against Mainlanders Having Property Rights (tm)", compensate me for having to move elsewhere, because their overentitled jerk membership foolishly think they have some RIGHT to fly through my living room?

There is NO "Right" to explore privately owned property against the wishes of the property owner. NONE.

[Love Zhaoying]

I thought of one, this exists near my home parcel.

Permanently remove Linden public roads that are split down the middle, in two separate Regions. (A barrier down the middle of the road apparently helps prevent inevitable accidents from crossing back and forth between Regions.)

[Qie Niangao]

15 hours ago, Dorientje Woller said:

One simple thing, as it has happened again this week: the removal of the inability to return an item that has being left behind in my home from some visitor that got kicked out of the place by the security orb.

Is this a rental? I can't think of a way a landowner could lack permission to return stuff left on their parcel. If a rental… well, there are different ways to set up permissions for tenants to return group- and non-group objects, so the landlord may be able to set it differently. (It's also possible to provide tenants with a script that can remove selected objects from just their rented space, but I don't know if anybody actually does that.)

[Love Zhaoying]

13 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

Is my living room now a "High Traffic" area?

If so, you may have to get that expensive "high traffic" carpet, or those tacky plastic "runners"..

[Love Zhaoying]

13 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

There is NO "Right" to explore privately owned property against the wishes of the property owner. NONE.

But..but..their ENJOYMENT!!1!!!

[Katherine Heartsong]

21 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Things to remove completely from SL: people who get their jollies from "looking inside" homes that would otherwise be "private".

Just ewwwww.

That is an odd thing to me. I would have thought that an attempt to cam into someone's home through the walls would stop at the walls as is the case in many video games. Sure you can peek in windows that are uncovered, and if someone's left a door open get in camming that way, but walls should be solid, no?

[Aethelwine]

19 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

Define "high traffic". I live on a parcel that was nowhere near ANY Official roads, railways, or waterways, on a mostly empty region.

Then some over-entitled jerk published a map, with recommended aviation routes, and one of those routes runs through MY living room.

Is my living room now a "High Traffic" area?

Will the "Association of Privacy Hating Tos Violating Harassment Repeat Offenders Against Mainlanders Having Property Rights (tm)", compensate me for having to move elsewhere, because their overentitled jerk membership foolishly think they have some RIGHT to fly through my living room?

There is NO "Right" to explore privately owned property against the wishes of the property owner. NONE.

Alternatively you could define high traffic as a corner next to a public access route,  open water with no other indication like marker buoys that the corner parcel has security settings apparently to prevent anyone stopping to sit on their deck chair in the far corner on  sand covered prim. Rather like the example on the waterway between sea of fables and bay of space pigs. The land owner can of course do this, it is their right to... but it does rather spoil the work of the 30 or more other land owners with parcels on the same river for who the route provides value.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

36 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

with no other indication like marker buoys

And that right there, is the classic display of that sense of OVER-entitled "What's mine is mine and what's YOUR'S is MINE too!".

Who the hell are YOU to demand that a land owner WASTE their LI allowance catering to your sense of over-entitlement.

 

The BAN LINES are your indicator.

[Jennifer Boyle]

1 hour ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

That is an odd thing to me. I would have thought that an attempt to cam into someone's home through the walls would stop at the walls as is the case in many video games. Sure you can peek in windows that are uncovered, and if someone's left a door open get in camming that way, but walls should be solid, no?

I have been wondering since 2007 why SL is designed to let people cam through solid walls. Not that it really matters because there are no people inside, only avatars, which are fictional just as Facebook said when they closed my account years ago.

[Aethelwine]

9 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

And that right there, is the classic display of that sense of OVER-entitled "What's mine is mine and what's YOUR'S is MINE too!".

Who the hell are YOU to demand that a land owner WASTE their LI allowance catering to your sense of over-entitlement.

 

The BAN LINES are your indicator.

Indeed in the case cited the banlines indicate an abuse of powers to the detriment of neighbours enjoyment of what they have purchsed and the premium they paid for it. The problem is a systemic one built in to the way land value works and depend on participation in a community that can be spoiled by the actions of one individual amongst 100. That is precisely why one thing that could be removed permanently that would add value to the SL experience it would be banlines and oppressive security along public access routes. 

[Zalificent Corvinus]

5 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

Indeed in the case cited the banlines indicate an abuse of powers

And right there is another classic display of the over-entitled dogma of "What's mine is mine and what's YOUR'S is MINE too".

You are under the delusion that the "enjoyment" of nomads wandering by, trumps the enjoyment of the person PAYING for that parcel.

The only ABUSE there is by you, abusing the hospitality of parcel owners by acting as if it's your divinely granted "right" and demanding they pander to your whims, by placidly accepting your habitual criminal trespass with intent to commit Abuse-Reportable ToS violating harassment of property owners on their own property.

 

11 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

and depend on participation in a community

And again with the "community spam", when it's made abundantly clear that the only community you care about is one that EXCLUDES the people who PAY for the property you trespass on, without their permission.

I remember another thread where you bitterly complained about the oppressive parcel owner with ban lines FORCING you to sail in the LLDWP provided "protected waterway" because you WANTED to sail on the PRIVATELY owned water next to it, and your WANTS overrule property owner's RIGHTS.

[Jennifer Boyle]

11 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

And that right there, is the classic display of that sense of OVER-entitled "What's mine is mine and what's YOUR'S is MINE too!".

Who the hell are YOU to demand that a land owner WASTE their LI allowance catering to your sense of over-entitlement.

 

The BAN LINES are your indicator.

I don't demand anything of any other landowner. However, I am free to draw appropriate conclusions from their behavior. Nice people willingly share and accommodate other people's needs and wants. Jerks don't just because they can get away with it. No one can know what's in another's mind, but I suspect that the usual reason is that it makes them feel powerful and consequential. 

My land is open to everyone, with two exceptions: those who have earned bans by behaving offensively (After 14 years, there are only about 100 on the ban list.), and neighbors who have put up ban lines. 

[PermaRuthed]

40 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

The BAN LINES are your indicator.

Then that is all is needed. Ban lines don't unseat people from their vehicles and tp them home.  Ban lines don't make them retrace their steps after a tp. Zero-second orbs are just malicious.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

2 minutes ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

No one can know what's in another's mind, but I suspect that the usual reason is

All you have to do is ask.

The reason is I got sick and tired of over-entitled jerks demanding rights they don't have over who comes and goes on MY land, and complaining that I build on my land.

Complaining that the ground level build makes MY land unusable for THEIR off road motor sports, complaining that MY house on a platform kilometres up, interferes with them pretending to be airline pilots in MY airspace, demanding that II waste MY spare prims, putting up THEIR air traffic beacons.

People who THINK they have a right to trespass in my SL home and insult me into the bargain, get the security orbs foot broken off in their ASS.

7 minutes ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

My land is open to everyone

What you do on land you pay for is your business. What I do on land I pay for is MY business.

What or who you choose to allow on your land is of no interest to me nor of ANY relevance.

 

9 minutes ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

Nice people willingly share and accommodate other people's needs and wants

Thank you for admitting that the home invaders are NOT "nice people". They make NO effort to accommodate my want and need for some privacy in my SL home, when building or scripting, or unpacking my shopping, or sorting my inventory, or taking a snapshot or two, or just chilling with some people I ACTUALLY know and ACTUALLY invited, rather than being harassed by random over-entitled nomadic anti-privacy griefer filth.

 

 

[Zalificent Corvinus]

11 minutes ago, PermaRuthed said:

Then that is all is needed. Ban lines don't...

...Extend more than 50 m from the ground. I don't live at ground level, and the majority of the criminal trespassers have always been at more than 2500 m off the deck.

WHEN LL change banlines to be effective upto 5000 m, THEN II won't need the orb.

[Katherine Heartsong]

Oh, I have a new one, though it's forum related.

If someone's on your Ignore list on the forums, you not only don't see any of their original posts, you only see a blank quote if someone else quotes them.

Speaking to no one specifically, of course, just a general suggestion. 🙈

Edited November 24, 2023 by Katherine Heartsong