Land Sales Crash

[Love Zhaoying]

16 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

Oddly enough I put those two adjacent 8192s up for sale at a decent price for Blake access, but enough that I would actually make a point to take the sales proceeds back into cash via the Tillia mechanism, and voila, they sold within a week. I had figured I'd have to wait to sell them and just let them sit there for months. Nope. So it may be weak the land market but it's not dead. I'm not watching the whole sim that used to have a marina beside my new 4096 home. Direct access to the coast and to Blake. It fronts a LL general water sim and is south facing. This will sell fast.

You may have a future in Second Life Real Estate!

[Zalificent Corvinus]

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

And a two meter grace interval? That's just for comic relief, right?

For the hypothetical "innocent explorers who accidentally stray across the line" it's more than enough.

For the deliberate criminal trespasser, it's more than they deserve.

 

I ran out of generosity towards the latter group ages ago, that's why I put in an orb. 20 pages into a 35 page thread where those criminal trespassers kept claiming rights they don't have, AND insulting home owners into the bargain, and claiming that we should pay more to keep them out.

20 pages into a 35 page I said "enough is enough" and I put in an orb, and gave the over-entitled criminal trespasser trash EXACTLY what they deserve.

They start a war, and whine when they lose. Too bad, so sad, don't care.

[Theresa Tennyson]

32 minutes ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

Oddly enough I put those two adjacent 8192s up for sale at a decent price for Blake access, but enough that I would actually make a point to take the sales proceeds back into cash via the Tillia mechanism, and voila, they sold within a week. I had figured I'd have to wait to sell them and just let them sit there for months. Nope. So it may be weak the land market but it's not dead. I'm not watching the whole sim that used to have a marina beside my new 4096 home. Direct access to the coast and to Blake. It fronts a LL general water sim and is south facing. This will sell fast.

That's something that the, "People are forced to overpay to land flippers" faction are overlooking - unless they're paying a lot of attention to the market, the lots they see for sale are the ones that aren't selling. Reasonably-priced lots may have been set for sale and then sold before they could even notice them.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Even five seconds of warning would, surprisingly enough, mean you'd find a lot fewer "arrogant vehicle fanatics" on your ban list.

Actually, I found that "instant punt and ban" worked better.

From the number of criminal trespasser trash banned by the orb, and the period over which they were banned I deduced that there are probably LESS than 100 hard core home invasion addicted fanatically vehicular overentitled trash on the grid, and bout 1/3rd of them are on my ban list, after which the others learned to AVOID my place.

 

Part of the original problem is that they tended to use "recommended" routes on a published map, a map that had two waypoints on one major migration route bracketing my place, so the route literally ran through my living room between the sofa and the fire place. This map also claimed to show all the "ban lines and orbs" but its idiot mapmakers didn't bother checking their routes and updating their map for OVER TWO YEARS.

 

Their useless map deliberately encouraged their idiot map users to trespass on my property. Eventually the survivors learned.

Evolution in action, so to speak.

[Theresa Tennyson]

14 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

 

They start a war, and whine when they lose. Too bad, so sad, don't care.

Theresa Tennyson looks at all the new no-banline, no-aggressive-orb regions added since then.

Someone in a cave somewhere yelling, "Harold Forever!" doesn't mean the Normans lost.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

46 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

I'm starting to think LL should have left airspace between 1000 m and 2000 m open to public movement, but they aren't going to change this now.

The Bellicosian free fly zone is what 400 - 2000, but the punt and ban victim list from my parcel is almost EXCLUSIVELY 2500 ish. It's almost as if they are DELIBERATELY flying 500 above the "free fly zone" to cause trouble.

 

47 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

However, I see no reasonable reason to teleport them home

TPHome has a legitimate use that is ALWAYS ignored by the pro-trespass movement. If you EJECT trash from one of several parcels owned by the same person or group, they just shift to another, if you then go around and manually eject and ban from all the parcels, and there isn't a "public access" parcel available, they end up stuck on the line between parcels, and UN-ejectable, because they are not, technically in any of the parcels, the y just hover in Griefer friendly inter parcel limbo. This problem should be one of the first things anyone with boot and ban powers over an entire region should learn.

I learned it.

Secondly, so you eject the trash to the nearest public access parcel, assuming there is one, then they just come right back and scream at you, punting them home teaches a harsher lesson. 

 

53 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

My primary reason for suggesting this change is so new users won't feel like SL is a hostile and unusable environment

Fun fact, contrary to the pro-trespass propaganda, noobs do not constitute the bulk of the victims.

All the trespasser trash on my ban list are well established accounts, with groups that clearly prove they are fanatically vehicular, including griefer clubs like the SLCG, for example.

NOT "poor innocent noobs who don't understand that private property is private, and leave on their first day because of evil home owners who won't welcome unwanted invaders".

 

[Zalificent Corvinus]

10 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Theresa Tennyson looks at all the new no-banline, no-aggressive-orb regions added since then.

Someone in a cave somewhere yelling, "Harold Forever!" doesn't mean the Normans lost.

Look up the 19th C American term "Free-grazers", and see how they fared against "evil property owners and fences".

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

6 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

Look up the 19th C American term "Free-grazers", and see how they fared against "evil property owners and fences".

 

Theresa Tennyson looks up.

At airplanes.

Mmm hmm....

(No, literally - I'm right by the flight path of a RL airport.)

[Zalificent Corvinus]

Just now, Theresa Tennyson said:

Theresa Tennyson looks up.

At airplanes.

Mmm hmm....

(No, literally - I'm right by the flight path of a RL airport.)

So you know why airports are unpopular neighbours, AND why every time a new airport is proposed, or an existing one wants to expand, "local home owners" launch protest campaigns, AAND you already know that aviation authorities impose limits on the number of flights, and the approach routes they use.

 

And the reason you replied about airports rather than "free-grazers" is because you know that "free-grazers" were people who thought it was ok to graze their cattle on OTHER peoples land, leaving no grass for the land owner's cattle, exactly the same sort of "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine too" argument used by the pro-trespasser trash movement.

And you know free-grazers were driven to extinction by a wonderful new invention called...

Barbed Wire Fences.

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

21 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

So you know why airports are unpopular neighbours, AND why every time a new airport is proposed, or an existing one wants to expand, "local home owners" launch protest campaigns, AAND you already know that aviation authorities impose limits on the number of flights, and the approach routes they use

 

Nope, it's general aviation. Call the tower and fly right on in. And if your airplane starts eating grass you've got a major problem.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

37 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Nope, it's general aviation. Call the tower and fly right on in. And if your airplane starts eating grass you've got a major problem.

Ohhhhh. So, not a real "airport" just some hick airfield used by amateurs, who'd wet themselves if the FAA showed up to confiscate their pilot's licences following complaints of breaking the rules.

Good Job!

And this proves what exactly? Regarding the fraudulent claims that airborne explorers in SL have more right to land they don't pay for than the people who DO pay for it.

Nothing.

We're done here. Move on. You lost. Again. As always.

Edited January 17 by Zalificent Corvinus

[Persephone Emerald]

59 minutes ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

[snip]

And the reason you replied about airports rather than "free-grazers" is because you know that "free-grazers" were people who thought it was ok to graze their cattle on OTHER peoples land, leaving no grass for the land owner's cattle, exactly the same sort of "what's mine is mine and what's yours is mine too" argument used by the pro-trespasser trash movement.

And you know free-grazers were driven to extinction by a wonderful new invention called...

Barbed Wire Fences.

 

It's a good thing I don't know where you live, Zali. Else I might be tempted to buy adjacent land and put a bunch of cows on the edge, looking moournfully at your lovely green grass. 🐄 🐄 🐄 🐄 🐄 

[Love Zhaoying]

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Theresa Tennyson looks up.

At airplanes.

Mmm hmm....

(No, literally - I'm right by the flight path of a RL airport.)

And don't get me started about those annoying helicopters. Did you know aircraft can see into your house?! TIL

[Love Zhaoying]

I thought Brits supported the "Right to Ramble".

[Persephone Emerald]

9 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

And don't get me started about those annoying helicopters. Did you know aircraft can see into your house?! TIL

Oh my gosh, are there helicopters in SL that can play an annoying warning about a man in a hoodie who police are searching for?

p.s.

I hope they don't scare the cows.

🏠 🐄 🐄  🚁 

Edited January 17 by Persephone Emerald

[Gabriele Graves]

5 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

We can't see the Lab's data, but we can see what the Lab did in response to the data, and how well that response is succeeding. It would be willful denial not to recognize what it means. Surprise, surprise: Alienation as extreme sport isn't such a growth market. Belli is.

Or it's jumping to the wrong conclusions and willfully fitting the data to suit your perspective.

5 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

As more Mainlanders pull up stakes and move to expanding Belli, it selects for the banline and orb afficionados who can't go to Belli and won't move to an Estate.

Just more supposition that this is what's happening and more "the sky is falling" panic.

What I see is people taking a Belli home and keeping some mainland for things they cannot do there.  I see people scaling back due to RL because of the rising cost of living.  There are dozens of reasons why people might leave mainland, not least of which possibly just leaving SL.

Here's another thought.  If people really are leaving mainland en-masse for Belli then the masses has spoken and Belli is what they want and nothing less than more Belli is likely to do for them.  Lamenting about how it all went so wrong is just pointless hand-wringing.

I'm betting the attraction of Belli for many is the much higher chances of getting a coastal/river view for no extra cost, having the landscaping all done for them, the being with like minded people, the fact that LL and others pour a lot of effort into events and activities that appeal to them are all likely to be part of the many reasons the people that do move over choose Belli.  Lack of banlines and orbs are likely to be just a part of the reasons, not the whole reason.  Might not even factor into some people's reasoning.

If Belli is what most people want then it's likely it's the whole package and not just one cherry-picked aspect of it.

The thing is though that you point to Belli and say this is the reason mainland is dying and yet don't seem to want to move to Belli yourself given your views.  Interesting.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I thought Brits supported the "Right to Ramble".

The "Right to Roam" only applies to about 8% of Britain, and that 8% does not as a rule, include ordinary peoples HOMES.

It's mostly empty wilderness, moorland, peat bogs, mountains. And even then there are restrictions.

This gets explained EVERY time some Yank claims "Brits support home invasion by criminal trespassers".

 

In general, I suspect Brits are MORE concerned about private property than many Americans, you colonials, apparently think its "normal" to have to share a dorm room at university with a complete stranger "roomie", here that is RARE.

People who DO live in shared accommodation, mostly young people, students and the like, have a room in a shared house, with A LOCK ON THEIR DOOR to keep the strangers who also live in the house OUT of their room. The "my property" thing can even extend to their half of a shelf in the shared fridge.. "This is MY fridge space for MY food, your food is over there..."

 

Britain has bout 1/5th the population of the US, in a damn sight less than 1/5th of the space, we have higher population density, so we take more care about "personal space" and private property.

 

It's easy to not care about trespassers wandering over the far end of your 5 mile wide ranch, that's 20 miles from a town, and 3 miles from the nearest neighbour, over there.

Over here, people who live in terrace houses, will paint within 1 mm of the boundary and not a fraction over it. People build tall fences or walls and/or screens of dense trees (evergreen conifers seem popular because privacy in winter) around their back yards so they don't have to see the neighbours and the neighbours can't see  them

 

So like most American assumptions about Brits, assuming we "all support the right to invade private property" is dead wrong.

 

[Zalificent Corvinus]

27 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

Lack of banlines and orbs are likely to be just a part of the reasons, not the whole reason.  Might not even factor into some people's reasoning.

I can't see a lot of mainland store owners giving a damn about ban-lines and orbs. Many have their stores in a sky-box, to reduce lag, so why would they give a rat's backside about a neighbour having ban-lines 2000 m below, and their customers arrive by teleport, not boat, plane or car, and the store owners don't give out landmarks to their neighbour's skybox 1000m above their store, so why would they care about the neighbour's orb.

 

Even the ones who build their stores at ground level, may well have an orb themselves, to stop over eager customers from bothering them up on the build platform where they assemble and package their products.

 

So claiming that "content creators won't want their content on a mainland full of ban-lines and orbs" is what I'd call "worthless hyperbole", apparently based on the assumption that everyone except for the ban-line and orb using home owners, is an "artist" wannabe building public amusement parks in which to abuse Experience code to engage in "legalised griefing" against "welcome visitors".

 

"Welcome to my public access bad-art installation, you will accept the experience or be ejected, you will be force teleported, force sat, have attachments force attached, have your EEP/Windlight force changed and your cameras force aimed because ART"

That is apparently "welcoming" and "wont scare off noobs", while ""private residence, invited guests only" is evil, and killing off SL!

Yeah right. And these privacy hating doom say-ers wonder why people ignore their over-entitled hot-garbage propaganda.

 

[Qie Niangao]

34 minutes ago, Gabriele Graves said:

The thing is though that you point to Belli and say this is the reason mainland is dying and yet don't seem to want to move to Belli yourself given your views.  Interesting.

Speaking of drawing unwarranted conclusions. I have a Belli houseboat and an alt has a camper.

In case it's somehow relevant, I also rent Estate apartments now and then, when I stumble on something exceptional.

It's true, though, that I've clung to an assortment of Mainland for a very long time, still bound by nostalgia and community ties. Once in a while I even see some encouraging development, just enough that I haven't yet pulled the plug.

And you're also correct that there are many things different about Belli, some appealing and some not. Personally I wouldn't stay in SL if Belli were the only option, but that sure wouldn't be for lack of orbs and banlines.

Couple more points:

The practical reason Estates could have restricted exploration without the opportunity cost incurred by allowing such restrictions on Mainland is that no Mainland-equivalent exploration is possible on Estates—they're just not big enough. We made that point to the Lindens long before Belli happened. Then Belli happened and now there's a non-Mainland landmass large enough to explore. It's not varied enough to be as interesting as Mainland in its heyday, but at least it's safe for testing vehicles and having a little fun. So it's not as bad as it was without Belli, but it's still recovering from an unforced error from long ago.

And finally a reminder: An SL parcel, for all the virtual "land" trappings, has much more in common with a blog than with a real life place. It's more a means of expression than a place we live. Some users are only interested in expressing their SL to a very curated set of observers, but the tools to restrict access to their expression also interferes with open access to others' expression to a broader public. Orbs have externalities. And the effect is perfectly asymmetric: one restriction affects all openings but one opening affects no restrictions.

 

[Gabriele Graves]

5 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Speaking of drawing unwarranted conclusions. I have a Belli houseboat and an alt has a camper.

In case it's somehow relevant, I also rent Estate apartments now and then, when I stumble on something exceptional.

It's true, though, that I've clung to an assortment of Mainland for a very long time, still bound by nostalgia and community ties. Once in a while I even see some encouraging development, just enough that I haven't yet pulled the plug.

And you're also correct that there are many things different about Belli, some appealing and some not. Personally I wouldn't stay in SL if Belli were the only option, but that sure wouldn't be for lack of orbs and banlines.

Hardly unwarranted, having a Belli place isn't an indication you consider that you have "moved" there especially when you admit that Belli by itself would make you leave SL.  So you haven't "moved" there any more than I have just because I also have a camper.

I guess though, I should have phrased it more that because you still keep your mainland, it suggests that these things aren't driving you anywhere.

13 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Couple more points:

The practical reason Estates could have restricted exploration without the opportunity cost incurred by allowing such restrictions on Mainland is that no Mainland-equivalent exploration is possible on Estates—they're just not big enough. We made that point to the Lindens long before Belli happened. Then Belli happened and now there's a non-Mainland landmass large enough to explore. It's not varied enough to be as interesting as Mainland in its heyday, but at least it's safe for testing vehicles and having a little fun. So it's not as bad as it was without Belli, but it's still recovering from an unforced error from long ago.

Yes mainland has it's unique advantages which are still a draw for those who appreciate them.  Exploration in Belli has been described as bland and boring due to the cookie-cutter aspect and so doesn't quite have the appeal to all.

"unenforced error"

10 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

And finally a reminder: An SL parcel, for all the virtual "land" trappings, has much more in common with a blog than with a real life place. It's more a means of expression than a place we live. Some users are only interested in expressing their SL to a very curated set of observers, but the tools to restrict access to their expression also interferes with open access to others' expression to a broader public. Orbs have externalities. And the effect is perfectly asymmetric: one restriction affects all openings but one opening affects no restrictions.

Again, that's one point of view.  Some people, many people in fact think of their SL land as their home and that they live there, not as any kind blog.

[Arielle Popstar]

4 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

From the number of criminal trespasser trash banned by the orb, and the period over which they were banned I deduced that there are probably LESS than 100 hard core home invasion addicted fanatically vehicular overentitled trash on the grid, and bout 1/3rd of them are on my ban list, after which the others learned to AVOID my place.

How is it you attract all these criminal invaders? I certainly haven't experienced anything like this when I rented parcels nor do I hear of many others who have other than bots, so what is your secret sauce? Are you by chance mistaking live residents with statistic bots perhaps scripted to visit you specifically? Might want to look at that because there has to be more to your experience as it seems to really differ from that of others.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

25 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

How is it you attract all these criminal invaders?

Learn to read posts in the thread. I already answered this earlier.

5 hours ago, Zalificent Corvinus said:

Part of the original problem is that they tended to use "recommended" routes on a published map, a map that had two waypoints on one major migration route bracketing my place, so the route literally ran through my living room between the sofa and the fire place. This map also claimed to show all the "ban lines and orbs" but its idiot mapmakers didn't bother checking their routes and updating their map for OVER TWO YEARS.

See, that's why I "attract" all these trash.

Some TRASH published a map suggesting people fly along a route that was "free from orbs and ban-lines" that runs quite literally RIGHT THOUGH MY LIVING ROOM.

People who DON'T live between anywhere anyone EVER is, and anywhere anyone EVER wants to be, might see fewer trash.

 

29 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Are you by chance mistaking live residents with statistic bots

Don't talk nonsense. Bot don't join griefer clubs like the SecondLife Coast guard, own homes in Bellicosiaa, etc. They certainly don't make a habit of FLYING around the grid. Statistics bots TELEPORT from place to place, but they CAANNOT teleport into MY place because I have ban-lines up which prevents directly teleporting in.

 

31 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Might want to look at that because there has to be more to your experience as it seems to really differ from that of others.

Every time you try "gaslighting" people and claiming that victims are to blame for everything you reveal your true colours. That's why I consider ALL of your posts to be hot-garbage.

 

What's even more laughable is you asked this exact same question before and got the exact same answer in another thread.

 

 

[Cinnamon Mistwood]

Looks like once again, a discussion about anything related to land is only about security orbs. In this instance, I believe Zalificent should be able to protect the area she rents from LL in any way she wants even if I think they way she says it is pointlessly verbally abusive and should be AR'd by the person it is directed against.

Back to the land crash - I have owned mainland over the years and I own some now.  I, also, have a couple Belli homes that I love and I love the Belli community and all the fun events.

Looking at the ridiculous prices I have seen for some mainland in SL, there must be a shortage of choices to be that high. However, what I see is huge swathes of land that appear empty.

What I have never done and will never do is rent from another SL resident.  Ever.  I would rather follow all the rules that LL sees fit to impose on people, than I would like to be at the whims of another resident.  I will NEVER rent from another resident or "purchase" land on a private estate from anyone.  Heck no! That way lies madness. Their land, their rules?  Nope.  

I am really glad we have all these options for land ownership, so that anyone who wants some, can have something that fits their needs.

 

Edited January 17 by Cinnamon Mistwood

[Zalificent Corvinus]

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

Some users are only interested in expressing their SL to a very curated set of observers, but the tools to restrict access to their expression also interferes with open access to others' expression to a broader public

Bullsh*t.

My having ban-lines and an orb does exactly NOTHING to stop people teleporting to somebody else's parcel elsewhere. NOTHING.

 

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

Orbs have externalities. And the effect is perfectly asymmetric:

Oh look, meaningless waffle.  MY ban-lines and orb stop over-entitled privacy haters from pestering me in MY parcel, they do NOTHING to stop the pestering of other people in other parcels.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

5 minutes ago, Cinnamon Mistwood said:

even if I think they way she says it is pointlessly verbally abusive

Over thecourse of the numerous threads aabout trerspassers demanding a ban on property owners having any right, property ownersd with ban-lines have been referred to as:

paranoid

inconsiderate sh*ts

fools

snipers

imbeciles

idiots

loonies

buckshot weilding porch sitters

poor people who never owned real property

people with no real life

people with mental issues

 

And many many many more wonderfully endearing terms. The Pro-trespass movement have EARNED the contempt in which I hold them a thousand times over.

 

9 minutes ago, Cinnamon Mistwood said:

and should be AR'd by the person it is directed against

I once told a person, that if they wanted to control who uses MY parcel, they should BUY it from me.

Another poster agreed with me.

Both posts were cancel cultured, for daring to suggest that the way to assume control of a parcel is to BUY it from the current owner. The person in question pursued and still pursues a policy of "What's mine is mine and what's yours ins mine too" to this day.