mainland Free: Graven Hearts Mainland AutoBan System - Hopefully stepping back from the nuclear option

[Gabriele Graves]

1 minute ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Good luck! Experience says, it's hard to keep things on topic. (Heck, you already had a Mole step in kinda, at least to comment.)

Give people a place to complain and argue about a topic they feel passionate about, and it's hard to stop them. 

Thanks though I felt it was useful to actually clear up any confusion about why I started the topic and ask nicely.

[Love Zhaoying]

2 hours ago, Abnor Mole said:

I think there is a lot of hyperbole going on

I just realized, that "hyperbole" is the same term I often use! Yay!!!

[Love Zhaoying]

Aren't we "discouraged" from using "Auto-Ban" systems due the various reasons discussed?

[Scylla Rhiadra]

2 hours ago, Abnor Mole said:

Consider also the possibility that extreme reactions tends to elicit responses. I don't personally know many people who have problems with greifers but the ones who do I notice tend to do things that actually attract them. Specifically, people who grief want to provoke a response and live rent free not on your land, but it your head. If you give them that they will keep coming back. Is it a possibility that your problem isn't from travelers but instead with a handful of actual griefers targeting you because they know they have gotten under your skin?

When the griefers employ tools that make your parcel partly or wholly inaccessible or unusable -- as for instance in my case by placing a self-replicating attack bot on a neighbouring parcel where rez perms have been left on, with the result that anyone approaching or standing at the front of the parcel ends up being orbited and a quarter of the parcel obscured in smoke and flashing particles -- they're not just trying to "get under my skin." They are trying (with some success) to make my parcel unusable.

Some griefers aren't merely "annoying," as  you sort of seem to be suggesting. They are outright destructive. What's more, they frequently deliberately target those least empowered or capable of responding well, much as RL bullies go after those who they know are least capable of fighting back.

I think it's important that LL provides some tools that often (although by no means always) offer some relief from abuse, harassment, and griefing: we need and should employ these where appropriate and effective to do so. 

But there is from some people this kind of laissez-faire attitude towards griefers that implies that they should be just left to do their thing, with the onus left entirely upon the target of their attacks. Being harassed? Block them! -- which of course, far from de-incentivizing their griefing, demonstrates that they have succeeded. Other abusive situations are met with suggestions like "go to a different place" or "just log off" -- all of which, if not actually rewarding the griefer by leaving them in possession of the field, certainly do nothing to discourage their behaviour.

I agree that one should try to keep one's cool and not let griefers get too much under one's skin. But I grow tired of this tendency to throw all responsibility on to the shoulders of the victim, who generally ends up finding their Second Life experience constrained and restricted in some way while the griefer skips off on their merry way, without consequences, to their next victim.

Maybe it's this tendency to not punish griefing, but demand that the target adjust their experience, that actually most encourages griefing?

Just a thought.

[Theresa Tennyson]

8 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

 

Maybe it's this tendency to not punish griefing, but demand that the target adjust their experience, that actually most encourages griefing?

Just a thought.

That would be a good point if we were actually talking about griefing. The thing is... we aren't, despite certain people's choice of words.

[diamond Marchant]

On 1/20/2024 at 10:10 PM, Gabriele Graves said:

One sentiment often expressed by travelers is that they would prefer banlines because those are at least viewable and potentially avoidable.

Testing Banline Visibility/Avoidability of the Graven Hearts Mainland AutoBan System

When tested, "ban by name" banlines used  by the Graven Hearts system are NOT visible until the banned avatar reaches the border of the banned parcel.

Methodology

A Graven Hearts object was rezzed at 3800m, deeded to group and turned on.

A non-group member alt approached the banned parcel from another region. Banlines were not visible until the alt reached the banned parcel border. A "you are banned" message also appeared in local chat.

Using Second Life Server 2023-11-07.6790647783 and Firestorm 6.6.17 (70368) Dec 10 2023 18:36:33 (64bit / SSE2).

Conclusion

The banlines encountered by the alt were NOT avoidable because they were not visible prior to reaching the banned parcel border. Consequently, the Graven Hearts system affords no advantage over orbs with respect to visibility.

 

Edited January 24 by diamond Marchant

[Scylla Rhiadra]

4 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

That would be a good point if we were actually talking about griefing. The thing is... we aren't, despite certain people's choice of words.

"We" may not be, but Abnor quite explicitly was, and it was to him I was replying.

[Theresa Tennyson]

15 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Being harassed? Block them! -- which of course, far from de-incentivizing their griefing, demonstrates that they have succeeded.

... How?

(Unless you yelled, "I'm blocking you!" beforehand, of course.)

[Rowan Amore]

4 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

That would be a good point if we were actually talking about griefing. The thing is... we aren't, despite certain people's choice of words.

Abnor certainly was talking specifically about griefing in the response Scylla quoted.  Whether you think people continually entering someone's private property to harass is griefing is your perspective.  If someone from the forums deliberately looked for my parcel to harass me in ANY way, I'd call that griefing.

[Gabriele Graves]

7 minutes ago, diamond Marchant said:

Testing Banline Visibility/Avoidability of the Graven Hearts Mainland AutoBan System

Conclusion

The banlines encountered by the alt were NOT avoidable because they were not visible prior to reaching the banned parcel border. Consequently, the Graven Hearts system affords no advantage over orbs with respect to visibility.

 

This is an issue to take up with LL as it's an issue with their banline system and not the system I have developed.  I already stated several times that this not perfect because the banline system isn't perfect but under the circumstances where banlines are visible, they have visibility where orbs do not.

You are wrong the fact that there is no benefit because they are very obviously visible in more circumstances than orbs.  In addition the banlines prevent you from going on to land you don't have access to regardless of visibility.

Edited January 24 by Gabriele Graves

[Rowan Amore]

1 minute ago, Gabriele Graves said:

This is an issue to take up with LL as it an issue with their banline system and not the system I have developed.  I already stated several times that this not perfect because the banline system isn't perfect but under the circumstances where banlines are visible, they have visibility where orbs do not.

You are wrong the fact that there is no benefit.  The banlines prevent you from going on to land you don't have access to regardless of visibility.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the banlines just stop your progress.and don't send you anywhere?  Orbs generally send you either home or to the corner of the region.

[Gabriele Graves]

3 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the banlines just stop your progress.and don't send you anywhere?  Orbs generally send you either home or to the corner of the region.

That is correct.  There is no teleport home with banlines.

[Qie Niangao]

19 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but the banlines just stop your progress.and don't send you anywhere? 

Now that you ask, I wonder: If an avatar crosses into a region at a parcel with the autoban system, the banline will pop up and the avatar will suddenly be on a prohibited parcel. If the banline is added manually, they get 15 seconds to scram after which it's the same as llEjectFromLand, but I haven't tested what happens with llAddToLandBanList as in this system.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

31 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

... How?

(Unless you yelled, "I'm blocking you!" beforehand, of course.)

I almost never block people myself, but my sense is that most people (including me, on those rare occasions) do actually inform the person they've been blocked? The alternative, of course, is to leave them, oblivious to that fact, abusing you while under the impression that they've cowed you into silence -- the only remedy for which impression is, of course, to tell them they've been blocked.

In social situations, such as abuse occurring in group chat or at a club with others present, blocking them merely leaves them free to continue to attack you publicly, free of any response or self-defence from yourself, because you of course don't know what they might be saying.

[Zalificent Corvinus]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I just realized, that "hyperbole" is the same term I often use! Yay!!!

Congratulations, you're not the only person using that term to describe any post that disagrees with you.

 

[Arielle Popstar]

55 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Maybe it's this tendency to not punish griefing, but demand that the target adjust their experience, that actually most encourages griefing?

Just a thought.

Might be a point if your experience as a home/parcel owner equates to what another poster has mentioned for griefing stats as a result of being protected by a 0 second orb. To me the way they operate seems to create more potential for further griefing then it resolves.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Arielle Popstar said:

Might be a point if your experience as a home/parcel owner equates to what another poster has mentioned for griefing stats as a result of being protected by a 0 second orb. To me the way they operate seems to create more potential for further griefing then it resolves.

If I understand what you're saying here correct, that again is sort of victim-blaming, isn't it? 

If your response to someone's legitimate use of an orb (and whatever your feelings about 0 second orbs, they are permitted) is to launch into a round of griefing, then your response is inappropriate, and you are to blame for that. Triggering griefing because you've done something the griefer doesn't like does not absolve them of ultimate responsibility for actions they have chosen to take.

[Istelathis]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I just realized, that "hyperbole" is the same term I often use! Yay!!!

I call hyper bowl on your comment!

 

/me places down Hurper Bowl card..  

 

Lets see you beat that!

Edited January 24 by Istelathis

[Arielle Popstar]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

If I understand what you're saying here correct, that again is sort of victim-blaming, isn't it? 

If your response to someone's legitimate use of an orb (and whatever your feelings about 0 second orbs, they are permitted) is to launch into a round of griefing, then your response is inappropriate, and you are to blame for that. Triggering griefing because you've done something the griefer doesn't like does not absolve them of ultimate responsibility for actions they have chosen to take.

Some of us see that being kicked home for accidently touching their land boundary or flying over top of their LL mandated property rights ie 60 meters, as going beyond what the penalty for doing so should incur. At that point I see that the Land Owner has now escalated the situation to where they themselves have become a griefer and as such by your own words is not absolved for the responsibility of their actions.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Arielle Popstar said:

Some of us see that being kicked home for accidently touching their land boundary or flying over top of their LL mandated property rights ie 60 meters, as going beyond what the penalty for doing so should incur. At that point I see that the Land Owner has now escalated the situation to where they themselves have become a griefer and as such by your own words is not absolved for the responsibility of their actions.

I personally am not a fan of 0 second orbs -- but whether you see people who use them as "griefers" isn't really relevant, as they are permitted. You are advocating for an "illegal" response to something that is actually "legal." 

And honestly, even if 0 second orbs were illegal, an equally illegal response would still be illegitimate and inappropriate. "He started it!" is really not a very good justification for doing something you know to be wrong.

[Love Zhaoying]

7 minutes ago, Istelathis said:

I call hyper bowl on your comment!

 

 

So bright, like the Sun! 

Aren't at least one of those DBZ characters supposed to be like "gods"?

I'm like..bright..Sun..Sungod..Ra..

It's a bowl of "Ra Men"!

 

 

[Rowan Amore]

4 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Some of us see that being kicked home for accidently touching their land boundary or flying over top of their LL mandated property rights ie 60 meters, as going beyond what the penalty for doing so should incur. At that point I see that the Land Owner has now escalated the situation to where they themselves have become a griefer and as such by your own words is not absolved for the responsibility of their actions.

Then this new system is the perfect thing.  It doesn't bounce you home or anywhere.  It just bounces you off.  Is.that griefing?

[Love Zhaoying]

I re-read the OP recently, and it is actually difficult to tell from the OP if any discussion is desired at all, or this thread was really just intended to offer the free product.

Sorry @Gabriele Graves, that's how it appeared to me when I tried a "close reading".

But then again, I can be pretty darn dense.

 

Edited January 24 by Love Zhaoying

[Istelathis]

20 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

So bright, like the Sun! 

Aren't at least one of those DBZ characters supposed to be like "gods"?

I'm like..bright..Sun..Sungod..Ra..

It's a bowl of "Ra Men"!

 

 

Pasta be upon you.

 

---

So as to not completely derail thread, from the derail, of the derail, I do think Graven Hearts is a good idea for people who want privacy and would rather not have people teleported out instantly.  I look forward to seeing how well it functions for people, but remain cautious as to what sort of problems may occur yet that we are currently unaware of, such unintended consequences - perhaps such as Bellisseria suddenly having ban lines popping up (if that could occur, I'm not sure) by trying to duplicate the system.

Edited January 24 by Istelathis

[Arielle Popstar]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I personally am not a fan of 0 second orbs -- but whether you see people who use them as "griefers" isn't really relevant, as they are permitted. You are advocating for an "illegal" response to something that is actually "legal." 

Well I think that they are permitted is questionable considering the Lindens do not allow them in Belliserea? and as such they at best are tolerated on the Mainland under some unstated justification or maybe them just waiting to hear enough complaints about them to finally ban their use on the mainland too.

Quote

And honestly, even if 0 second orbs were illegal, an equally illegal response would still be illegitimate and inappropriate. "He started it!" is really not a very good justification for doing something you know to be wrong.

And that goes for both parties. You say you are a landowner, do you see the degree of harassment Zalificent says she does?