Ann Otoole Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 gets confusing eh? 1. open a jira to make people ejected from a land group get immediately ejected so they cannot keep being a problem. Solves the issue at hand. 2. Open a jira for a social group type that is not tied to land. It is a communication group and will be like twitter/plurk and optimized accordingly. Make sense? eta: the amount of work done for land groups is incredible. Everyone entering an area has to be checked etc. Think about it please. There needs to be a seperate social group type not connected to land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RudolphUkka Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ann Otoole wrote: Open a jira for a social group type that is not tied to land. It is a communication group and will be like twitter/plurk and optimized accordingly. Does a Group HAVE to be tied to land at the moment then? *** Rudi *** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Otoole Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 There is code that fires. it needs to be made seperate. This is an ancient issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ann Otoole wrote: gets confusing eh? 1. open a jira to make people ejected from a land group get immediately ejected so they cannot keep being a problem. Solves the issue at hand. 2. Open a jira for a social group type that is not tied to land. It is a communication group and will be like twitter/plurk and optimized accordingly. Make sense? eta: the amount of work done for land groups is incredible. Everyone entering an area has to be checked etc. Think about it please. There needs to be a seperate social group type not connected to land. I have two land groups.. I have thirty-two others that are not tied to any land at all. Are you saying that I should get rid of the other thirty-two because they are not being used for their intended purpose? ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Otoole Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 No. I am saying there needs to be a social comms group type that is never tied to land. Therefore regions never have to even look at the comms groups at all. I.e.; as is, every step you take in a region has to be examined by the region to see if you are in the proper group. Please extrapolate on this fact of simulator life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pannie Paperdoll Posted November 15, 2011 Author Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ok.... the group being abused or not issue that Ann has aside.. what is live help actually supposed to do?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Pannie Paperdoll wrote: Ok.... the group being abused or not issue that Ann has aside.. what is live help actually supposed to do?? Restart sims? ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pannie Paperdoll Posted November 15, 2011 Author Share Posted November 15, 2011 Well if thats all its there for... talk about a waste of money on LL's part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Otoole Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 You canot do anything about it until you enter a jira to make it so ejected people are immediately ejected and cannot keep spamming/talking in group chat until they get logged off. You cannot do anything about it unless you enter the jira request and get enough watchers for LL to deal with it. So... While you are at it then enter the jira for social networking groups not tied to land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ann Otoole wrote: No. I am saying there needs to be a social comms group type that is never tied to land. Therefore regions never have to even look at the comms groups at all. I.e.; as is, every step you take in a region has to be examined by the region to see if you are in the proper group. Please extrapolate on this fact of simulator life. And all I'm saying is that groups shouldn't be tied to land at all... but the solution isn't that there should be separate social groups, but a different mechanism, entirely separate from groups, for dictating the distribution of land. Connecting land ownership with groups was a mistake from the start. Somehow, I get the feeling that we are both saying the same thing from different points of view. ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ann Otoole Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Dresden Ceriano wrote: Ann Otoole wrote: No. I am saying there needs to be a social comms group type that is never tied to land. Therefore regions never have to even look at the comms groups at all. I.e.; as is, every step you take in a region has to be examined by the region to see if you are in the proper group. Please extrapolate on this fact of simulator life. ... Somehow, I get the feeling that we are both saying the same thing from different points of view. ...Dres rofl yes. we are in sync. But we need an uprising to get LL to make land groups and social nets seperate. Oh and deal with when some person gets kicked from any group they are immediately kicked. How old is this issue anyway? Older than me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Well, I'm glad we got that settled. And with that said... I'm going to sleep... it's way, way past my bedtime... lol. ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ziggy21 Slade Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Cinnamon Mistwood wrote: Wow! That is almost the exact same script I heard when I contacted Live Support for a completely unrelated topic. They also didn't answer my question. I got a response and solution faster from a friend on SLums. I was then able to pass the answer to Live Support for the next time that issue came up. Somehow, that seems a little backwards. Just to try and return this to the more central topic... Yup and me, almost exactly the same script for another issue and its been the same every time I use the service. This is supposed to be one of the perks of being premium and yet without fail they tell you to raise a ticket. I would like to hear from anyone who has actually had an issue fixed via live chat, anyone?, anyone at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ziggy21 Slade wrote: Cinnamon Mistwood wrote: Wow! That is almost the exact same script I heard when I contacted Live Support for a completely unrelated topic. They also didn't answer my question. I got a response and solution faster from a friend on SLums. I was then able to pass the answer to Live Support for the next time that issue came up. Somehow, that seems a little backwards. Just to try and return this to the more central topic... Yup and me, almost exactly the same script for another issue and its been the same every time I use the service. This is supposed to be one of the perks of being premium and yet without fail they tell you to raise a ticket. I would like to hear from anyone who has actually had an issue fixed via live chat, anyone?, anyone at all? I got a sim restarted once when I was ghosted... lol. ...Dres (It did work.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venus Petrov Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Interesting. The last two times I contacted Live Help I did not have a Scout on the line. Both times it was to inquire why the sim I live on had been offline for more than one hour. They were able to help me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RudolphUkka Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ann Otoole wrote: There is code that fires. it needs to be made seperate. This is an ancient issue. Are you saying that it IS possible to use a Land Group as a Social Group by there being no land ownership involved? What then is your moral stance on the use of Land groups as Social Groups in this way, if there is no opportuity for fraudulent behaviour by members relating to land? Is it just a conceptual issue? Or is your abstruse and uninformative allusion to "code that fires" a short hand for some sort of stalking capability that LL has built in to the Group management mechanisms that might allow malefactors to track Social Group members without them being aware of it? That it is an ancient issue is of no help to me or any of the other newer members of SL who may not have been around as long as you, and I feel that if you are bringing unequivocal opinions ("it needs to be made separate") to these forums you might have the courtesy to explain the basis for them, rather than dismiss the entirely understandable ignorance of others as irrelevant. I am beginning to feel that this is less of a discussion than a crusade on your part. *** Rudi *** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knowl Paine Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 I agree :smileywink: To: Dresden, I agree, live chat should have mentioned the Forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carole Franizzi Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Oh my. Well, at this point I'm guessing its function - even in this extremely reduced and limited capacity - is to be able to use its feeble existence as a selling point for premium membership. I imagine when people sign on for that, they assume they'll get talked through their issues without any delay, not simply told to use the same routes open to non-paying clients. Look on the bright side - she was awfully polite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carole Franizzi Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 RudolphUkka wrote: Ann Otoole wrote: There is code that fires. it needs to be made seperate. This is an ancient issue. Are you saying that it IS possible to use a Land Group as a Social Group by there being no land ownership involved? What then is your moral stance on the use of Land groups as Social Groups in this way, if there is no opportuity for fraudulent behaviour by members relating to land? Is it just a conceptual issue? Or is your abstruse and uninformative allusion to "code that fires" a short hand for some sort of stalking capability that LL has built in to the Group management mechanisms that might allow malefactors to track Social Group members without them being aware of it? That it is an ancient issue is of no help to me or any of the other newer members of SL who may not have been around as long as you, and I feel that if you are bringing unequivocal opinions ("it needs to be made separate") to these forums you might have the courtesy to explain the basis for them, rather than dismiss the entirely understandable ignorance of others as irrelevant. I am beginning to feel that this is less of a discussion than a crusade on your part. *** Rudi *** I would have thought if you rent land, rather than buying, the issue doesn't present itself. I have several groups but have only ever rented land from privates. So even if they "defrauded" me, all they'd gain would be the right to pay the rent. Or am I missing some important point? If I'm not missing a point, Ann's rather scary tale of having your land stolen (wonder what happened to those who had this occur to them? Did LL sort it out?), then it's a good argument in favour of renting and not purchasing if you intend having groups. Would I be incorrect in saying that it's not so much a case of clients abusing a system (i've been in SL for over 3 years and it looks like I had never even understood this risk existed), but of LL offering a service which is a tad defective? I mean - if I splashed out and bought a sim and some nasty rotter stole it from me because the system isn't foolproof, I'd be slightly annoyed to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Void Singer Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 oh FFS, it's a bug, one that's been known forever... ejecting an av from a group doesn't remove them from group chat, because it doesn't reinitialize the chat handle which is already being held on the persons viewer... as long as they have the active handle, they can message the group (in effect this last till they log out). this should be solved by chat moderation controls for groups, which should be available from the chat participants list for group members with moderation powers. use them before ejection. as to the OP's actual question, Live help should have mentioned the above, at least the part about moderation, but generally I've only found live help to be useful for quickly getting a region reboot, or cleanups of griefer trash after they've been booted from a public area. They don't appear to have any any access to AR reports nor ability to act on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ann Otoole wrote: It is absolutelty certain groups in SL were primarily intended for land management purpose and work flawlessly in that regard. If customers want a seperate type of group for social networking then they need to enter a jira feature request for a social networking group type that is not connected to land rights. Might it be more accurate to say that they were "originally" intended for land management but since then Linden Lab allowed the expanded use of groups for social networking. I did a brief search on the topic and while I could find no 'official' statements regarding the purpose of groups, I did find this: http://secondlife.com/community/groups/ "Groups that congregate around any topic," sounds very social to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RudolphUkka Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Does this mean that Ann's perception may not be the official line? Should I henceforth refrain from ARing members of Social Groups inworld? Should I start a thread asking for suggestions how I might be able to compensate those Social Groups and their members whom I have already reported? *** Rudi *** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Void Singer Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 as an addendum, Live chat is apparently not allowed to push the reset buttun during rollouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 RudolphUkka wrote: Does this mean that Ann's perception may not be the official line? Should I henceforth refrain from ARing members of Social Groups inworld? Should I start a thread asking for suggestions how I might be able to compensate those Social Groups and their members whom I have already reported? *** Rudi *** Asking me this may be like asking George Carlin what penance should you serve. But I am also reminded of Martin Luther. “I cannot choose but adhere to the word of God, which has possession of my conscience; nor can I possibly, nor will I even make any recantation, since it is neither safe nor honest to act contrary to conscience! Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God! Amen.” What does your conscience say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RudolphUkka Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Perrie Juran wrote:What does your conscience say? I am afraid that I have a very self-serving and pragmatic conscience and it is whispering in my ear that I should point those that suffered in the direction of Ann's blog. *** Rudi *** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now