Jump to content

Gabriele Graves

Resident
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,271

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    5

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Gabriele Graves

  1. Gabriele Graves
    I will consider adding this feature. This is a very useful observation. Thank you.
  2. Gabriele Graves
    Thank you Scylla, the context of your responses was perfectly reasonable. Generally though to all posters, discussion of griefing is definitely off topic as far as I'm concerned. Thanks for the encouragement about my system. There has been precious little of it, some but far more complaints than even the constructive criticism I had hoped for.
  3. Gabriele Graves
    Yes, as accomplished. The system works solely within the banline system as created by LL themselves. This is extremely doubtful as most people with zero-second orbs are checking every second. Simply not true. The avatar enters the region on the waterway. All parcels using the system put up their banlines and said avatar will see those banlines as they get close. Whether or not they are unseated/vehicle auto-returned is dependent on a completely different setting "object entry". This is the case for any banline use. You are no worse off in a boat than with anyone putting up general banlines from the about land dialog. Stop spreading misinformation. They are no more a booby trap than another other banline use despite your inflammatory use of language.
  4. Gabriele Graves
    Discussion about the system and possible improvements where it's feasible, yes. Even discussion about potential pitfalls. Not discussion about whether banlines or orbs themselves are inherently good or bad. Also not a discussion about shaming/blaming land owners for the access choices they want or trying to get people to change their choices.
  5. Gabriele Graves
    That is correct. There is no teleport home with banlines.
  6. Gabriele Graves
    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.
  7. Gabriele Graves
    Thanks though I felt it was useful to actually clear up any confusion about why I started the topic and ask nicely.
  8. Gabriele Graves
    Orbs in general, including my system would be completely unnecessary if general banlines were capable of going up as high as orbs can detect and ban. If that could be configurable as a range for the land owner, that would actually be perfect and another example of everybody wins because those who want an even less severe option could have it. Sadly, I don't think LL will do that, I would love to be wrong and happily retire this option if we had that. =================================================== Now about the topic I started: This topic is about compromise but not in the way that some are thinking. If you want people to choose an option that is less severe for others, you have to offer something that is better for them as well. What I see a lot of in this thread are sentiments that only one side in all this should have to make the all the compromises which leaves them with less. The compromise I started the topic for is not for anyone to have to lose anything but both parties to gain something. Any discussion of people having to cave in to having have people fly over their land is off-topic as far as I'm concerned. So I would ask that people stay on topic which to reiterate yet again is to give back some visual clues, no matter how imperfect, to travelers about the boundaries without taking away the access control that some land owners wish to have. This topic is not about people having to make flyovers possible. Again, please, everyone, keep to the topic I started and don't use this as a platform to try to strong-arm/shame others from the their choices.
  9. Gabriele Graves
    You forgot wandering around - that's up there with riskiest as people roam all over the place.
  10. Gabriele Graves
    Great, problem solved then. Let's hear no more about mainland being a problem for travelers.
  11. Gabriele Graves
    As we are all aware by now that this kind of information is anecdotal data and not conclusive evidence. The great thing is not it doesn't matter which point of view is right or wrong. If there are still a lot of zero-second orbs then this might make some people abandon them and if there aren't a lot of people using zero-second orbs anymore but instead have land that is open to public traversal then they aren't likely to adopt this system which doesn't provide open public land by design. So either way, win-win. If Abnor is correct then if the people of the forum could stop complaining about zero-second orbs all the time that would be awfully nice because you will just keep make yourselves look like idiots. You know who I'm talking about. K' thx.
  12. Gabriele Graves
    Oh right! It's just the question marks you wrote here made it seem as if you needed confirmation of that:
  13. Gabriele Graves
    Sorry, I went to bed after I sent my "toast posts" Toasts are popups but they're not just for chat, some are for group notices, system notifications, etc. All of those things come down to being shown by one of three types of toasts. There are obvious and easy options for redirecting some of the things the things that would go into toasts to chat/IM insted or turning off them completely but in the case of some of the system notifications, such as the lsl ban messages, it is anything but obvious or easy and so you instead have to hide one of the three basic types if you want rid of them which of course takes out all messages of that type. I also found out with this exercise that the basic toast type that is used when you are added to either land parcel list is different from the toast you get when you bump into a banline. How strange is that?
  14. Gabriele Graves
    Again, our perspectives differ on this. You are welcome to your opinion but it appears to very much differ with the sentiments around orbs on mainland from the evidence I've seen.
  15. Gabriele Graves
    I've also found out that toasts can be disabled completely on FS by setting their "life" to zero. Obviously this affects all toasts of each type but may be solution when traveling: As you can see there are three different types of toast with three different lifetimes.
  16. Gabriele Graves
    After some further testing, I believe I know what is going on with the with the "You have been banned indefinitely" messages for my testing account on Firestorm. I was sure that it must have been an alert and that I must have disabled the message in the Notifications sections of Preferences but like @Qie Niangao I couldn't find it when I went back. They are actually system toasts. On Firestorm, there is an option to show them above other windows and I have this turned off. The toast is appearing underneath another dialog and I didn't notice. I also didn't notice that it output the same message to the chat window because I don't have that displayed that all the time. The debug option for this is FSShowToastsInFront which suggests that this is a Firestorm only option. At this point I have no idea if the same thing exists on the official viewer or where it would be as it's been so many years since I've used it for any length of time. Not sure what viewer @Qie Niangao is using but maybe a related reason?
  17. Gabriele Graves
    We will have to disagree on this. So far nobody else is doing anything to try to shift the needle one way or the other, not LL, not other orb makers, nobody. All we have are orb wars, in the forums and inworld, again and again. So I stepped up and gave of myself to try to help. That's it, my only motive. It's more likely that the impact will be minimal. I should be so lucky to convince enough zero-orb users to change. It would be a nice problem to have. Perhaps change comes by degrees? Someone adopting this is already stepping back from a very hated edge and gaining something in the process. If that's as far as they will go, then I'm good with that. The alternative is that they stick to their orbs until the end of SL or until some one takes them away. I know which alternative I would rather have.
  18. Gabriele Graves
    I think that like a lot of things in SL, there are layers of history, kludges and other things that really obscure the original intentions anyway. Just the example of "You have been granted access to this land" If you are not on the parcel where you were added, what land is that? It's always been possible to add someone not on the parcel to either list. So one way or another, a mistake was made. In my opinion, consistency isn't something that's notable enough about SL to talk about "intent" in a lot of cases.
  19. Gabriele Graves
    I think it's LL's responsibility to fix this inconsistency, preferably by removing the notification from scripting. There really isn't any need for it. If a person is on the land when banned they get the ejected message anyway. Really the only notification that makes sense are when you were on the parcel when banned and not when you aren't.
  20. Gabriele Graves
    @Abnor Mole You are never going to convince anyone on mainland with a zero-second orb and no public access to allow people over their land unless you change policy *and* force them to do so. This system is only aimed at those people. If we would prefer those people stay with those orbs, then so be it. With all due respect, this doesn't make anything worse in any way with respect to this goal. Nobody argues that travelers would generally prefer access over the land of others but that is not the point here as they don't have it today and they will not have it tomorrow either for people who use zero-second orbs to disallow all public access.
  21. Gabriele Graves
    Fair enough, I admit I skim read some of the posts. I also saw the bit in the OP where you said you unfriended them which usually indicates you don't want any further conversation with them, hence my response. I missed the bit further down where you explained they were a colleague. Sorry about that. Anyway, glad you got an answer you are happy with.
  22. Gabriele Graves
    I've added this to my marketplace store:
  23. Gabriele Graves
    If you block the person creating the conferences, you will never be included as far as I know.
  24. Gabriele Graves
    Nothing is perfect. The solution to suppressing the message is within each user's control and is available on every viewer as far as I can tell. This is unlike many other inconveniences which often don't leave the affected user with any recourse. There is nobody that has to suffer these messages unnecessarily. Remember this is meant to be an alternative to zero-second orbs that teleport home and stop all stranger access: These orbs are always invisible and they are not just hard to detect, it is not possible to detect them. There is no flyover with these orbs either. Banlines visibility can be turned off too but you still get the advantage of just being stopped at the parcel boundary, still no teleport home unlike the other invisible orbs. I would have though that any issues with banlines are much less of an issue than a teleport home. So on all fronts in contrast the way this system works is an improvement to that. I cannot stress this enough but this really isn't a solution for people who want to give strangers access to their land in any way. It is a solution to convince people with a nuclear option zero-second orb that keeps all strangers off their land to choose something more benign. Comparisons with orbs that are designed for allowing stranger access are like comparing apples and oranges, the only thing they have in common is that they are fruit or in this case, security devices. I do have a way more comprehensive security solution that I use on my own parcels using this banline concept which is designed for random stranger access and only operates a blacklist. It even allows privacy zones with temporary adding of banlines when a zone is breached. It has all the bells and whistles, so comprehensive security can be achieved using just banlines. However it is a lot of work making this into something that the average user can use easily. This is not something I am interested in giving away/selling to others. I am not interested in entering the security orb business. I would prefer to leave that to others. Again, this is just to try to convince people with the most hated kind of security orbs to step back a notch and give them a better option.
  25. Gabriele Graves
    You can block all conference calls in Firestorm as outlined in this post:
×
×
  • Create New...