[what will it take for LL to actually do something]

10 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Sacrifice your entire SL social circle, all your hobbies, interests and investments in the platform .. sounds a lot like letting the bully win.

Victims of abuse, harassment and threats feeling like they have no recourse but to leave the platform is not and should not ever be an acceptable solution.

Sure but eliminating everyone that made you feel offended is also not the solution. People need to grow up around here.

[what will it take for LL to actually do something]

11 hours ago, Keesie Pelous said:

"call the police"...that doesn't actually address my question, does it?  why state "we will not tolerate harassment" if they actually DO tolerate harassment?

"There's no need for LL to get involved in disputes that you can solve yourself by using the block user function"...i'm certain that threats of violence go beyond a "dispute".  and i fail to see how expecting residents to block people is a better option than expecting LL to follow their own TOS. 

 

LL does not tolerate ill behaviour of any sort, but in order to not have to respond to each and every report of an alleged offense, they give you the tools and ability to manage your own experience with others in SL.

The tools provided are more than sufficient to handle 99.9% of the issues for people. The problem I see, over and over and over and over and over again in virtual worlds is people NOT using these tools, and PURPOSEFULLY not using these tools - and every time the situation escalates.

LL also does not get involved in the personal disputes of users - as they are numerous and petty in my experience, and if they 'punished' everyone that everyone wanted to be 'punished' in SL - there would be no one left.

11 hours ago, Keesie Pelous said:

and for the record, i doubt the twit involved has the means to carry out any threats.

 

Then don't worry about it. Block the user and be on with your Second Life. You already let it get too far that you even considered having to file an abuse report.

If there are so many in SL and other platforms that find it so easy to do it to me, for literally nothing - what is stopping you from empowering yourself with the tools LL has provided you?

1 hour ago, Keesie Pelous said:

and thats the problem.  you shouldnt have to expect to be griefed and you shouldnt have to expect them to do nothing.

Wrong, it's the internet, and misunderstandings are made, feelings are hurt, conflicts, disputes and disagreements will happen. You are going to have to accept this not only as a fact of participating in Second Life - but accepting it in your real life.

Both existences have tools in place for you to manage such encounters. Use them.

1 hour ago, Keesie Pelous said:

and if you can't imagine there are people on SL who do nothing but go around trying to cause problems, i'd have to figure you were new to SL.  my SL partner was hosting in a club and I was there with her.  some dude ive never had an interaction with before IMed me and started running his mouth.  He didn't like my response so he IMed my partner and started running his mouth to her.  the same dude went back to the club several hours later and ran his mouth to another hostess and a club manager.  he ended up getting banned from the club and all 4 of us sent an abuse report to LL.  3 days later the dude is back in all of our IMs.  now you're certainly free to imagine anything you want but just keep in mind, what you imagine isnt necessarily reality

 

58 minutes ago, Keesie Pelous said:

They have a means of reporting harassment.  so if they aren't actually going to do anything, why do either of those things?  people spend a lot of real world money on SL and if LL isn't actually going to enforce their own rules, they at least owe the people on SL a straight answer instead of pretending they won't tolerate something.  its funny, i have a friend on SL who made clothes and he made a shirt with RW design of a popular rock band on it and his account was banned immediately.  but it seems people report threats of violence and LL sits around with their thumbs up their butts.  the moral of the story here seems to be that unless LL could be sued for allowing something, they just don't care and thats a shame.  it explains why there are so many complaints about douchebags on SL.

IMs are harmless, words are harmless, and on the first offense - whether any of us would feel if it is warranted or not - you could have instantly BLOCKED them.

But you didn't, and on further provocation, you still didn't. Why not?

Instead of being a tattletale, or fighting some war - use BLOCK Instead, and it's over.

Will you use your BLOCK function or will you not? If not, then we are dealing with a whole other issue here.

[what will it take for LL to actually do something]

There's no need for LL to get involved in disputes that you can solve yourself by using the block user function.

Fun Fact: 99.9% of Second Life 'problems' can be solved with minimal effort using the block user function.

[How is this Allowed on MP - Obvious Copyright Infrigement]

57 minutes ago, Flea Yatsenko said:

People gravitate towards things that are familiar. If someone is looking for a band shirt in marketplace, and one is an extremely popular band, and another is one a content creator invented themselves, almost everyone will take the popular and familiar band. Copyright content harms original content builders.

Yep. One can be an innovative, creative and original artist and say try to sell a T-Shirt. People would think it is cool if you were a celebrity, or had some fame of some sort.

Then another artist simply makes fan art like Darth Vader stroking a Kitty Kat, or Heisenberg Face from Breaking Bad saying "Say my name", or of "Baby Yoda Playing Golf" and those T-Shirts will sell thousands Copyright infringement sells.

[Here are all the alts I deleted]

.

[Getting premium without a credit card?]

.

[I feel guilty for spending money on land and SL in general]

10 hours ago, Marianne Little said:

I spend about 44 US on land and the same amount on shopping. If I didn't have land, I would spend only half on SL. I do not need land to live in SL.

Do you ever think about this? I know some people spend many hundreds, so I am not comparing myself to them.

Did you sometimes stop having land and use only a sandbox? Or rent some small skybox for 100 L a week? Could you enjoy SL as much after that?

I think I would miss the land.

My economy in RL is not in danger. I pay all my bills. I have saved up over 10 K in the bank, just in case something happens. I tell myself that when I don't waste money in RL, I can give myself this SL treat. An example: If I am out and get thirsty, I do not buy a latte or a bottle of water. If I did not bring water with me, I go thirsty until I am home and can drink tap water.

I feel stupid when I worry about the play money I spend on SL. I think I am in a depressive period and look for things I can blame myself for.

I wouldn't presume to tell you whether you should feel guilty or not guilty about ANY action you do in your life.

Usually, the guilty feeling has a basis - and is something for you to figure out why you feel that way.  People can give you reasons why you shouldn't feel that way, and they're saying so to help you feel better - but it doesn't solve the issue.

The guilty feeling is a sign that we should be doing one thing, but we are doing the other - wouldn't matter what the catalyst or trigger to feel that way is.

I've at times in my life been doing something that was a distraction, trying to avoid something I should have been addressing, or something I should have been doing instead, and it may actually have nothing to do with the COST of the thing.

Think about it for a bit, see if you can find out where it's coming from, and deal with it - w/e it is that is nagging at you. Good luck.

[1 second Orb timing, is it necessary]

24 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

 Realize they aren't trying to annoy or hurt or grieve you.

This should be the base assumption of all Second Lifers, and to make decisions based on this, and balancing the need for security and privacy with respecting others enjoyment of the platform and to use security measures (or any object that might disrupt others) in accordance to this.

[SL viewer suggestion for pan and zoom - discussion]

1 hour ago, Quistess Alpha said:

ctrl+alt+click+drag on an object in SL works like alt+mmb over an object, then mmb+drag in blender.

Nice, thanks!

[1 second Orb timing, is it necessary]

17 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

IMO, these should be dealt with on a case to case basis instead of an overall change to the Mainland.   Since they ARE rarity, it seems it would effect less people overall.  Fix your orb, done.

How would you propose to this case by case?

I did suggest that I could probably do such a thing, by simply filing an Abuse Report. It might waste LL's time dealing with it (as the argument is currently that it is legal to have 0 second orbs) and hence why posting it here for them to consider was done. I also don't want to file it as 'Abuse' either - because that's not entirely fair either.

It's also not easy to pinpoint where the snipe comes from, as it is so fast - that one is sent home far before we know who or what parcel initiated the action - so couldn't even avoid it the next time should I find my way back to where I was originally before the ejection and teleport.

There is literally no defense against such things, especially if I'm doing a combo of looking around for fun, and seeing what's on the map, and in a couple cases even descending down towards a rental parcel and suddenly getting TP'd home

[1 second Orb timing, is it necessary]

43 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

I mean if we are gonna use an RL example. I am certainly not gonna wanna chit chat with someone who nonchalantly comes into my house. I am telling them to get out right away or I will call the cops and take them out by force. How is that any different than someone using an orb and kicking you home instantly? 

 

Only the most exceptional and extremely rare case is someone just going to walk into your house, and I also believe the majority of users in Second Life are doing the same thing, and if they go too far in doing so it is out of curiosity and nothing malicious.

Yet depending on the bylaws in your particular city, it is a reasonable expectation as part of a civil and free society in the West, that people are allowed reasonable access such as knocking on your door to say hello as a neighbour, or perhaps a Girl Guide is selling cookies, or a salesperson selling roofing or painting services wants to give you a business card, or another is dropping off a flyer, etc. Yes some people don't like that but most accept that it is a concession in a civil society, so don't automatically send the hounds against people or blow their head off for daring to knock on their door.

The analogy we're talking about is more like walking past someone's property, and your hand happens to cross their little white picket fence and they are are killed by a sentry gun on the roof.

One measure is reasonable and fair and still respects people's property and rights and allows the free movement of people in conducting business or non-malicious actions - and the other of course is clearly ridiculous.

3 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

And, aside from the fun of hearing each other talk, is the conversation doing anything more than chasing the same tired horse around the barnyard?

I think it may have started off as a practical problem needing a solution, and has morphed into a study of the thoughts and attitudes of Second Life users, and how that will affect us as a community moving forward.

exception: surpassing what is common or usual or expected, far beyond what is usual in magnitude or degree,deviating widely from a norm

relating to bell curves and generalization (on the fringes, not common, not average, exceptional)

as an argument: Arguing The Exception

eg. A troubled kid decides to fill a Super Soaker water gun with bleach and spray people in the face with it. An exceptional use but the Mayor calls for a citywide ban/non-sale on all Supersoakers.

 

[SL viewer suggestion for pan and zoom - discussion]

24 minutes ago, Bree Giffen said:

To pan and zoom the SL camera you press ALT and hold down the left mouse button on something and move your mouse around.  Using CTRL allows a pan up down instead of a pan zoom. 

I think that the part where you hold down the left mouse button can be removed where you could simply move the pointer over an object and press the ALT key to immediately pan and zoom by just moving the mouse. This removes the constant mouse button press which helps with carpal tunnel issues. It also makes laptop track pad usage a lot easier.

What do you think? Useful? Maybe an optional tick box to change this behavior? Is this already a hidden option somewhere?

I wished it replicated orbital movement around a selected object like an 3D program, or ease of use and going into a 'fly mode' without moving the avatar as another method.

Still not used to working in Blender, then trying to do something in SL and having to use the clunky cam move controls

[1 second Orb timing, is it necessary]

5 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

To this point, I've been riding along Route 9 for the past couple of hours.  I've yet to encounter any orbs let alone a 0 sec orb.  Take note, also, that my driving skills leave a lot to be desired.  I've veered off dozens of times and a few times on purpose.  Nothing.  Nada.

So, we're all discussing something of a rarity on mainland.  Why on earth would LL bother changing something that effects such a small percentage of people on BOTH sides of the discussion?

Because experiences may vary between people and their usage of the platform. As many have pointed out how they have allegedly been assaulted or otherwise put upon in one way or another - their experience on the platform may vary from others - and dismissing their concerns or denying their personal experience doesn't help to come to a solution.

If the OP did not experience this, or if it was truly a 'rare' occurrence then they probably wouldn't have bothered to post about it. Neither would I in my own recent post.

[1 second Orb timing, is it necessary]

The only 'force' I see exerted on anyone today is some legitimate 'explorer' or people traversing Mainland regions - with the expectation that LL's promise of 'exploration' and 'discovery' are met.

"Force", as defined in context as 'compulsion, or constraint exerted upon or against a person or thing' is objectively and observably and factually being exerted on random individuals, taking control of their avatars against their will  - and not 'reasonably' pushing them to a nearby parcel or safe parcel in the region - but ejecting them back to their home - which has been reported as severely affecting user experience in Second Life.

Nowhere in the OP or responses that request that orbs when used are set to a more reasonable delay 'forces' any land owner to do anything, other than be considerate of other's usage of the platform.

The claim that LL doesn't read forums or take people's experience into consideration when moderating, updating and improving the platform is false. If the posters who claim this truly believed there own words, they would never see another person's posts, requests or suggestions as such a threat - or they wouldn't fight so hard against it.

If they have the time to moderate the forums and especially the relatively rare 'hot' topics such as this one, it doesn't take much effort to write a note about both party's concerns and discuss it at the next platform staff meeting.

Force: Use of a compelling force that exerts one's will over another's control of their avatar - and without their consent. This can be physical as in real life, or by the use of technological means or process inworld.

strength or energy exerted or brought to bear : cause of motion or change : active power

violence, compulsion, or constraint exerted upon or against a person or thing

[1 second Orb timing, is it necessary]

. sorry better to stay on topic if possible

[1 second Orb timing, is it necessary]

A lot of pages and a lot of things said, when the most simplest of solutions could solve the issue, protect the privacy of those who need it the most, and to allow us 'explorers' to Explore and Discover as Second Life promises it's customers by;

- setting orb delays to minimum 15 seconds from within the API,  overriding any countering scripts.

Not one solid argument has been made as to why 15 seconds or more is not enough to attain their privacy or to secure their belongings, or stop someone sitting on their sofa.

Other solutions have been presented, I've presented my own, but in the end, sometimes the simplest solution is best - and the rest as clever as they might be - are just over-complicating things.

The state of things as it is for myself, is that I have no desire to 'explore' anymore, and the land that I rented and another that I purchased from 'exploring' I now only teleport to and from. I'm surrounded on all sides by ban lines, with only one side that is open to mobility and only because it is partially abandoned land and a small strange strip for sale beside it.

I repeat, for those who create and sell things, there have been many sales, rentals and purchases from 'exploring' mainland regions - artists,scripters, builders, renters, land sellers got a lot of business from me that way just coming across them (and as well as my network that used to be on SL).

The irony is that now I am forced to live as if I was in a private parcel, without needing one, because that's the experience. Teleporting in,teleporting out. Others teleporting in, teleporting out... There is absolutely NO point having an open world or for LL to maintain the logistics and resources to process it - if the majority of usage is teleporting in and teleporting out - along with practical usage/research/observation that people are leaning towards wanting privacy.

Although I am a person who is very much open and accepting of being open in a publicly accessible region, and others may want to get 100% privacy without paying for it - the result and practical experience would be better served by methods adopted by many other platforms at this point - serving up on-demand, single instanced 'experiences'.

This would take the privacy landowners issues and solve them by granting them what they wish - at whatever affordable price LL would offer - remove the compartmentalized parcel from the Mainland, opening it up to other users who are more open to a community experience, - thus removing the need for disrupting security measures - that will affect the positive experience of other users.

EDIT: LOL sad that I have to do this LOL but still kinda funny.

Words used in this post and their context
A 'solid' argument: of good substantial quality or kind, made firmly and well, prudent, serious in purpose or character

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

4 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Back on topic, I believe the source of many cases of incivility on the internet, in social media - is that sometimes individuals don't just want to be "heard", or even "agreed with".  Sometimes - and I have seen this more recently (not so much on this thread) - individuals want to both a) have their say, and b) have the last word.  

Now, I don't see that as any kind of "fault" - but it's almost as if we all need to wear caps showing our Myers-Briggs code to give everyone a clue.  Sometimes when speaking with another who must "have the last word", you don't know that at all and start to feel "attacked" (or perhaps they do).

For these cases, wouldn't it be great  to have a "mute conversation" function?  Unfortunately all the "mute"/"block" functions  on the forum at least, still show you breadcrumbs. "You have chosen to ignore" etc.  In my opinion, better mute/block functionality, including for "threads" (not just people) would be super awesome!

I'll give you a "for instance".  Let's say you had no problem with anyone in this thread - but you never wanted to see it again. There's no way to do that, it will show up in your "unread content" feed.  And if the current "block" functionality were extended to "threads", you'd still see an indication of the activity in "unread content"!

I think adding better mute/block - and adding it for threads not just people - would go a long way towards easing those who are "triggered" in the Forum.  

Heyo, another great idea from yours truly!

You guys are EXPERT at reframing things. Very interesting.

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

8 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

This you?

 

Can't stop can you?

Nearly every response you make is designed to incite a defensive response in  your target, no matter what it was that they said, and you frequently join dogpiles too.

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

And.. look at them dogpile... they can't stop.

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

 

Thanks, guys! I was losing my confidence there, due to Codex's harsh response. 
 

 

Please stop framing my posts as malicious, hostile, 'harsh' or any other portrayal that basically begs a defensive response - and is not very conducive to friendly discussion, which this should be. Constantly inciting someone else by making accusations to their motivations or portraying them (or anyone) in the illest of light is not 'civil' discussion.

You can respond to someone else's posts without having to poke me or others in the process.

Please stop, and address the ideas that someone presents, and stop the personal attacks. Thank you.

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

*Edit* Your use of "clearly" (underlined and all) comes across as caustic and sarcastic. What the heck did I do, except be sensitive? Be cool, man. You can do it!

 I am not responsible for your reaction to what I post - that is  your responsibility, not mine.

Unless I post a 😠 at  you, assuming the best of people's intent is best.

 

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

18 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Your concept of "clearly" may not match other's. I've seen you use "clearly" in other posts. Bad form, in my opinion. Like trying to shame people because you aren't clear, by insisting you are "clearly" clear.

This is so, so tedious.

Whether or not you were "clear" is irrelevant. I was providing an alternative viewpoint.

And I clarified the context in which I was using it. Clarifying or rephrasing a statement is a valid procedure in a conversation, or having to nitpick a word and agreeing on a definition so that conversation can be understood and continued. It may be tedious, but that's what happens sometimes while communicating with others.

I don't use words as 'concepts' nor do I make my own definitions for them. I use words that are defined in a world-respected dictionary so that we can all agree on their meaning and usage (context) so that we can comprehend the ideas presented.

Can we get back to discussing the topic or ideas now?

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

30 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

"Getting staff involved" - is also part of "encouraging the user to take personal responsibility".

The context I was using was "A personal decision or action is one you make on your own".

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

1 hour ago, Prokofy Neva said:

If ban or block or ignore or a security orb were enough to control my experience in SL, you'd never hear from me. But you do because griefers exploit not weaknesses of tools, but people's psychology and do social engineering.

So that's how they conceive of things like making alts with versions of my name or my business name so that there is "brand confusion". That's why they join groups that seem to be for a good cause, such as a group around a temple or church or mosque, and then wear the tag and spam racist rants at people.

That's why they join groups that are open or easily joined and then spam in them to tarnish my reputation or others.

That's why they spawn prims on no-autoreturn land that affects the whole sim. My autoreturn in a shared virtual world is not enough.

That's why they manage to talk their way into situations, playing on people's reluctance to be seen as censoring or canceling.

That's why they pick up causes like "Impeace Bush" that they believe are "bullet proof".

Etc. etc. etc.

I don't know Bansar but there are entire studies like Clay Shirky's "The Group is Its Own Worst Enemy on this problem (which I have written a rebuttal to).  Shirky was wildly touted by game professors long ago in 2006 and is forgotten today, interestingly.

Sure, don't take my opinions on the matter as absolute - I'm not a polarized person.

For myself I support a notion to reserve the extreme tools for extreme cases. When block and  mute is more than enough to eliminate a problem (for small offenses or misunderstandings) - then staff should be left alone, or calls to ban them is an over-reaction. Most issues can be dealt with by these tools. My argument was is that many don't use those tools BEFORE going to a more extreme measure. What can happen is that people can be framed in a much darker light than should be and have been subjected to over-discipline.

I've worked in complaint departments, and the customer will ALWAYS exaggerate their encounter, or depth of their frustration - it's a normal tactic to amplify to communicate that a wrong has  happened. I'm not criticizing that, it's just what happens and it takes a measure of patience and professionalism to first be able to empathize with the complainant, and then to assign an actual realistic level to the incident.

I am not disagreeing that in the case that you have presented, it is extreme and exceptionally hostile behaviour, and repeatedly - like bypassing security systems, blocks, using alts, etc - Of course that needs a bit more staff interaction.

Remember my argument first is 'give and encourage the user to take personal responsibility in managing their experience of the platform and others' - the most basic layers like block and mute, etc - then only get staff involved when it becomes behaviour that is sustained, bypasses, or goes to alts etc.

Like I said, if the large banhammer is used for every user or occasion not only is it unfair, but innocent people get mashed in the process as well.

Of course even the tools can be weaponized by nasty types if they want (group bans, sharing IP lists, etc) but that's a whole other topic.

1 hour ago, Prokofy Neva said:

If ban or block or ignore or a security orb were enough to control my experience in SL, you'd never hear from me. But you do because griefers exploit not weaknesses of tools, but people's psychology and do social engineering.

Yes, some people have become experts at 'skirting the rules' and that is also a form of trolling and griefing - and that's much harder to combat because there is nothing to report - and the reporter will seem deluded or paranoid.

1 hour ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I don't know Bansar but there are entire studies like Clay Shirky's "The Group is Its Own Worst Enemy on this problem (which I have written a rebuttal to).  Shirky was wildly touted by game professors long ago in 2006 and is forgotten today, interestingly.

That was a typo, but it kind of fits a bit haha. I've quickly looked up the book you cited and got a quick overview.

Clay Shirky - The Group is Its Own Worst Enemy (PDF)

I'll have to read it a bit more first, but yes it seems to address things that I have noticed in just the last 5 years or so, and with the advent of Sansar,  VR Chat where I noticed it the most enough to want to look up the psychology - I know it as "Early Groups Can be Toxic and Detrimental to Growth" kind of  "Community Manager" type knowledge, but this is similar in thought regarding how groups can work against themselves for positive change and why.

Can't comment on this too hard yet, haven't read it but will

Edit: Also a related resource in similar fashion and relating to the challenges of creating online worlds:

The Lessons Of LucasFilm's Habitat (Stanford U.)

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

What's interesting to me about this part is, depending on how one does business with Second Life, they (or Tilia) already have your RL ID!

And some of that is necessary, and is needed in some cases - if one is pulling an income out of SL - this is needed for tax purposes.

Also, many other corporations may have personal details. Yet they are all compartmentalized and so have (theoretical/ethical) limits on the use of said information.

What Provoky proposes is a UniqueUserID, which is not a new idea - but it aims to identify an individual worldwide and under ONE governing body - has far more implications and issues.

"The Right To Be Forgotten" or as how I would know it - practicing patience and forgiveness, is an important concept for us all - as we all screw up, we all lose it, we all do dumb things - and never being forgiven, never having our trespasses 'forgotten' - can cause great harm to the individual - and especially on a global basis.

Social Credit has this same aim, and is practiced widely in China. No second chances, no forgiveness. We either behave a certain way or get put out of society.

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

I think this topic 'discussion' in it's entirety will speak for itself, and how it relates to the OP, and what Philip has to deal with and the challenges.

["It's really, really hard to build a world" - Philip on Civility]

. I keep forgetting dealing with manipulators and weirdos never works out. I'll just report instead.