PeachJubilee

Rival Destiny wrote: Well I suppose that's the part I missed. I didn't see anyone in here state that you can make an object or a link set no perms without adding something. I think when anyone has spoken about a no perm object, they have done so without discussing how it was made. At least, I totally missed the comments where anyone has said otherwise. Bottom line, it's not against TOS to do this. If LL wanted you to be able to make an item no copy and no trans at the same time, you could uncheck both these perms for the next owner, at the same time in the edit menu. But you can't because the permission system does not allow this. Merging two items together for the purpose of working around this limitation in the perms system sounds a lot like circumventing a limititation of the perms system. It's against the TOS to circumvent the perms system. This particular bottom line lies beneath muddy and opaque waters.

Ricky40 wrote: Thannks for the mesh idea, no I was not plannig to flash someone.....why.....? We were alpha layers under mesh clothes. The layer makes the bits of your avatar that are supposed to fit under the mesh invisible, so if you are using a mesh trenchcoat you probably will not be able to flash anyone.

Flea Yatsenko wrote: I agree. I think there's not enough risk involved with posting to the marketplace in general, and that's why we see so many things that shouldn't be posted where they are. Actually it's not a problem of too little risk, but of a low differentiation between risk faced by good faith actors and risk faced by deliberate cheats. You can list items in good faith and get yourself treated exactly like a deliberate cheat. This is little incentive to obey the rules no matter what the consequences, since even if you obey them the consequences are still risked. Add into that the low chances of getting caught when deliberately cheating, then even if the penatly were high, there is just too little difference in chances of being "punished" regardless of intent, that those inclined to cheat will not be discouraged.

Good advice Naughty Caramel, although I'd not jump to a character test without taking off any tattoo layers first. Tattoo layers commonly cause bake problems when logging in for some reason, so taking them off and doing a quick "rebake" often works to resolve clouding at login.

Moriarty Belgar wrote: Well I never said someone modified the bridge and gave him a bad copy, I'll be the first to admit that I didn't look at the code. What I'm saying is that there is a possibility that there is a weakness in the code, and yes, even with a thousand eyes it can be overlooked because someone can look at something at a totally new angle, think along the lines of Fulton and the steam engine the parts had been around for almost two thousand years, but he was the one smart enough to put them together. Basically what I am saying, do not discount something until it can absolutely disproven. I mean I can come up with another explanation that is just as scary and just as plausible. LL's authentication server was hacked and before the intruder got cut-off Beowul's main was one multiple accounts that was taken over, then the first time it was logged in by the hacker, a modified bridge was placed in the inventory. I am not saying it is true, I'm saying that is in the realm of possibility. I'm sorry to have to report to you that you only think you know better than those you are seeking to contradict, as a result of not knowing enough to know better. Lsl cannot do what it is being accused of, not just because it cannot hack accounts (it cannot) but also because lsl does nothing when residing in a script stored in the inventory of an unlogged avatar. Nothing at all.