Jump to content

Colby Firehawk

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Colby Firehawk

  1. Thank you for the detailed explanation Tolya. That's the sort of feedback I wanted. The thread was prompted by my experiences, but was not about what to do about them. Yes I was a little miffed, but the thread was about trying to understand how subjective and judgmental accusations were allowed to propagate and security service and others were allowed to act on them. I deal with lots of detail oriented stuff in RL and I suppose I've gotten used to picking apart the details, as well as tried to apply too much real life thinking about what is considered defamation and damaging in real life and tried to equate that to SL. RL defamation and the SL version obviously are not the same. Anyway you offered a good explanation here about why security services are allowed to do what they do. Thanks!
  2. There is a practice in SL that people should know about by which you may in part reveal your real IP address and thus some of your privacy. Here’s how it can happen. You click on something in world, it gives you a special web link, you open that in your browser. That's end of story. By special web link, I mean something that usually has a bunch of nonsensical stuff at the end like “kIHFZXyfEtOrRdX3YQrFGqHxWBe9”. That’s usually something created just for your avatar. Once you click on something to get that, the moment you open it in your browser, you’ve ventured out into real life. It is VERY, VERY EASY for the operator of the website to associate your IP address with your avatar at that point. Edit note: Reference examples removed.
  3. @ LL decides if, when and how to enforce their rules... You have no recourse. I can talk like that too! This thread was start to finish about what the rules mean, not about enforcing them. It's pretty obvious it's up to SL to decide what to enforce. So far I haven't ask they enforce anything at all, so duh, they haven't done anything. I think I have the answers I wanted at this point. It is time to move on. Thanks to those that answered in earnest!
  4. @ Legally, "defamation" is only a false statement. If you say something about someone else that's true, no matter how horrible and insulting it may be, it can't be considered defamation, slander or libel. Also, the burden of proof is on the one who claims to have been defamed. Hi Theresa, Thanks for the reply. There seems to be some different definitions of defame, but after looking at them, I do a agree that the accusation has to be false to be defamatory. I'll amend assertion A above. Following that logic, which residents get to decide what constitutes guilty? If I for instance posted that someone was a griefer here on the forum because I thought so, or because someone in my group thought so; it's true to me or my group member, is it defamatory? How does that person prove he or she is not a griefer since the burden of proof is on them? It's almost impossible to prove that because it's subjective. Even more so when I won't divulge when, where, or by whom the accusation was made. So, I could make dozens of accusations and post them here and I'm practically immune to any recourse... that is what you're saying? I'm sure that wouldn't be allowed by the forum moderator, but that's what's going on in world. Again, I'm just trying to better understand why this practice is allowed to continue. Your help is appreciated.
  5. @ I don't see a violation of ToS here. I would suggest just chalking it up to experience (and a great story later) and move on. Find another place to hang. Thanks Jessi, I'm not really concerned about any one place or myself being banned. I take exception to those who bully people and impact others based on their own perceptions or opinions. I don't believe any resident should be in judgement of another except in respect of what goes on on their own land.
  6. Thank everyone for the replies, but they are mostly off subject (not meaning that in a bad way). I'm only asking about the ToS. I did say in the initial post that it's absolutely the land owners prerogative to ban someone, justly or not. That's not in dispute. What is is someone's opinions of a resident being communicated to multiple land owners, the impact that has, and what is allowed by the ToS. Let me rephrase by making these assertions: A - Defaming someone by labeling them a griefer, cheat, bot, or doing something nefarious is a violation of the ToS. It is not one residence' privilege to determine guilt or innocence. The ToS does not make exceptions for defaming based on intent, good reasons, opinion, or the perception of guilt by ANY resident. B - The ToS is further violated if the content is libelous, false, inaccurate, misleading, or invades another person's privacy. C - Defaming someone on a sign, in this forum, in chat, in group chat, or by using a script is still defaming someone. The ToS makes no distinction between public or private defamation. It only says "Post, display, or transmit Content." Scripts transmit content. D - When these actions result in other residents making decisions based on them such as banning them from venues (one example), that "impedes or interferes with other users' normal use of or enjoyment." Yes the land owner has the right to ban anyone, but it's the script that is ejecting people and putting them on the ban list, not the land owner, and that predicated on the direct actions of the people operating the script and knowing the impact it has, ergo, the people operating the script are the ones accountable for its results. If I am wrong about theses assertions, please explain how referencing what allowances are made by the terms of service. I've read it. I think I understand it. I don't understand how these practices are acceptable under the ToS and I really would like to know. I'm not asking about my particular case, not about intent of the people making the accusations, but in specifics of the ToS allowing these "services". Thanks for reading.
  7. A thank you to those of you that responded. And BTW, it's not dismissed; it's still going on. As you might have guessed, I'm prompted by personal experience. MY crime? Someone, somewhere, at sometime, thought I LOOKED like a bot. I've never been a bot, I don't know how to be a bot. I've never griefed anyone or cheated at games. Maybe I was Googleing something, maybe I took a phone call, or maybe I crashed, but it wasn't for a legitimate reason that I was added to the ban list or because I really was a bot. It was because someone said so: Maybe because I dressed the wrong way, didn't reply to them in chat, or danced with their girlfriend. I followed the instructions to be cleared by the "security service", but I'm still on the banned list of some sims because the "security service" labeled me, as one land owner put it, "causing issues at another club." This is a direct result of being falsely and inaccurately defamed by the security service. That in turn impedes or interferes with my normal use of or enjoyment. The "security service will not say when, where, or by whom this was reported. My personal experiences aside, this thread is a more general question, not directed at one service, but the practice of allowing individuals to side step due process and act as judge, jury, and executioner. It's not about intent. It's about the detail of what the ToS says is or isn't. Question 1: To me, it doesn't say "for a good reason" behind the sited sections above, but I'm obviously biased. So the question is a more matter of factually does using a script to communicate this information and acting on it in this manner, for any reason good or not, violate the Tos? Question 2: Addressing the intent of the service, if I said something in group chat that was inaccurate, false, and defamatory about another resident based on something someone told me for the good of those in the group, and then ask the resident to go to a location to prove himself or herself to others, would that still violate the Tos sited above? That's exactly what has happened and still happens via script. Why is it the resident that has to take measures to clear his or her name because someone else made an accusation and how is that allowed because of the intent? I really would like an answer. If the answer is no, please explain how the ToS allows for this. I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but I really am trying to understand why this practice is acceptable. Thanks in advance for your replies.
  8. In respect of this Tos Section (http://www.lindenlab.com/tos#tos6): 6.1.(iv) Post, display, or transmit Content that is harmful, threatening or harassing, defamatory, libelous, false, inaccurate, misleading, or invades another person's privacy; 6.2.(iii) Engage in malicious or disruptive conduct that impedes or interferes with other users' normal use of or enjoyment of the Service; If I wanted to post that someone, maybe even you, was a griefer, cheater, bot, or doing something nefarious based on hearsay and send that information to a list of land owners and people, labeling that person as a griefer, cheater, bot, or nefarious, would that be permissible? Of course not. Posting anything derogatory about someone is not allowed especially if it's defamatory, false, inaccurate, or misleading. It is absolutely the land owners prerogative to ban someone, justly or not. But if I took measures to get someone banned in places all across SL in places I don't own, deciding where they could or couldn't go, would that be allowed? Seems that might impede or interfere with other users' normal use of or enjoyment of the Service. So why is doing this with a script instead of with an IM or on the forum not a breach of the Terms of Service??? There is a "security company" here in SL that is doing just that. It uses information reportedly from various sources including "field officers" that decided if you should be banned or not, then sends that information to land owners all over the grid via script which automatically bans you at other locations. They do [admittedly] make mistakes and ban people erroneously. This defamatory, false, inaccurate, and misleading information gets sent to various land owners and erroneously labels people. What's more they are automatically banned at multiple locations erroneously (see impedes or interferes with other users' normal use of or enjoyment). Why dose this not violate the 6.1 and 6.2 sections of the ToS and why are they not responsible for it???
  • Create New...