M Peccable

Hopefully you won't get what you wish for. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. Those constant menu boxes (which you will constantly get since if you don't opt-in, it can't remember your choice like a web site does) would drive most people battier than bots do.

Neither is an acceptable answer without losing a lot of capabilities (scripts don't store large amounts of data very well), drastically increasing server load, and/or sending SL back into the dark ages by making you answer a question in a menu box that for each place you visit that has a security system or visitor tracker. No thanks.

I would like to know more about how implied consent works, but it seems that if the type of explicit consent required to avoid all of this can be put in the TOS that everyone has to agree to, then it would clear up a lot of ambiguity and risk.

If that's true then a GREAT MANY ITEMS in SL are currently in violation, including attendance recorders that are used in SL classrooms and many businesses with employees that are paid by the hour.

To offload the lookup of the names from SL's servers. If just the UUID is stored, then the script has to look up the all user names anytime they want to see the visitor list.

Then also according to PII, I would have to hash the user name too.

Really? That's a new one on me... I would love to hear some official confirmation on that.

This PII thing seems full of inconsistencies. For example, it seems to me many visitor trackers SL are in violation. Even if the owner "opted-in" to allowing their user name and UUID to be stored in a list, all of the visitors being recorded didn't opt-in. So if the visitor counter is storing its list outside of SL, which many do, it's a potential PII violation.

I have done the same thing over a similar time period. However, that is irrelevant. Her bots, along with mine and all the other responsible bot owners, are getting swept away by all the botphobia. No exceptions, regardless of the owner's reputation or the purpose of the bots.

I beg to differ. Otherwise this subject would not be so passionately controversial, and they would have been totally banned many years ago.

Well, only half joking . To me the carve-outs just makes the water more murky. At what point does SL activity cross the line of not being purely personal activity?

Wow. I never thought I would live in a world, RL or SL, where pointing at someone was breaking the rules. 😕

Some of the abusers boast about how many regions they can do a day. I doubt those folks will be doing any adjustments, unless it is tweaks to make the bots even faster.

So in other words LL, on its own, is extending the "legal" RL PII to include SL information. An abundance of caution I suppose. But usernames (and to some extent UUIDs too) are everywhere on the Internet and multimedia. YouTube is a good example. That indeed does seem to pose a contradiction.

I guess I missed something somewhere. All the PII regulation quotations I have seen refer to RL personal info. How did avatar UUIDs and user names get connected to RL personal info?

There's some posters in that recent closed thread who would definitely disagree with you! In fact, they would shoot them if they could, lol.

There's already a potential enhancement to this potential problem. It seems the bot problem has suddenly become even worse on mainland, because they are now banned from a massive number of regions. With less regions to do, each bot's new cycle begins over again that much sooner. So, this is likely to heighten botphobia even more than it already is among mainland dwellers.

It would have to be pretty serious, because LL hates breaking content. Stopping all data collection in world would break a great many more things than most people realize.

That's right: Rushed out the door and implemented before it was ready because the squeaky wheel had turned into a roar.

I appreciate your warm thoughts. But we all know how fast or slow LL reacts, depending on user knee-jerk demands. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Judging by what I have read on this forum, I don't think there will be any outcries about unfair treatment of responsible bot owners. So I believe a slow death will happen before anything is done to tilt the playing field back to anywhere close to level. "Today is a good day to die." - Worf

Certainly I am upset with them. But until a way is found to distinguish the good bots from bad ones, they are all treated the same, which according to some here is just fine: Unintended causalities just have to be accepted in the name of progress. I don't buy it. Paul is right. There are better ways to handle this.

In my case at least, that very thing has been happening for well over 12 years now. It wasn't until this latest huge batch of bad bots hit the grid that got me caught up into all of this.

You don't know that, because you don't know how many products you have that depend on a bot in order to work. There will be much hidden damage revealed if this estate wide bot ban, in its current form, is enabled on all of mainland.

I am on the receiving end of that mentality. Trust me, it's real.

If you're being serious, then lol!