Solar Legion

"I understand LL needs more customers. And I'm happy for every new resident joining in. My reasoning is not about people I personally approve or disapprove of (regarding that SL would be empty and I had the whole world to myself). It's about how LL are guiding them into SL with false promises. 'It's your world, your imagination. Now what you wanna do is become a premium, get one of the houses we made for you and play our newest game we made for you and use our newest viewer which we stripped of all the functionality but made it super easy to move your nicely premade noob avie with just a mouseclick. Oh, and also we cleverly hid the worldmap so you won't be bothered with too much info and can stay a happy ignorant bunny for years to come.'" Except ... That quoted line of falsehood is just that: Falsehood. The present clients have not had functions stripped out of them, they are not dictating what people do or where they go and they have not changed their marketing strategy much. If anything, they broadened it to suck in more people who wholeheartedly believe their gimmick: "Your World, Your Imagination" ... Just as you did when you joined. That was always a gimmick ... as was everything they did.

"I would postulate that last names caused folks to ponder a little more their choice of first name." File me under those for whom the choice of last names had nothing to do with my first name as - at that time - you had to enter in your first name before you could select a last name. Also at that time, they did not filter out the last names which had been used up.

Hard time following what was said? Not my problem. Retake reading comp and get a handle on logic and thought analysis. Seeing as you are unlikely to do such, I'll be blunt: Any "insult" you take from my post is your own invention. My point is clear as day as well: PLENTY of people in real life look far younger than they really are, circumstance depending. Basing anything on appearance is quite foolish. Further, the attitude you convey in this thread is the exact same sort those opposed to violence in video games and on television convey each and every time they decry it. You - nor anyone else - has any right to dictate the apearance of others in any manner. You have no right to dictate what others engage in, in a virtual environment. I may find a lot of things morally reprehensible: I do not seek to ban or otherwise make illegal, such things where not a single, real individual is harmed at all. Those that do are the problem. End of story. I'm not here to "debate" with the likes of you either. That you responded in the manner you have is all the indication I need that you're not capable of any sort of thought untied to emotion. Second Life is filled with avatars, not real people. Your reactions prior were over the top and fit right in with the Internation Red Cross demanding that video games featuring war scenarios follow humanitarian laws and penalize players for commiting "war crimes". Have a fun time feeling sorry for the pixels on the screen.

Oh look, someone else who needs to get a clue and reevaluate their utterly over the top reactions. Here's one for you: I am barely over five feet tall in real life and - without my beard and mustache - do not look a day over 18 (I am nearly 30 by the by). I set about trying to make an avatar once which merged the fantasy of Second Life with reality .... and quickly gave up on it just as I gave up on remaining clean shaven in real life. If I am being asked for Identification in real life any time I go out to purchase my pipe tobacco OR pick up a nice bottle of Kaluah .... What the heck do you think would happen here in Second Life? I frankly find your attitude insulting and concerning ... It is the attitude of those who lobby against violence in video games .... All because someone might seek out the real thing (utter hogwash).

Welcome to Second Life: Linden Lab does not need to ask you a single thing when it comes to implementing new features. They are not required to make a new feature on their service an opt-in feature. Do as has been suggested: Shut down the feeds and adjust your settings, move on and next time ..... pay attention. Some of us had advance warning because we actually read the forums, news journals and such to try and keep ahead of potentially troublesome issues. If you want a service where the parent company asks you before implementing a new feature and makes some of them opt-in only ... Second Life is not for you.

I'd be perfectly happy if a law passed which made your business utterly illegal. In fact, if this passes, I do hope that someone comes up with just such a law - what is good for the goose ought to be good for the gander, eh? Why not make it illegal to "rent" out "land" in Second Life and any similar programs without being a certified Realtor!

Are they valid within Second Life? That is debatable (no matter what any user says, it is debatable). Are they legal? Perfectly. I am one of those people who firmly believes Linden Lab needs to get its head out of its arse and strike that counterproductive section from the ToS/CS and replace it with one which gives land owners (Whole sim or not) and their staff the bloody tools they need to properly function. Being able to share logs between the staff IS one of these tools. It makes it that much harder to land ban the wrong person or for the wrong reasons. I frankly marvel at the people who get up in arms over such things: They are the ones most likely to utter something utterly out of line and be punished for it .... and then turn around and "get their revenge" by abusing the Abuse Report system by sending in a report concerning the staff member who brought the conversation to the land owner. Sorry folks - my ability to do my bloody job supercedes your "right" to be a little prat - legally at that. It's high time Linden Lab learned this as well. Oh! And thus far, Linden Lab's "actions" against Sims/Land Owners with clearly placed signs have been VERY sparse. The reasoning is clear enough: If you remain in a Sim/in a parcel with signs clearly placed, stating that you are being logged AND that those logs MAY be used to handle any issues which may arise ... Well, you don't have a single issue with it. While the same cannot be said for forcefully worded IM Disclaimers (they MUST be worded in such a manner as to offer a positive/negative response, at least for the ToS), a disclaimer in the land Covenant - something you should bloody well read when you travel to a new Sim, just in case their Rules are listed THERE - is a beast of a far more ambiguous nature. Further still, no forum owner is required to safeguard your posts. That is the risk you take in posting to a forum. Ifyou do not wish to take such a risk and instead (mistakenly) believe that your posts must remain hidden from public view until such time as you give express consent .... Then do not post on forums. A "reasonable" level of Privacy does not entail total control over each and every word you write/utter. That is unreasonable.

Your example is out of left field. The issue comes in when far more sensitive information is shared or when someone says something truly damning or admits to having broken a law or the ToS. A more minor variation comes into play on RP Sims and any Sim where there are set rules. People have sent Abuse Reports in against people whom they have confided in before ... I have seen it myself. If you tell someone you have broken a rule and will continue to do so and they then turn around when the broken rule becomes a problem and copy that log over to the estate manager(s) ... You have no valid reason for sending in that Report as you were the one foolish enough to tell someone else about it. Anything less than such a situation is Linden Lab being heavy handed ... and quite frankly the above situations - wherein the "trusted" person is then suspended or banned - are ridiculous as well. Drama will happen no matter what: Linden Lab should never have put that clause in their ToS as it causes far too many needless problems. Estate managers cannot even share conversations they have had with their customers/"tenants" with other Estate Managers because of it ... Not without being Abuse Reported by some nit.

Ya .... no. In the US it falls under the same laws a recording telephone conversations and their subsequent use.If either party lives in a state where all parties must consent/agree to the recording and subsequent sharing of said "recording", then that law set takes precedence. There are very few exceptions and Second Life is not one of them. You make a log and post it elsewhere? While the contents of that log may not be bad ... you've still broken a law if the other person lives in one of those states.

If they are in the US and you want to waste the time of the court system .... Yes. Any person living in a two-party consent state (applies to more than two party as well) is protected as the laws dictate that such states take precedence over single party consent states. In short, if either party is in such a state, then a law is being broken. Granted a law which has yet to be aplied to Second Life and similar places, but it IS a law. This same law has been used for chat logs and other such "recordings" as well. So then ... You can go after persons whom post chat logs outside the service as well. It would be rather nice if Linden Lab understood this and ceased attempting to dictate what you can do with your Logs and other information and instead insisted that you follow the laws of your general area. It would go a long way in the direction of silencing the people who like to Abuse Report over absolutly nothing (and yes, if you say something foolish and it gets spread to Estate Managers and such ... you are reporting over nothing. Self-censorship folks).

Never contact support on the behalf of another user. So far as Linden Lab is concerned, if that user states their accounts were compromised and then another user contacts them on their behalf ..... they shoot first and ask questions later. They assume you are the one who compromised the account(s). And there isn't a single thing you can do to rectify that assumption. Congrats.

Are they valid for reposting logged conversations within Second Life? Nope. Are they valid for reposting logged conversations outside of Second Life? That is debatable. I do find the reactions of some to be most amusing however. Defriended, and muted people (as well as sending ARs) over such things? Congrats! You've done exactly what they wanted you to do! A good number of those who have added such "disclaimers" who are still in my friends list did so to weed out those who cause drama, have no common sense or are incapable of comprehending what they have read. One such person actually laughed when asked about it and stated point blank that any logs that may ever be shared would be transfered over an exterior service/program and that their disclaimer was a warning of such along the same vein as those annoying (and all too often quickly spoken/tiny printed) disclaimers on phone calls/documents/web sites. Each and every time this topic comes up, the same people express their distaste for it. The same people assume they know what each and every person intends with such disclaimers .... And the same people are dead wrong when it comes to some of their assumptions.

1. Your information is incorrect. Plain and simple. I am a Premium user and presently only use the 512 as a Linden Home. Should I decide to purchase more land, I will be charged an extra five dollars a month for it. Should I decide to abandon my Linden Home before buying an additional 521, then the free tier will go to the new plot. 2. "Real Estate" companies within Second Life have nothing whatsoever to do with pruchasing Mainland plots from Linden Lab or from individual users. This is not Real Life. 3. If you are not seeing the land for sale markers, you are either doing something wrong or are using an outdated client.

There is a reason why Mute turns avatars into nondescript, grey people .... and why Phoenix and Firestorm have a Derender feature. I don't even question if something offends me, I just mute/derender and forget. So far? No avatar I have seen has crossed that visual line.

I am willing to bet it was one of the vigilante thugs who have nothing better to do than patrol the sandboxes, log information which they have no right to, harass users, file frivolous abuse reports and track down real life information. All while dressed up as copywritten characters. Meh.

If you didn't like his/her response then you really won't like mine. After a single day within Second Life, a new user should not be in one of the public welcome areas. If they had any neural capacity for cognitive thought they would have remained on whatever passes for the starter islands these days until such a time as they are able to at least move around and communicate without much trouble. As a former Mentor/Helper .... I have very little patience for such individuals who feel they are OH so advanced and can skip right past the orientation process. I have even less patience for those who took an offered teleport by a "friend", dragging them off of the starter zones. "Welcome to Second Life: Learn how to operate on a basic level or leave." - The mantra of every burnt out helper.

You have too many prims/objects set out. Pick a few up or find a lower prim object.

It means absolutely nothing at all as it is a marketing ploy geared to suck in those who are susceptible to them.

Without restrictions? Some very specific users would find themselves banned, entire groups would be eradicated. All "privacy" issues outstanding on the JIRA pertaining to specific features or requests (such as profiles and any evasion of scripts) would be closed as they appear and even blacklisted in the system. All development on the official client would be suspended and all download links to any of them scrubbed from the system. The only updates to the official code base would occur as needed, using code from Phownix, Firestorm, Imprudence and other third party clients. No updates would be made or released until the other clients released them first. Profiles would be expanded to allow an RP toggle, larger information fields (which have two versions: RP and OOC), 100+ pics, 100+ group limit, age fields for the RP mode, further filters when searching a profile which are capable of filtering out almost anything. Anyone who does not have their RP mode filled out would be unable to visit any Sim which has been flagged as an RP only area, is set to Adult AND has no Age filter (let's face it folks, you've RPed as someone below 18 in adult situations before, do not lie). That is just for starters.

I don't trust the JLU or any of its affiliate groups. They abuse the system and find ways around each and every rule in the ToS .... -waits to see how long it'll take them to list me as a griefer, stalk me, harass me, illegally list me in their database, illegally snoop around my personal life and Abuse Report this post- For those Lindens watching .... Yes, they DO do that kind of crap and NO, nothing I have said in this post is against the ToS as it is truth and can be verified.

Actually, my argument is rock solid. "Rightful" sharing of logs has zilch to do with the Terms of Service and everything to do with legality and the situation. It's just that simple - in fact, it's just as simple as the boilerplate "You can't do that because it's against the ToS" responses to things like this. As for what does and does not add to the discussion .... parroting the ToS doesn't add to the discussion, nor does stating what is already known. This is General Discussion, isn't it? Yes? Well then, responding in such a manner as to be politely saying "you're not allowed to do what is perfectly legal everywhere nor are you right to voice your displeasure over it" is a bit much ..... isn't it?

Do you have anything to add which is not already covered or which can add to the topic at hand? Did you bother to read the entire thread for context? I am well aware what the rather broken stance of Linden Lab is: Restating it in any way, shape or form is pointless and quite frankly, irritating. Boilerplate responses of that nature do little more than make me wonder if you're the sort to go whining to Linden Lab when someone passes information you've let slip on to an Estate Manager (resulting in a ban from said Estate). Now then ..... do you have a response that will add to this thread and the topic at hand (which has apparently evolved past the title of the thread) or not? And yes, I am well and truly irritated now.

Regarding Valid and legal .... One cannot enforce an invalid, legal contract nor can one enforce a valid, illegal contract. It must be both valid and legal to be properly enforced. In either event, the arguing of semantic is pointless.

Dres, the phrase "bleating about privacy" is a reference to those who believe that every little piece of their publicly available offline and online information can never, ever be shared anywhere they have not given prior permission for it to appear. You put information in the public eye, expect it to appear elsewhere. The recent bleating and blathering concerning web based SL profiles for example: Your profile is public. Linden Lab gets to decide how they handle public information. Even removing your profile from search does not prevent a person right clicking on yo and viewing your profile. These are the types which profess to abhor drama ..... and yet they cause more than their fair share of it. I have never run into anyone with a disclaimer in their profile around whom drama has spun out of control (no more so than the average user). I have run into the privacy nutters and ya know what? They bleat about privacy because of all the drama they bloody create. As for sharing IM and general chat logs ..... that section of the ToS is worded and enforced in such a manner that it utterly hampers the general user .... and yes, it bloody well angers me. Heaven forbid I should share a conversation that has been logged which contains material which skirts the inner edge of the ToS! And since I don't feel like hitting reply a second time ..... Gadget? There's no such thing as a truly private conversation within Second Life - not unless you use an OTR system. At any given moment, a Linden can view your IM logs on their system. For that matter, anyone passing by your screen or using the same PC as you can view the conversation. Your ideas would be fine and dandy in a perfect world: We don't live in such a world. The only "respect" that is deserved concerning an IM only goes so far. Usually up until the point a person begins to become verbally abusive to the one they are messaging or when referencing another users (quite possibly a friend or an estate manager). It is that viiew and attitude, taken to the extreme, that spawns needless and unfair bans stemming from someone Abuse Reporting another user for rightfully passing on a log which contains verbal abuse, plans to grief or simply by the request of an estate manager in an effort to resolve a dispute. If the two of you cannot tell ..... this is a topic I do not have much give concerning. ToS or not, you IM a person, they have every legal right to log the conversation and pass it on if the need arises. At present, this can only be done (safely) outside of Linden Lab's servers. So far as I am concerned, they have no valid reason for this whatsoever. The only users I have an issue with concerning the logging and sharing (be it in SL or not) of IM and general chat logs are the ones who like to twist the words of others to fuel their own twised views. These are the sort who will blog endlessly about nothing at all, ranting about conspiracies which do not exist and trashing others without any reason. If Linden Lab is going to demand that users do not share these logs in SL, then they need to find a legal reason to keep the above types from sharing them outside SL.

Yep, sorry, no. In this case Validity is determined by legality. The disclaimer is perfectly legal (IE, valid). What is invalid (in terms of the SL ToS) is the act of sharing the generated logs with anyone else without expressly written permission. A "disclaimer" to the contrary would thus be invalid within LL's servers. Not trying to be an arse here but I wanted tl clear that bit of miscommunication up. On this topic, validity and legality are one and the same so far as I am concerned as it's pretty hard to enforce a "valid", illegal policy concerning specific topics/actions. You missed a case use for message logging by the by - and it is, by sar, the most general use: Making bloody sure one doesn't get asked a question concerning a bit of conversation which happened months ago and having to try and remember said conversation. By the by - and once again, not trying to be an arse here: The only log file that could possibly be considered true clutter is the local chat log. That one gets pretty big, pretty quickly for the more social users. Other than that, the logs rarely get bigger than 5 megs. That is not exactly "clutter".