Solar Legion
-
Posts
5,377 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Solar Legion
-
-
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".
-
Actually (and I am dropping this in reply to this person for a reason) such a disclaimer is PERFECTLY legal. Online conversations are covered by your state/province's laws concerning the recording and subsequent use of telephone/media conversations.
While Linden Lab will enforce their ToS within their own service, there isn't a single thing they can do outside of their servers .... and they know this. Their ToS section concerning disclosure and the sharing of logged messages (which, incidentally, is already rendered partially void simply due to the fact that the standard client program can log local chat and IMs) is little more than a misleading bit of jargon which often results in responses like the one to which this very post of mine responds to.
Like it or not, most of the US is comprised of single party consent states. Only one person in a conversation needs to give their consent to legally allow them to "record" and do whatever they please with the conversation (within reason).
To sum this up? Are the disclaimers legal? Why yes, yes they are. Do they circumvent the ToS? No - no they do not. Can someone log you and then share the log over other web sites/message systems? Yes - yes they can.
By the by? Those of you making the claim that those who put such a disclaimer in their profiles are large sources of drama? Yeah, hate to break it to you but it is more often those who bleat about privacy and who go around reporting people if they even suspect that a conversation was shared with another person that are the largest drama sources. I speak from experience on this one.
-
I'm one of the ones that complained biterly concerning online status for several reasons, among them being the fact that, prior to the implementation of that feature, I have had several friends as well as content creators/creator CS staff gripe at me for IMing them to see if they are online. Their view was that, if they show up as offline, you should leave them alone unless its bloody well life or death importance.
Once these features were implemented, I siply ceased to IM anyone who showed as offline in my friends list yet online in their profile. when it coems to CS staff? I'll double check using various other avenues to see if they are "ghosting" (online but hidden) or not. If they are Ghosting, I leave them alone.
The whole "unfriend notificvation" system is also a boon as I and several other of my friends have discovered that the server which houses that information can occasionally lose entries in the list. when this happens, the system still sends out the notification - enabling me to send a friend request again. If they truly did drop me of their own volition .... I let it go. If not, they add me back and chalk it up to the server being a flake.
-
@Ceka: Actually, Commercial Adult content is not allowed in Mature rated sims. There's nothing preventing a user from going out and buying a sex bed, then placing it in their M rated home.
-
Ahem ..... There's a difference between non-humans and animals.
Animals are critters, usually naturally occuring ones. Non-humans are generally the various fantasy races.
You allow animals, not fantasy races, thus you do not allow non-humans.
-
I sure as heck hope you meant to reply to Prok on that one, as I'm in agreement with Penny.
-
(This response meant for a poster whose responses in this thread have since been removed. Leaving it up simply for the sake of the record.)
Thanks for the laugh - no, seriously.
You could not have managed to utterly miss the point of and utterly twist the meaning of the OP and further than you already have.
The only person who honestly believes a single word you've written in response ... is you.
You have so utterly lost touch with reality that it ceases to be amusing after a very short time.
There is an issue in Second Life concerning the scale of avatars and quite frankly the fact that you seem to believe otherwise is rather telling. If you bothered to actually read the OP and look carefully at some of the images .... You'd know just how utterly wrong your response truly is.
-
2
-
-
You have, apparently, never signed up for anything at all using your cell phone or the internet in general.
"Unsolicited" requires the "spam" to be sent in what would be the digital equivalent of a "cold-call".
A bot/greeter with its sensor range set too high? Yes - that ought to be ARed as you never once visited the store.
However, if you did visit a shop in SL, the message sent is no long "unsolicited".
To use another, offline example: By the definition the OP uses and going by the wiki definition, all television commercials can be classified as spam.
Yet no one has ever dared to do such.
The principle is pretty much the same: Like I said, it becomes spam after you've made it clear that you do not wish further advertisements/messages.
Mind, I'm adamant on this for the simple reason that I am sick and tired of just about every communication anyone ever sends for any reason on the net as well as in SL being called "spam"
-
Apparently you're such an immersionist that you cannot begin to comprehend another way to view the various Avatars within Second Life.
Here's a hint: You're not the majority and can only speak for yourself. The same goes for every poster in these forums.
I, personally, don't give a crap what the avatar looks like. The only time I expect an avatar to act as it appears is when the person behind it is engaged in role play or otherwise identifies as an immersionist of the most extreme type.
My avatar itself changes so often it isn't even funny. As such, there is no set action or behavior for it. Basic mannerisims? Yep - those show up for each appearance change. Nothing deeper unless I am actually engaged in role play or similar.
As for child avatars? You are aware that the entire real world would be classified as Adult going by the sim rating criteria which Linden Lab uses - right?
Linden Lab has stated their polict regarding Child Avatars: I personally believe they should investiagte each and every AR concerning them that crosses their desk ..... and permaban anyone found to be targeting them in a manner which goes above and beyond simple abuse reports.
What does that mean exactly?
Child avatar pops into an adult sim. Derranged User sends in an abuse report and fills it with utter nonsense.
Derranged user gets the boot.
There is but one example.
-
Ah yes, someone complaining about what they believe is spam ....
You do know that there are still companies out there that hand out or sell your e-mail address .... and they often do not explicitly warn you of this fact?
You are also aware that it is not against the ToS to set up a scripted item/bot which reacts to the presence of a nearby avatar by recording their name and possibly sending out a message at a later date? You visited the shop - that is all that is required according to the ToS.
Now then, instead of complaining and getting indignant over being sent a message concerning a shop you visited, either IM the owner and ask to be removed from the list .... or mute the object/bot.
By the by? Spam is defined as unsolicited mail/messages/calls, usually from a business. Like I said, you visited their shop .... Not spam until you ask them to cease and they continue to send.
-
Actually Void .... If anyone was truly concerned about the information - and truly believed it was historical - a backup would have been made elsewhere by now.
Frankly, I saw something like this coming eventually. PR issues, data cleanup ..... The Wiki was going to have information deleted eventually.
Personally? The only "historical" information concerns the origins of Second Life and its progression out of Linden World.
Technical notes, Town hall meeting notes/transcripts, Linden profiles .... All of that is information that should have been mirrored elsewhere by the users and former/current Lindens.
-
It's a wiki .... owned by a corporation. There's nothing in it that is truly "historical" - unless you count truly outdated information concerning employees who no longer work for Linden Lab and/or information on Sims that have since been shut down and/or other truly outdated information as such.
It's their wiki. They decide what information to keep and what information to discard: Period.
-
This group is not endorsed by Linden Lab and has no power or authority anywhere on the Grid. They are like all the other "police"/vigilante groups in Second Life. Not a one of them is any better than the "griefers" they seek to remove.
If it were possible, I would add each and every member (with very few exceptions) of each and every "police"/vigilante group to my own personal ban list.
-
Phil Deakins wrote:Darrius Gothly wrote:I also find it ... at least hard to believe, if not most likely incorrect .. that LL would permanently ban an account without at least one prior incident.
I agree with that unless the 'crime' is really bad. I also agree that the OP may not have been told the full story. If the person hadn't previously had a warning, then the reason for the ban must be really bad and she would know what it is. If the reason isn't really bad, and it's something she did, then I'm sure she would have previously received a warning or a shortish suspension for it.So, assuming that the person who issued the ban didn't get out of bed on the wrong side that day, either she knows the reason and isn't saying, or it was caused by some vindictive or nasty ARs which descibed a really bad 'crime', imo. It could well be that the use of the word "daddy" was gone to town on by some stupid person who reported it as child sexplay.The fact that LL doesn't provide the reason is a side issue, but is abominable.There are a few things which Linden Lab bans for without any prior warning. Before the merge with the old Teen Grid, being underage was one of them. Filing such a report was a favored tactic of griefers in Role Playing areas. Using my prior post as a jumping off point, sexualized age-play is another insta-ban issue. That one is yet another favored tactic of griefers visiting RP areas.
It's also something that most users are utterly unaware of. The friends I do have who Role Play or who are into BDSM (both being groups I 'play' with regularly) used to ask me why one of my "Limits" and unstated rules concerned specific terms and words.
Crap like this? There's the reason.
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
How ugly is too ugly?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
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.