Jopsy Pendragon

September 25, 2010

@Griss- Your posts clearly show you've read up on the issue, put your own thought into it and felt the need to express your opinion. I'm sure you're not alone, I'm sure there are other residents new to the blogrums who finally decided to speak up without being canvased. I'm sure we can expect another longer, louder round of it when LL makes the next display names announcement.

September 24, 2010

No, catching people in RL is not what counts.

Not unless they've broken REAL WORLD LAWS.

Frankly... if someone I don't know believes something untrue about me because they're gullible and ignorant... that's a shame. Sure it would be annoying, and I'd want to find out who besmirched my name... but in all honesty... if people are that gullible in the first place, their opinion isn't worth much.

September 24, 2010

I signed up on AU before SL bought it... and preferred it just as a 'gamers friendster' like service.

Aren't there other services out there like "Avatars United" or did they all just quietly die when I wasn't looking?

September 24, 2010

@Lamorna-

Again, most 'lay' users probably looked enough to see that this is "yet to come" not "useable now" and then ignored it.

What IS rather clear is that people worried about being impersonated have gone on a campaign against display names and have canvased residents with likely alarmist rhetoric to get them to come and post on the blogs.

@Axi-

Character assassination and defamation is just as effective without impersonation, and without display names is just that much harder to catch. Display names may give vengeful idiots a new tool, but it is NOT AN EFFECTIVE TOOL. More people aren't going to be successful at ruining peoples reputation than they are now. In fact, more people will likely FAIL in the attempt.

September 24, 2010

"At the risk of giving a hostage to fortune, where are all these people, Jack?" -- Lamorna

New and Casual residents tend not to get involved in "SL Issues" nearly as much as those of us who have more invested in SL. Most probably glanced at the announcment and shrugged and didn't read past the title. If they even read that at all.

That's no indication that they won't enjoy using the feature though.

September 24, 2010

Ponsonby said: Again, the perpetrator will leave no audit trail.

Not true. If there's anything in chat, the offender's identity is still trivially easy to obtain, even if they teleported away before you mouse-over/click their name in chat.

Furthermore... if someone is so hell bent on harassment or committing fraud... that they hide their IP, use a fake email, and create a throw-away alt.... lack of display names is NOT going to stop them.

MOST people are going to see right through display name fraud. Someone that is smart enough to create an untraceable throw-away alt will know this. They're not going to go through all that effort... and then throw away their chance of successfully committing fraud or harassment by blatantly impersonating someone with a display name.

Keep in mind that if it's L$ they're after... the money itself leaves an audit trail WITH USERNAME we can pull up using the SL website.

Will the number of attempts go up? Sure. So will the number of residents CAUGHT attempting to commit fraud.

I haven't yet heard a compelling argument saying that the number of successful attempts is guaranteed to go up.

September 24, 2010

re: clearer audit trails.

Consider this probable case: Alice buys something from Bob, who may (or may not) be a sales rep for Carl. Delivery of the purchase doesn't happen. Alice files an angry and incoherent abuse report against either Carl or Bob for ripping her off. (Whether Bob intended to or not). LL has a mess to untangle. What's Bob's relation to Carl? Is there one? Is Alice telling the truth? Let's start asking people and reading chat logs and spend lots of time trying to figure out who's really at fault here.

Now consider the case where Doug sets his display name to "Carl", Alice's transaction doesn't complete, and files the abuse report. LL looks at Doug... see's he impostored Carl and accepted payment in Carl's shop... clearly Carl is a different avatar. They don't have to look at the chat log between Alice and Carl(doug) searching for clarification, though they might glance at it for confirmation. Cut-and-dried... and without having to ask questions and wait for answers, LL can flag Doug's account as "suspicious" and if more AR's come in against Doug... he's ban-hammered.

And, to the other bit, when I said "misleading" I meant "to give a wrong impression". The word does not require 'intent' be a component and I didn't mean it as such.

September 23, 2010

Ponsonby-

Your examples are misleading.

Usernames like "name(dot)resident" and "name(dot)Resident" will not exist.

Only "(space)Resident" will appear at the end of one-word usernames for legacy support (TPV's and old LSL name functions). "(space)Resident" will NOT be part of the account name though, it is only added when it must be for old viewers/scripts.

September 23, 2010

I won't miss it. The "recommended friends" picked seemed utterly random, quickly tired of the daily deluge of "unite us" requests from people that were treating it like a pokemon "gotta collect'm all!" game.

'meta-MMO-registries' should be run by a neutral organization not one MMO in particular hoping to recruit people that play other games. I think the AU mission was not helped by being made part of SL.

September 23, 2010

Anita said: "@ Insight: I hope the shopholders and simowners do not listen to your advice, because then SL will be gone..............Shopholders makes the SL economy alive, no shops, no income for shopholders and no income for the Simmrenters who have shops on their sims to help pay the SIMRENT. Leaving SL a place without great shops and clubs to goto."

As long as there's money to be made here.. there will be people here making it. If some leave because they're annoyed at people using their display names, things will be that much better for those businesses that remain.

Of course you don't see people who have "left SL because of his or her name is not liked by that person" ... People don't "leave" SL because they don't like the name they're stuck with... they simply just don't START using secondlife at all. And all the potential revenue they could have brought with them is lost. =)

Yes there are problems with display names. I still think the net benefit is positive, and could be improved with a few more changes. (For example, PLEASE show username in the friends list).

It will take time for people to adjust. Nothing will stop the griefers and fraudsters though, and while this may increase the number of attempts, it also will give LL clear audit trails with which to ban people for fraud, rather than the ambiguous and difficult to verify information they usually get from fraud reports now.

September 22, 2010

Allowing people to change their USERNAME will not help people that wish to use unicode to put letters from their own native language's alphabets into their names.

Why won't LL offer a username change service? They aren't saying. I can guess at several reasons but all I found from LL was --> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/How_to_change_my_name

Sadly freedom and griefing go hand-in-hand. Anything that gives us more power or liberty to do things... also gives griefers more tools to harass people.

USUALLY more people benefit by these changes than are inconvenienced by them. I'm all for giving this a try to see if it turns out okay.

And am still looking forward to the updated project viewer being announced for testing. =)

September 20, 2010

@LadyJane-

To be completely fair... I think Lamorna's service is well-intentioned, and not at all intended to be a 'scam' I just think it has some very undesirable consequences.

As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Which I used to think only referred to "those that meant well but did nothing", but lately have been thinking also includes "the very unwanted meddling that people with 'good intentions' inflict on others 'for their own good'." (and no I'm not thinking about Lamorna when I say this.. I'm just rambling)

September 20, 2010

Lamorna-

Again, lemme try again, because I don't think my previous example was clear.

Say "Ponsonby Low" (aka "Polo") sets her display names to "Polo" ... but (for the sake of argument) she is ignorant of your service (like *MOST* residents will be, no matter how successful a marketing campaign you run.)

Later, someone else with the display name "Polo" hears about your service and decides to use your service to protect it.

Now, Ponsonby is forced to give up using her nickname as her display name, or she'll be ejected from places using your service. And worse, now she feels blackmailed into registering her new display name with you to prevent someone else from usurping it out from under her... again. (and who knows, maybe she ends up picking and registering a display name already in use by other people who she then impacts by using your service).

That's what I mean by exploitive.

How does someone with a display name of "BigJoe" tell you "Let other people USE my display name... but don't let them RESERVE my display name." (assuming you won't charge for that service too).

And, furthermore.... how will people like BigJoe know to tell you... before it's already too late and they've lost the right to use their own display name because of an usurper?

The more I think about it.. the less I like it.

--

Eyyy, "Antney"... id be a real shame ifz youz name wuz to catch fire, ya know? If youz pay me some dough, youz can fugget all aboutit.

September 20, 2010

Ponsonby said: In THIS case only, the submitted name is flagged. But recall that the message box inworld ALREADY says 'expect a delay of several days for this to show up.' So during that time,

Actually the new display name takes effect on the avatar and their chat immediately, which are (or were) the two of the three places where user.name is not clearly visible. The delay is for everywhere else, nearly all of which (except friends list, so far), always show the user.name next to the display name already. To be effective the check must be complete *before* it is accepted for use as nametag/chat and before it counts against the person's "one display name change for the week".

Ponsonby said: There is NO reason not to protect SL Residents from having their account names duplicated.

Nothing except that LL believes that common display names like "John Smith" and "BigJoe" *should* be available everyone that wishes to use them, not limited to the one person just because it matches their user.account name. If you can get them to change their mind on this policy, you're golden, and I'd applaud you.

There are other complications as well... how would you have the system deal with a new user account being created that conflicts with existing display names? Force everyone with a matching display name to change it? Wait until they change it and then when they try to go back, say "Sorry, you can't change it back now. Tough." ? =)

Lamorna said: In a post Display Names world, the first person to register a name like this will get it. If the new Account Name of "omegatrix" tries to reserve it as their Display Name, they won't be able.

Okay that's commendable... but I thought you weren't going to accepting registrations for "Display Names" as well as usernames was a "tbd, maybe later" thing.

I personally, don't desire the protection of your service, but now I feel compelled to register with it... not because I want to stop others from using my name (let them, I don't care)... but because I don't want someone else REGISTERING my name as their own.

The problem with your banclone system is the same as what people are complaining about display names. They can choose not to USE it... but that does not protect them from being AFFECTED BY IT.

I fear too many will be ignorant of your service until they're stung by it... even if they had the name longer than the person that registered with you, the person is now forced to change their display name if they don't want to get randomly ejected from places. And, they're forced to register with you to prevent someone from yanking their new name out from under them, so it doesn't happen again.

That... I'm sorry to be this blunt... but it really does really does seem exploitive and extortive.

I honestly prefer that LL make usernames always visible by default. CLEARLY demote display names to an "informal common name" instead of this ambiguous "primary identity" nature they have now in chat, nametags and friends list.

September 20, 2010

"So I'd welcome any correction to my assumption that when typing in a Display Name, some sort of pop-up or drop-down menu provides a choice of fonts." -- Ponsonby

Hrrrmmm.... I admit my unicode-savvy is weak... but I think they're called 'scripts' not 'fonts', and they seem to be rather different. (Sort of like the difference between "make" and "model" of an automobile.)

And I didn't see any UI control for setting which 'script' was desired to type in. Keep in mind that mixed-script names are *common*. Latin script is used for many western languages... and sometimes characters from other scripts are naturally mixed in, for example... "Señorita".

To forbid mixed script names would undoubtedly cause usage problems.

Also, there are uppercase and lowercase homographical problems too... so if LL were to keep a list of all 20 million names converted into each possible script, they'd also have to take into consideration that upper and/or lowercase combinations of those letters may ALSO cause conflict... so... 20 million times the number of scripts, times each possible upper/lower-case letter similarity ... we're talking a lookup database of billions of names.

I've got a serious case of crossed-i's now after digging through http://unicode.org ... thanks. ;-P

September 19, 2010

"My account name is my brand name and my reputation" -- Lamorna Proctor

Exactly. Your ACCOUNT name is your unique brand name upon which your reputation is built. Your display name is merely a copy of it.

One thing your service won't provide, is the right for people to freely use the display name "John Smith" as a display name, once john.smith registers with you. While protecting unusual names will no doubt be valuable to many... do you have an algorithm that's smart enough to reject registration attempts of common names? Of course not.

Nor is your system likely to respect someone who sets their display name to, say, "Omegatrix", long before someone else creates a user account of "omegatrix". So while the person with the display name may have been using it longer... the person who creates an alt can easily use your system to harass them.

"parody will be ok wont it?" -- ninjafoo Ng

Depending on where you live (tyrants and observance of copyright laws vary), it has been okay for longer than there's been an internet. Yes.

(edited to re-word awkward sentences)

September 19, 2010

Please, for the sake of all reasonable argument, remember this:

UNICODE (which is wanted by many of our international residents) makes it VERY DIFFICULT to protect usernames from being used as display names.

Even protecting ONE WORD, much less 20 million, is proving to be a challenge. There are too many letters that look similar in other languages that can be used in unicode.

Seriously though...

Impersonation is NOT THE SAME AS identity theft. I can look like you, I can say I'm you, but unless I've got CREDIBLE EVIDENCE saying that I'm you... (passport, driver's license, credit card numbers, passwords to verified unique accounts) then it is merely impersonation, no more damaging than someone wearing an Obama mask is guilty of identity theft of the president.

For the people that are worried about impersonators alienating customers... What are you currently doing about alts from your competitors that show up in your stores and then tell your other customers "This place ripped me off. I bought that there... and it was totally broken and they wouldn't give me a refund." As damaging if not more so.

Or what are you doing to stop legitimately irate customers that think you ripped them off because SL, in all it's perfection, FAILED to deliver the purchased item again, and you weren't there to offer a re-delivery before they yelled and screamed in your store about how much of a con-artist out to rip people off you are?

If someone does a class-A job of impersonating you... you've got them dead to rights committing fraud, clear-cut perma-bannable offense. No hearsay, no he-said-she-said, no "I didn't know" excuses, clear, deliberate, permanently punishable fraud. Cut and dried in a way that the other two examples wouldn't be.

I'm NOT SAYING THAT DISPLAY NAMES ARE PERFECT. I'm just saying ya'll are way over-reacting.

Sorry for my angry tone of voice... a neighbor's dog has been barking for the last two hours and I'm seriously fed-up with it.. and it's carrying over into my attitude here.

September 18, 2010

"Create a parallel SL world for everyone wanting to use their real names." -- Infiniview Merit

Simply not going to happen, it's contrary to everything LL has been building towards. They're doing away from the teen grid... (and even with the teen grid, usernames were likely unique, otherwise teens would be forced to change their name if it conflicted with someone on the adult grid, when they came of age).

Two parallel worlds... do you want to buy land in both and run a business in both so that you're not turning away customers because they chose to be only in one world? I don't. Most won't. Which world, then, would you set up shop in, knowing that you'll be missing out on possible sales?

The goals are pretty clear:

allow people to use unicode in their names
allow people to use casually use popular names that are already in use
convert usernames into a format that is more interoperable with external systems
allow people to change their informal name they're known by when they wish to.

(unicode in usernames is a bad idea because username is supposed to be simple and clearly unique, even if it's awkward as a call-name.)

6000 more posts by angry people who act like they believe that display names are the same as usernames won't convince LL that we can't adapt to this change.

If you want to change their mind, then batten down the hatches and prepare to swamp them with abuse reports when people start attempting to commit fraud using display names.

September 18, 2010

"SL identity theft could be very similar to RL identity theft in the eyes of the law." -- Monique Rosetta

Not likely. No more than if I were to slap on a paper nametag saying "Hello, I'm MONIQUE ROSETTA" is identity theft. No more than LL is guilty of identity theft if they permaban someone or force-change their name for being offensive. Like it or not, but our "identity" within SL is not governed by anything even remotely similar to the laws that protect our RL identity and credentials.

If LL can show that "people fooled by display names" are themselves negligent of properly understanding the service they were subscribed to and show that they made a reasonable effort to educate their users and emphasize that display names are "Just For Show" and are not bonified identities... then they're off the hook as far as being accountable goes. I don't think the implementation as planned does that quite yet... and still hope it will.

September 18, 2010

Ponsonby- I only said you obviously ignored or disagreed with me because you seem to be asking the same answered questions over and over. Which is fine... just makes attempting to answer them seem increasingly futile. But again... I will try.

Let me attempt to rephrase again:

LL apparently wants to let AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE use the display names that they want. Neither 'all'... nor merely 'most', but as many as possible without allowing obscenities or impersonation of official Linden staff.

REAL WORLD IDENTITY THEFT resulting from someone impersonating an LL official is something that could embroil LL in expensive legal problems. If LL does not make at least a token effort to protect their name in the service and it gets abused, they could be held accountable for losses accrued due to identity theft... for neglect. In-world impersonation is not the same as identity theft. SL resident businesses have no control over display names and can't be held accountable when impersonation happens.

As to 'why' ... simply because LL thinks this is the right thing to do, they literally need no more justification than that. Many of us see it differently. We'll find out whose right soon enough.

September 18, 2010

"I am replying to your post not for its particular content. But to see what your opinion of this question is. For those who want to use their real names in SL, what is wrong with making an extra av available to everyone? That way it would not be such a mess with double names all over the place?" -- Infiniview Merit

Om nailed it. We can have alternate AV's already, (though they can't access our non-transferable purchases unfortunately) but if duplicate display-names aren't allowed then people won't be able to use their real name, or common nicknames that their outside-of-SL-friends know them as. Whether that's facebook, folks at the same college, or WoW, doesn't matter.

User population size plays a big role in this...

When the population grows to a certain point, unique names start to get ugly, with numbers tacked on, words thrown together randomly, and they start getting longer and longer. To avoid this, other MMO's (like WoW) split their universe up into parallel dimensions, which are identicial, but populated by different people. There could be a Jopsy on each parallel copy... all owned by a different person. Since they can't move from one parallel dimension to another, it works out okay.

But SL is all one big world, no parallel copies with completely different populations.

So, as our names continue to get uglier... having a mechanism to allow us to have an 'informal' name becomes valuable. It is no easy thing to do. Most places are built with this capability built in automatically... or have parallel dimensions they can bring online when the population density gets too thick and the names start getting ugly393ish. To migrate to this system after being online without it is.. well, like breaking a badly healed leg so that it can be re-set.

September 18, 2010

"And Jopsy---'life is unfair' doesn't make sense when we're talking NOT about some act of nature, or even about some change that a company can't help--but about a choice (to permit duplication by Display name of account names) that LL didn't have to make." -- Ponsonby Low

I wasn't talking about nature. I was talking about people WITH power making decisions that people with LESS power have to endure. That's "Life". This is "Second" "Life" .. and the same holds true.

LL wants MOST people to be able to use their real names if they want too, where it makes sense for them to do so. Obviously they feel the need to make an exception in their own case... for reasons you don't want to hear or care about. Which is fine... it really is. Exceptions to rules are just one of those things that happen.

I'm not going to waste my time yelling at LL to change something I know they won't. If anything I'll focus on the things I think I can convince them to change.

If you feel like you're getting better results with your line of questioning, great. But from where I'm sitting, it doesn't look like it's helping. =(

September 18, 2010

@Avi-

I was terse with Ponsonby because I've already tried giving more thoughtful answers to that question from her elsewhere... and she's disagreed or ignored them. So I went for something a little less subtle.

LL DOES have legitimate reason and cause to feel that blocking their own name is necessary, regardless of the inconvenience to anyone whose real name may be Linden. They are the #1 target for impersonation. People impersonating LL staff can more easily coerce account passwords out of new users and other *private* information like credit card numbers... things that someone impersonating a SL Resident Business Owner would have no business asking for.

Simply put.... display names need to be clearly inferior to our unique names, and I think that we will adapt to that.

Yes, some of us may have to tell people "Sorry, no, that's not me." This is something I already do several times a day (because people modify and sell my free scripts (with my permission) and often they still have my name in the creator field). It's a hassle, but part of the cost of doing business.

I'm still waiting for the new project viewer to test out the changes Jack mentioned. Until we see it in action, there's no point running around like chicken little.

September 18, 2010

Answer…. It doesn’t.

Answer…. It doesn’t. -- PaigeTAM Piaggio

Keep in mind, if Sarah Palin could have stopped Tina Fey from impersonating her so devastatingly on SNL... she would have.

I agree, I would like existing username to be forbidden for use as display names, but I really doubt LL is going to concede on this point.

Which is why I keep insisting that formal username be shown next to informal/nickname/alias "display name".

Ultimately though, if someone else chooses to use our name, here or in some other online world... we have very little control over it. Even if we lawyer up... it's very difficult to tell someone "You can't use my name".

September 18, 2010

"Why is it okay to inconvenience one group but not the other?" - Ponsonby Low

Because life isn't fair. Never has been, never will be.

Forums

Blogs

Knowledge Base

Blog Comments posted by Jopsy Pendragon

Linden Lab

Tilia

Second Life

Connect With Us

Partner With Us