Op-ED: Criminal Gangs Can’t Ask for No “Guilt by Association”
by prokofy on 10/07/07 at 2:09 pm
By Prokofy Neva/Op-Ed
In Second Life, you can make a group with only 27 cents and one other person. Don’t like the group you’re in, because it’s taken over by a tyrant or filling up with griefers you don’t want to be associated with? Make a new one — and the tools enable you to create either a dope-smokin’ hippie love commune where everybody is exactly equal and income is distributed or a Gorean slave camp where a master rules with an iron fist and confiscates the earnings. It’s your world, your imagination. You are never stuck with an affiliation; you can always recreate, renew, reform — by making a new group and leaving an old one.
In Second Life, groups are an important part of identity and reputation. The first thing people use to judge an unknown avatar is his groups. So people usually take care to have the groups on their profile reflect their real intentions. When they discover they are in a group that acquires a bad reputation, they press “leave”. When they persistently do *not* press leave and keep on affiliating with a group acquiring a reputation for griefing, it’s because the core of the group, the friendships they’ve made are more important to them than their reputation, or they don’t care about having a good reputation. But people judge nonetheless — and they must, in a lawless, oppressive world, ruled by ruthless executive power (the Lindens), little reliable information (everyone is anonymous to some degree) and concerted propaganda and disinformation campaigns by warring parties.
GANGS VERSUS GROUPS
Guilt by association” may be an honourable liberal principle, the bedrock of “not guilty until proven innocent.” Yet it isn’t endless, and it can’t be used as a cover and a distraction from crime. In real life, gangs have all kinds of insignia and rituals — and they commit crimes, even murder. The police are right to watch thse groups as *groups*; if they didn’t, they couldn’t keep the public safe. When a Crip or Blood ties a certain bandana on their leg or head or makes a certain hand signal in a school, administrators and the police don’t think they’re doing a Home Ec sewing assignment or studying signing for the deaf. They realize that the attributes and membership features are what gives the group coherence and can abet crime; in some settings, such as a school, it is prohibited to wear the insignia of gangs precisely to prevent them from getting a toehold.
Principles, parents, the community weigh the problem of possibly wrongfully preventing an innocent kid from holding their pants up with an ordinary red scarf versus controlling the proliferation of gangs. Whether locally in schools, whether nationally in racist movements, whether internationally in extremist and terrorist movements, the non-state actor, and the non-state organization are the chief threats to the peace. This vexatious factor, the leading issue of our time, bedevils policy-makers and law-makers as they attempt to adjust to a new world accelerated by the Internet and social media that reduce the role of governments and older civil societies institutions like churches, trade unions, and volunteer clubs and in their place create amorphous, anonymous, unaccountable affiliations that can easily hide crime not only behind anonymity, but behind liberal assumptions about good will.
The self-making and self-franchising of malevolent non-state group or movement, whether racist extremists or terrorists — or in our own tiny snowglobe virtual analogy, griefers — pose an impossible challenge to civilization. Protecting values like freedom of assembly and the right not to be subject to “guilt by association” must be balanced against the need to protect all of society from crime and terrorism, and to prevent the malevolent and conspiratorial gang from exploiting liberal values even as they use them to cripple the liberal society and bend it to their own aims and power.
WHEN YOUR ASSOCIATES ARE GUILTY
Thinking about the Woodbury University saga, we can only ask for more and more information to come to light to make a judgement, and to make reasonable assessments based on patterns already visible in Second Life. If you have a group of some 200 people, and some 30 or 40 of them (many of them alts who have been banned and come and gone) are repeatedly found to be guilty of griefing (and indisputably so), at which point do you “call” it and say that many of the alts, hangers-on, accidental tourists and Eddie Haskellers of the outfit can’t be expected to count on avoidance of “guilt by association”? Many more of them could be stepping forward to claim innocence besides one student, Janelle, who says she is a clothier but has no clothing in world and a track record of harassment, and one “Ubiquitous Librarian”. Woodbury’s RL leadership could be commenting. Yet there is silence.
One thing is sure: the Lindens cannot be allowed to be the final arbitrers on these matters forever. Regrettably for the future of the Metaverse, they *are* these final arbitrators now, because *they have all the server-side information* and they can also punish those who attempt to provide adversarial defense through the distribution *inworld* of chatlogs and notecards. They have all the information; yet they aren’t talking. Their failure to act on this or that case isn’t proof, however, that they’ve exonerated a figure like Tizzers Foxchase — they haven’t (and if it is true that she’s lost a RL job associated with this project, her own employers seem less liberal — or gullible — than the Lindens). Sometimes the Lindens deliberately don’t ban group leaders to see if they go on perpetuating a conspiracy, so as to be able to entrap those often really doing the dirty work. Sometimes they may have enough circumstantial evidence, but even they like to build the case better.
BECOMING LIKE THE TERRORISTS?
In real life, if a figure like a “blind mullah” was incapable of actually performing any criminal acts, but was found to constantly sustaining, supporting, ideologically indoctrinating, recruiting, even directing subtly any terrorist act, they might find themselves indicted. Their lawyers might work hard to show them to be merely pious religious leaders whose views, even if extreme, aren’t grounds for prosecution. The Lindens — and all of us — find ourselves in a roughly analagous situation to the problem of terrorism and the “war on terrorism”: at what point do invasive procedures like wiretapping and racial profiling, gross violations of rights, defeat the purpose of the war on terrorism, and become like terrorism itself?
In Second Life, the Lindens wiretap with abandon and “racially” profile with aggressive zeal because they can — and because they have the information all on their side, on the servers. We can’t tell them not to wiretap; we all agreed they can monitor us at any time when we signed the TOS. We can’t tell them not to “racially profile,” i.e. identify by group affiliation — they have no checks and balances or rule of law to answer to, they are an unchecked executive power that protects its own grid first and foremost.
MASS BANNING OF 2005
Newer residents like Jessica Holyoke weren’t here in October 2005 when the Lindens made an unprecedented mass banning. They banned at least 25 people we could all identify as later missing; they said in fact the list contained 60 people. Philip announced it at a townhall. The bannings were all of W-hat and spinoffs in Voter-5/Voted-5 that had occupied the aptly-named sim “Satyr”. The bannings didn’t come in haste; they followed months and months — a year in some cases — of constant gridcrashing where all of Second Life itself was ground to a halt (this used to be routine, until the Lindens figured out a “fire lane” system that contained self-replicating objects). Some of the people banned loudly proclaimed they were suffering from “guilt by association,” but as their griefing, from petty to serious but serial and systematic, was amply documented and proved with server-side data, the Lindens didn’t blink. They sent a very clear message, more clear than their claim to have opened up an FBI case: keep forming groups for the malicious purpose of crashing sims and bothering other residents, and you will be banned, and if all you do is come on griefing posses and LULZ it up and provide textures, you’ll be banned too.
Since then, the people banned were sobered, and some began to turn to more positive pursuits (like Isometric/Decomposing Monstre and machinima) or seek rehabilitation (Plastic Duck) yet never free of rightful suspicions from the taint of their past crimes. Others continued to come back on alts belligerently, and kept being banned. They rang all the memes and chimes of the first groups or used those who were very much part of the culture and membership of griefing groups but had escaped the ban hammer like Anonamoose Letlow to reconstitute new groups and actions. Always, their cry was, “We’re reforming,” “We’re not like those few bad eggs,” “We’re going to be engaged in creative stuff now, honest” — even as they proceeded to go out *and do the exact same thing as they did on Satyr on Woodbury, right down to the letter. Woodbury got one round of warnings; seeing as it was much the same people doing the same thing as Satyr, the Lindens didn’t go below the bar set by their previous action: they confiscated the sim, continued to make bannings, and hoped that this would serve as enough of a deterrent.
HOW WILL JUSTICE BE JUST?
Now comes the question of how we must obtain justice, in an unjust world, where the deck is stacked against us.
The first issue to realize is that people can — and do, and will — ban on the basis of group affiliation, and absolutely nothing can stop them. When Ban-Link or its clone are GOM’d into the client and become a fact of Second Life, at one flip of the switch, huge, long lists can be added, even things like “all 200 members of Woodbury” and possible, under agitation from Angel Fluffy and other security-state advocates, lsl functions that can ban by group membership as well. We will see entire groups banned by affiliation, and there will be absolutely nothing anyone can do about it, and crying “no guilt by association” to the hardened and wizened club and rentals security goons will be pointless, as they weren’t born yesterday and know how to make snap judgements by instinct simply to protect their venue and their property values and their business. This isn’t a very pleasant world, but it’s not one anyone will be able to stop, as Angel Fluffy with his capture roleplay; Cindy Claveau with her frequently-griefed club; Travis Lambert with this newbie-helping operation at the Shelter; Intlibber Brautigun with his real-estate empire and other members of the group Pro-active Security all have ample motivation to ban on the basis of any marker they can muster, so as to protect their own interests — which the Lindens see aligned with their own interests.
POLICE BLOTTER AND FREE PRESS
The Lindens promise more aggregate information to come on the police blotter, to end the idiotic, memory-less rounds of Linden v. sandbox-shooter that serves as the blotter now — but that’s not going to contain names of residents. And that’s why I think communities have to make their own local police blotters, and keep them as local — and as tethered to a process of fact-gathering and correction as possible. Until the Lindens are prepared to emulate real life and publish all the elements of the case — the abuse report, the alleged perpetrator, the prosecuting Linden, the facts of the case and an adversarial defense — this is about as good as it will get.
In the police-informants’ state that the Lindens’ perfected and have now templated and readied for open-sourcing to the grid, the informant’s report — not even confession! — is the crown of evidence, as Vyshinsky used to say. No adversarial defense is really possible without a Law of Discovery — which involves confronting Lindens to turn over what evidence they have server-side — and there they’ll cry “confidentiality” of their subscribers and refuse cooperation. So as in RL police states, the population will have to count on the big security agencies, the police versus the intelligence, the presidential bodygards versus the corporation bodyguards of oligarchs — to leak kompromat, or compromising material on one another, to set up journalists with false or even selectively true information; to otherwise manipulate the system of information and law-enforcement to their ends.
In this horrible climate, only an independent press, able to keep covering the news without fear or favour, is absolutely vital and only to be expanded, not discouraged.
mootykips
Jul 10th, 2007
I completely agree. We should have never hung around Woodbury, we just got them in trouble, and they should never have supported us by giving us free land and scripters. Terrible.
Thraxis Epsilon
Jul 10th, 2007
“In this horrible climate, only an independent press, able to keep covering the news without fear or favour, is absolutely vital and only to be expanded, not discouraged.”
You forgot “Unbiased”.
And YOU Prokofy are anything BUT unbiased. All of your articles are opinion pieces that boil down to “Waah… They keep griefing me.” Followed by a litany of accusations about anyone who disagrees with you. You berate a law student about the law and state you won’t debate law with them until the pass the Bar. Have you passed the Bar? Are you a Lawyer?
I worked for years as online customer support for an online gaming service. There is a reason why you have become a target for “griefers” real and or imagined. Because you have a big mouth and run around squawking like a chicken, you give them exactly what they want, you give them a response and from looking at the past few articles, and comments to articles, posted by you here. You give them a huge response.
Loloz Oh
Jul 10th, 2007
I really feel sorry for the victims, being forced to play in this horrible, tyrannical, police state of a game with no choice to do otherwise….oh wait.
The Linden’s don’t care what you think as long as the cash keeps rolling in. Prok, you need to send them a message with your wallet! Boycott SL! Non-violent boycotts are the only way to make then Lindens hear us, the victims.
lulz
Prokofy Neva
Jul 10th, 2007
Well, mootykips, since you’ve showed up here with a comment to “fall on your sword” and make it all seem as if Woodbury is not to blame but is innocent, and it’s only your exploitation of them (nice cover story!) could you confirm or deny the allegation that the PNs contributed to the purchase cost of Woodbury sim?
Can you confirm or deny that you live in the same town in RL and contacted these people at Woodbury to assist them?
Can you confirm or deny that Tizzers invited you to form a PN base on Woodbury?
and so on.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 10th, 2007
And YOU Prokofy are anything BUT unbiased. All of your articles are opinion pieces that boil down to “Waah… They keep griefing me.” Followed by a litany of accusations about anyone who disagrees with you. You berate a law student about the law and state you won’t debate law with them until the pass the Bar. Have you passed the Bar? Are you a Lawyer?
I don’t need to “pass the bar” as I’m not putting myself out as an expert and arbiter on the law as Jessica is.
>I worked for years as online customer support for an online gaming service. There is a reason why you have become a target for “griefers” real and or imagined. Because you have a big mouth and run around squawking like a chicken, you give them exactly what they want, you give them a response and from looking at the past few articles, and comments to articles, posted by you here. You give them a huge response.
Are you related to Thrax Linden?
So…let me get this straight. Nobody should ever complain about griefers. They should never protest. If they do that, they are creating targets. Instead, they should stay mum, intimidated, and never expose wrong-doing. They should let the griefers have their way.
Sounds like a plan!
Posted by: Thraxis Epsilon | July 10, 2007 at 02:40 PM
mootykips
Jul 10th, 2007
I confirm we contributed – I sent Tizzers some money both at purchase time of the sim and after when we hacked Carigorp’s account. (latter was only about $3000L though)
I’m not in the same town (I live in Texas) but I did contact them via email/phone.
Tizzers did invite us to form a PN base. Caused a big blow-up internally because some of us didn’t want to use a SL base and some did.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 10th, 2007
I confirm we contributed – I sent Tizzers some money both at purchase time of the sim and after when we hacked Carigorp’s account. (latter was only about $3000L though)
Can you specify a) what you paid at the purchase time of the sim and that b) the $3000 only came later after you hacked this Carigorp’s account.
>I’m not in the same town (I live in Texas) but I did contact them via email/phone.
When? Why? Whom?
>Tizzers did invite us to form a PN base. Caused a big blow-up internally because some of us didn’t want to use a SL base and some did.
When? Why?
Jessica Holyoke
Jul 10th, 2007
I like how I’m brought up when I haven’t even posted yet.
>>Some of the people banned loudly proclaimed they were suffering from “guilt by association,” but as their griefing, from petty to serious but serial and systematic, was amply documented and proved with server-side data, the Lindens didn’t blink.
That statement is why we are at odds here Prokofy. You are bringing up the Mass Banning of 2005 as an earlier example of both “guilt by association” and how the Linden’s were justified in the banning. However, you stated that those banned had documented griefing incidents. That’s not “guilt by association.” That’s them being guilty.
On the end of the argument, you stated that the Lindens didn’t blink. But what about the landowners that don’t have that information. Are they as justified to ban everyone from a group that has griefing members?
And if this is how people want Second Life to be, that’s fine too. But the problem is that if Nancy Newcomer joins a group not knowing what it does, she will be tainted by other people’s actions and be essentially punished because of it. Even if she leaves the group, if someone saw her in it, she’s still tainted by the group’s reputation until Nancy can prove she had nothing to do with the griefing, which she likely can’t to the satisfaction of a landowner resident.
Bullshit Caller
Jul 10th, 2007
“I completely agree. We should have never hung around Woodbury, we just got them in trouble, and they should never have supported us by giving us free land and scripters. Terrible.”
Not to mention getting money from Tizzykips, eh, Mudpie?
Anon but not Legion
Jul 10th, 2007
Prokofy – yes, ignoring them IS the way to make them go away. The more you rant and rave about these injustices, the more we giggle with glee. It isn’t an issue of “being intimidated” or “keepimg mum” or anything of the sort. If you don’t give us a response, you cease being fun to screw with. Additionally, if a more satisfying result is found elsewhere, sometimes we bounce to that. However, time and time again you write these articles about how we’re awful terrible people. You give us what we want – A RESPONSE. Not only a response, but a frothing-at-the-mouth-red-in-the-face-barely-coherent rant.
Your cries of “REAL LIFE FINANCIAL DAMAGES” only add to the hysterics, because they are so absolutely insignificant. I mean what, you lose at worst $1.50 because a newb comes by looking to rent and sees people dressed funny shooting particles into the air while you screech at them about leninist, fascist, luddite, haskelesque conspiracies? Yeah, lets chew that one over a bit.
You may say I’m Haskeling it up here, but the honest truth is the vast majority of griefers are only out for a response. You give the desired response – ATTENTION AND HISTRIONICS. The vast majority of griefers aren’t writing malicious scripts, aiding or abetting people intending to crash the grid etc. People are too quick to scream griefer – hell, I remember being called a griefer once when some friends and I wandered into a somewhat busy sex-shoppe dressed as robots.
I would advise studying the phenomenon of trolling more intently after you’ve made an honest effort to dismiss your preconcieved notions of conspiracy and malicious intent. Malicious intent and mischevious intent are two wildly different things. You call someone with merely mischevious intent someone with malicious intent enough, you’ll help push them in that direction.
Prokofy, I’d gladly walk with you hand in hand to show you the REAL world of W-Hat, Voted-5, /b/tards and the like, if only you’d open your eyes.
We are not actually terrorists or marxists (despite the old soviet logos of w-hat), or luddites (seriously, this accusation is my favorite as it MAKES NO SENSE), or teki-wikki’s. We are not the downfall of cyber-humanity.
We’re just laughing at our own inside jokes and the bewilderment of the general populace.
Also, the statement “It all began at Woodbury U” makes me quite sad – it seems you’ve forgotten all about dear sweet Baku.
Reality
Jul 10th, 2007
“I don’t need to “pass the bar” as I’m not putting myself out as an expert and arbiter on the law as Jessica is.”
Dearie? Until you yourself have gone through law school and become a lawyer or other diploma carrying expert on law … you do not have a leg to stand on when dealing with even so much as a law student.
Jabber39
Jul 10th, 2007
wow, PN is getting a lot of press from the herald.
DaveOner
Jul 10th, 2007
Howcome we all have to post comments to respond to articles but Prok gets to respond by making her OWN article AND spamming the comments sections of both articles?
I think someone at SLH is scared one of her cats will bite them if they stop her!
Maklin Deckard
Jul 10th, 2007
“But what about the landowners that don’t have that information. Are they as justified to ban everyone from a group that has griefing members?” – Jessica Holyoke
Yes, they are…they are the ones paying the bill, not the group that is banned. There are two choices…the group can clean house (and if it is a few bad apples, why do we never see or hear of this happening?) OR those that wish to protect their reputation quit the group.
“But the problem is that if Nancy Newcomer joins a group not knowing what it does, she will be tainted by other people’s actions and be essentially punished because of it.” – Jessica Holyoke
Then Nancy is a brain-dead dumbass that deserves what she gets. I know for a fact I would NEVER join a group RL or VR without first asking around to find out what their rep is (and in places they don’t control). If our hypothetical Nancy Nitwit joins the first group that pops up an invite and doesn’t determine how they are viewed inword….well, I consider it rather Darwinian in that she gets what she deserves for being careless.
As far as Woodbury goes, been in two sims in the past week that were working fine…someone wearing the WU group flag shows up, then another, then another…then the sim goes down repeatedly, each time it comes up the WU people return and it lags/crashes again and again…THEN Lindens show up, WU groupies stop showing up and the sim crashes stop.
Seems kinda odd these things happen when Woodbury / Btard types show up and magically stop when Lindens appear in a sim and Woodbury folks stop returning to the sim. Could be coincidental…but with the reps the two groups have made for themselves, I am not buying it. Just too convenient a coincidence.
Count me in as a supporter of ‘guilt by association’.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 10th, 2007
The only reason I made my own article is because when I posted an article with some important revelations in it that needed to see the light of day, which itself was a response to two tendentious articles in a row, it was stepped on immediately by a posting of Jessica’s article by Pixeleen — despite a policy Pixeleen herself invokes about not having people step on articles.
The real question to ask is why Jessica, who isn’t a reporter but a contributor, has been allowed two articles in 24 hours on this subject, when her opinion expressed in the comments section would suffice. Ever balancing the saddle-bags I guess.
Thraxis Epsilon
Jul 10th, 2007
“So…let me get this straight. Nobody should ever complain about griefers. They should never protest. If they do that, they are creating targets. Instead, they should stay mum, intimidated, and never expose wrong-doing. They should let the griefers have their way.”
No I’m not Thrax Linden, and have no idea who he is. (Do you have some grudge with them in particular? as you seem determined to link them to some SL name)
Now as to what you should do if you witness or are a target of abuse?
1. Report the abuse with the AR system
2. If it isn’t your land, you may opt to remove yourself from location
3. If it is your land, you may ban, eject or whatever valid tools you have available to you the responsible parties.
4. Quietly Mute the offending parties (or pretend that you have) (note the “Quietly” part, that means no IM to them going “MUTE”)
If you refuse to use the tools provided to you… you’re part of the problem. If you argue with and cause a scene with the offenders…. you’re part of the problem. And if you waste the time of the people (aka Lindens) who do come to take care of the problem with needless comments and statements about how they should handle it, or what they should do, you are part of the problem.
During my time working for TEN / Pogo, before EA took it over, I kicked and temporarily banned more people for not following those simple guidlines, and I had the full backing of my boss on it, then I did the people who may have really caused a problem.
And yes… there were a few people who made good on threats to sue because of my actions. Their lawyers contacted the company, my boss provided the logs showing what led up to the person being kicked or banned… their lawers either dropped the case or advised their client to drop the case.
DaveOner
Jul 10th, 2007
“The real question to ask is why Jessica, who isn’t a reporter but a contributor, has been allowed two articles in 24 hours on this subject, when her opinion expressed in the comments section would suffice.”
Can’t stand another fox in the hen house, eh, Prok?
And by your logic your comments in other articles would suffice without getting special attention with your own “article” as well. At least Jessica’s making an attempt to actually “contribute” to SLH!
But then again, I think it’s all about attention for you, anyway.
BTW, is there an opening for “Editor” at SLH? I ask because there doesn’t seem to be one at the moment otherwise there would be a better variety of articles instead of the redundant lineup as we see it now.
WU is gone. Prok try to be happy about something for once since you probably feel you won something out of it. Let the dead horse take a breather for a while!
Kahni Poitier
Jul 10th, 2007
Nobody can cry “victim” like Prok, huh?
Jessica Holyoke
Jul 10th, 2007
To Maklin,
And I think I see us as coming at the problem in two different ways based on a perception of what SL is. I wouldn’t join a sorority, a civics group or some RL organization without checking it out somewhat, even if it was based on the information that they gave me. (SL as RL). But I wouldn’t vette out a MySpace, Yahoo or Facebook group to see if it was a secretly evil organization either. (SL as social networking). If the group looked close to something I would be interested in and it was free, not only would I join it, I have joined it. Granted, groups are publically shown in SL, as opposed to other social networking places, but the same basic concept of internet social networking applies.
And also, based on what? I was on the grid for almost six months before I found out about /b/ tards and another two months to find out that /b/ didn’t stand for bling. And as the population of SL grows, everyone is just going to get more isolated. So reputation is going to be worth even less in the future.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 10th, 2007
Thrax, if you are the same one inworld with these people in the griefing posse, I guess you imagine Second Life is a lot like the griefing game that you used to run — except now you get to be a griefer yourself with impunity.
>1. Report the abuse with the AR system
this goes nowhere, isn’t publicized even when accepted and dealt with, and is generally ineffective.
>2. If it isn’t your land, you may opt to remove yourself from location
Um, yeah, that’s right, let griefers, scammers, shooters, and racists take over the welcome areas and infohubs. Splendid idea!~
>3. If it is your land, you may ban, eject or whatever valid tools you have available to you the responsible parties.
Except…on the mainland, they can taunt you AND push prims inside your land from nearby neighbours’ parcels who haven’t banned them and can’t be reached, and from Linden land. And that enables them to crash sims, too.
>4. Quietly Mute the offending parties (or pretend that you have) (note the “Quietly” part, that means no IM to them going “MUTE”)
Oh, I believe in due notification of all mutes. I mute people who grief, yes. They work around it by sending repeated TPs, sending dollar payments, pushing notecards — which until recently couldn’t be batted away. Even if there are more tools to reject these things, they still form annoying blue screens that you may click on accidently.
>If you refuse to use the tools provided to you… you’re part of the problem. If you argue with and cause a scene with the offenders…. you’re part of the problem.
Um, I don’t cause a scene, asshole — but people like you joining griefing posses do. Your snotty, condescending advice, typical of griefing game gods, holds absolutely no water with me.
Because tools are never enough, tools are insufficient to deal with civilization, and you need ways to expose the bad behaviour of miscreants and both deter them and inform the public. And that’s why the free press is absolutely vital, and that’s why people like you bent on giving griefers a pass and disrupting the world and keeping it merely your tekkie wiki sandbox and not have it used for other more serious purposes constantly attack the free media, and constantly blame the media for fueling griefers, and constantly think the solution is to quietly make deals with game gods.
Fuck. That. Shit.
I’m all for the media covering griefers in such a way as to not fuel them — and to not cover them strategically as well. But when the facts of the case are this much disputed as they are with Woodbury, more coverage, not less is needed.
>And if you waste the time of the people (aka Lindens) who do come to take care of the problem with needless comments and statements about how they should handle it, or what they should do, you are part of the problem.
That’s right, let’s cede ALL the power to your uber class and comrades-at-arms, the game gods, eh? That’s the ticket! My, you’re a classic case of game god assholery, good to have it exposed.
>During my time working for TEN / Pogo, before EA took it over, I kicked and temporarily banned more people for not following those simple guidlines, and I had the full backing of my boss on it, then I did the people who may have really caused a problem.
Wow, and that’s something to be proud of? Hello? My God, this is always worse than we knew.
>And yes… there were a few people who made good on threats to sue because of my actions. Their lawyers contacted the company, my boss provided the logs showing what led up to the person being kicked or banned… their lawers either dropped the case or advised their client to drop the case.
Ugh. I do hope that some ballsy law firms step up to the plate — along with clean-hands prosecutors — that start to really investigate and prosecute and restore and enlarge justice in games and worlds, since the assholes running them without any sense of impunity or the rule of law are really the essence of the problem. Imagine being proud of harassing those who didn’t play by the police-state rules, instead of the griefers!
Anonymous
Jul 10th, 2007
“But I wouldn’t vette out a MySpace, Yahoo or Facebook group to see if it was a secretly evil organization either. (SL as social networking). If the group looked close to something I would be interested in and it was free, not only would I join it, I have joined it. Granted, groups are publically shown in SL, as opposed to other social networking places, but the same basic concept of internet social networking applies.”
Actually, by making groups visible, the same concepts do NOT apply. People have made their affiiations (or social networking as you call it) public, and in so doing they open themselves to being tarred by the same brush when other members act out of line. You are apparently FAR more trusting than I am, I would not even consider joining a social network without first checking out what goes on there / how the members behave.
And if it comes to my attention that a group I have joined VR or RL contains members behaving inappriately who are NOT immediately kicked out, I would resign from that group on the spot! I would NOT expect to be treated any differently than the inappropriately behaving members if I were to remain in that group (as so many here do). I consider it due dilligence to protect both my VR and RL reputations, respectively, and that requires basic research on the groups with which my name is associated.
“And also, based on what? I was on the grid for almost six months before I found out about /b/ tards and another two months to find out that /b/ didn’t stand for bling. And as the population of SL grows, everyone is just going to get more isolated. So reputation is going to be worth even less in the future.”
With all due respect, Jessica, you apparently are NOT particularly observant. When I joined, the big griefers were the SA goons, W-Hat and Voter/ed-5….I was aware of them and warned by others to avoid associating with them within my first week (SA Goons I heard about day 1). Some players volunteered who to avoid, and I also asked around. its real easy to find out the troublemaker groups from the many people they have bothered, or friends of people bothered.
And I hold just the opposite view on reputation…yes, as SL grows INDIVIDUAL rep based on the PERSONS actions is going to mean less and less (Maklin who? He built what? Never heard of him!). But conversely, the LARGER SL grows the MORE reputation derived from group membership IS going to matter (unless you wish to end up on the wrong end BanLink / other auto-ban lists), for as SL grows larger and people more isolated (as you put it), the LESS time landowners/club admins will have/take to look into the qualities of the individual (ex: Jessica who?) and the more likely that bans will come down based on reputation derived from group membership (ex: Jessica who? Don’t know her, wait, she’s in Woodbury U? I heard of them, frigging griefers…banlink…).
(NOT implying you are a griefer or part of woodbury U, used strictly as an example)
Reality
Jul 10th, 2007
“Because tools are never enough, tools are insufficient to deal with civilization, and you need ways to expose the bad behaviour of miscreants and both deter them and inform the public.”
Dearie, it’s a piece of software – not the next Egypt, Babylon or any other ‘civilization’. You have yet to provide hard line proof to back up this claim.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 10th, 2007
When W-hat was banned, everybody on Second Citizen, the stronghold of the griefers like Huns and Kerian and griefing apologists like Flipper and Aimee screamed “guilt by association”. But those of us who spent more than five minutes inworld had been to dozens of townhalls and community meetings and events where we saw these people claiming “guilt by association” were catcalling, jeering, particle-blasting, disrupting, harassing, even crashing the sim. Those of us who had events in world knew what it was like to deal with them. There were ample numbers of eyewitnesses and even without me, numerous abuse reports. Many people saw them disrupting SLB4, whatever Tizzers’ claim (and note she has 2 accounts at the very least, one named “Tizzy Gazov” with her hubby’s last name.
The entire saga of Woodbury from its first banning in April to its confiscation now can’t be laid at my doorstep because I don’t abuse report these people as part of a strategy to develop local police blotters and use of tools in anticipation of more and more autonomy to handle “policing” when the Lindens ostensibly “share” this. Furthermore, if I had assiduously
documented and reported daily all the forms of petty harassment that Tizzers indulges in — coming to my office, renting from me, joining the group — all acts technically legal and innocent but all part of a whole that constitutes harassment — and if numerous tenants joined in this exercise as they saw her flying around their lots scoping out whether they were furries and could be harassed — then likely she’d have been disciplined by now.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 10th, 2007
Just because someone remains at large doesn’t mean they aren’t guilty — and possibly very guilty, and so guilty the Lindens watch them like hawks to see if they can establish a larger picture of a conspiracy.
However, you don’t make the argument against guilt by association convincing by adopting the cause of the Black Panthers and celebrating violent and criminal revolutionary aims. And that’s the w-hat equivalent, and once you have documented cases, and once the Lindens have repeatedly acted on a group, and once the lie has been given about 3 times on this notion of “reforming” and “only a few bad eggs,” by the time you get to Woodbury, you don’t say oh, Janelle’s a clothier and Tizzers a harried administrator, you explain that they’re in on it. And neither of them is Nancy Newcomber, and both of them known EXACTLY what sort of shenanigans they’re up to!
Baloney. Jesus said, “By your fruits ye shall know them.” It remains good advice today. By people’s actions, outcomes, products, effects you know them. People join groups and leave them all the time. Janelle knows EXACTLY what’s she’s doing and is merely lying to be obnoxious and to further the goals of the conspiracy. Nobody comes and puts down $400 and harasses a rental agent targeted by a harassment group and laughs like a hyena unless they have intent — they don’t wander accidently from their sewing circle into this organized thuggery.
SqueezeOne Pow
Jul 10th, 2007
“When I joined, the big griefers were the SA goons, W-Hat and Voter/ed-5….I was aware of them and warned by others to avoid associating with them within my first week…”
That’s interesting to know. In fact there are many people that go long periods of time exploring the grid without encountering griefers. It’s pretty easy to do if you use some common sense and observation skills…unless you seek out drama.
I sought drama in the form of blowing stuff up. I was a griefer but more in the context that I didn’t understand the social protocols of SL and was under the impression that combat played more of a part in things than it did. I found plenty of trouble!
Then I found a new direction I wanted to go in with SL (I do this every few months) and got into more “productive” aspects of things. I now have encounters with griefers maybe once every 4 months. They are often short encounters that I am able to end quickly through various means.
I, too, didn’t know what a /b/tard was until all the noise that showed up on SLH over this WU thing.
If you join a “griefer group” as in, their whole point is mischief then you should know what you’re getting into already. If you join a more ambiguous group or a group whose aim doesn’t appear to be that of grief but there are people that wear that tag and cause grief…how are you to know?
Also, there are plenty of groups in SL that are just information groups…DJs letting members know where they’re going to play, a group for people who share similar interests, groups for SL business and customer support, etc.
I’m not going to quit a group that gives me services just because a portion of them are jerks and I wouldn’t expect them to be banned from that group. Honestly it’s none of the group’s business if it doesn’t relate to or affect that group’s purpose. It would end up with the equivalent result of Target running background checks on people that come through their doors.
Not all groups are clubs with regular meetings and a manifesto and not all their members represent the group in the same way.
DaveOner
Jul 10th, 2007
“…Because tools are never enough, tools are insufficient to deal with civilization…”
haha if this is what passes for “civilization” these days then pass me a loin cloth and a rock!
Thraxis Epsilon
Jul 10th, 2007
“Thrax, if you are the same one inworld with these people in the griefing posse, I guess you imagine Second Life is a lot like the griefing game that you used to run”
My name is THRAXIS as much as you type you should learn reading comprehension first.
And not once did I say I was for or encouraged Griefing. I am all for the Lindens removing from the grid people who have been confirmed to have crashed sims, etc.
But that confirmation isn’t going to be found in the hundreds of hours you’ve wasted on your crusade against those groups. It is going to come from the Lindens themselves actually getting that information directly.
The best any resident is going to be able to do is to ban those people they don’t wish to have access to their land, from their land.
“>And yes… there were a few people who made good on threats to sue because of my actions. Their lawyers contacted the company, my boss provided the logs showing what led up to the person being kicked or banned… their lawers either dropped the case or advised their client to drop the case.
Ugh. I do hope that some ballsy law firms step up to the plate — along with clean-hands prosecutors — that start to really investigate and prosecute and restore and enlarge justice in games and worlds, since the assholes running them without any sense of impunity or the rule of law are really the essence of the problem. Imagine being proud of harassing those who didn’t play by the police-state rules, instead of the griefers! ”
You again fail at reading comprehension. It was not that the lawyers were not ballsy. It was the fact that their client was clearly in the wrong to begin with.
As an example.
Abuse Situation: Player is in a PG area swearing and being abusive.
Resolution: Player is warned and if actions continue is temporarily banned.
Result: Offended player spends the next hour bitching and complaining about the person who had already been banned.
This offended player is now a disruption and is notified of the tools they have to control their playing environment. They continue to be disruptive and become verbally abusive.
Resolution: offended player is warned that continued behaviour is a violation of the rules just as much as the behaviour of the person banned… continued behaviour results in a temporary ban.
And Prokofy…. you’re not Free Press, when it comes to the subject of Griefing. You’re biased, you have a personal interest in the subject matter, and you attack people for unrelated issues every chance you get. If there is ANYONE at the SL Herald who shouldn’t be covering a story about griefers… it is you.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 11th, 2007
>Abuse Situation: Player is in a PG area swearing and being abusive.
That’s abusive in and of itself. There shouldn’t be such a thing as “PG” in a game for *adults* (perhaps YOUR game was for kids but this one is NOT). And PG swearing is the classic nasty people do against their enemies — get them nailed for PG.
>Resolution: Player is warned and if actions continue is temporarily banned.
Result: Offended player spends the next hour bitching and complaining about the person who had already been banned.
So? Let him talk. Ignore him. Move on. Obviously he had issues. Issues you can’t take the time to parse, or don’t care about and haven’t figured out how to make the guy feel served. A good customer service manager would help that person feel “closure”. You’re obviously sucky at that.
>This offended player is now a disruption and is notified of the tools they have to control their playing environment. They continue to be disruptive and become verbally abusive.
Tools? Telling a game mod so that all that game mod does is issue a warning? Please, spare me, that’s the lamest shit I’ve heard since um Second Life.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 11th, 2007
But that confirmation isn’t going to be found in the hundreds of hours you’ve wasted on your crusade against those groups. It is going to come from the Lindens themselves actually getting that information directly.
Actually, as in RL battles against extremists and terrorists, the real battle isn’t against the specific extremist or terrorist groups; the real battle is for the hearts and minds of everyone else. The real battle is to keep countering the malevolent logic of the extremist griefers, so that those just watching, and making up their minds understand the arguments and may even be persuaded by them, given that the griefers’ objective is to propagandize people over to their nihilism and malevolent glee in making others miserable. So it’s about building a wall of shame.
Janelle Kyomoon
Jul 11th, 2007
>>Many more of them could be stepping forward to claim innocence besides one student, Janelle, who says she is a clothier but has no clothing in world and a track record of harassment
Thanks for your slander! I love how I didn’t even attack you once in my article. I steered away from actually because I don’t like falsely accusing people. You are so childish Prokofy, you act like a high schooler and not a 50 year old woman that is supposedly a responsible human being. I went out of my way not to point fingers at you or blame you for anything in my article. and you attack me. Bravo Prokofy, bravo. You my dear are a hero in journalism. So track record of harassment???? You mean the one time I simply choose your low rent homes and gave you a free 400 lindens in your pocket. So thats a track record now? Funny how childish your accusations are. Let me guess you probably reported me to the Lindens for griefing you too? This is so sad.
And I’ve told you already, I will see you at the SLCC Prokofy. I look forward to seeing you and showing you my RL outfit that I am working on as well as a print out of the outfit in SL. Like I said. I’m NOT like you, I’m not trying to turn a profit in Second Life. I’m simply trying to use it for my own personal needs. My clothes aren’t good enough to sell on the Second life marketplace. They are simple and only starting off points for my real life work. Can we post pictures in these comments? If so I will post the outfit as soon as I get home. I’m currently enjoying my time visiting shrines and Tokyo, Japan which is why I haven’t jumped at Prokofy’s personal attacks on me.
I will not lower myself to Prokofy’s menial childish behavior and start shouting names and false things about her. I will simply prove myself at the SLCC. Have a wonderful week everyone, even you Prokofy!
Mark
Jul 11th, 2007
BUT MOM!
He was GONNA hit me!
Pretty much explains it all, from both sides.
Grow.The.Fuck.Up
Concerned citizen
Jul 11th, 2007
Give it up Thraxis, you can tell her a MILLION times how to best deal with griefers, but she won’t listen and just continue to give them all the attention they crave… God knows I tried. And it’s not like my advice to her has been so bad, the security team I run at our club has been very effective against them, so far even that some griefer groups don’t come by anymore as we’re seen as ‘too risky; only for the most experienced griefer’.
But when did Prok ever LISTEN to anyone? She’s far too buisy talking. And thus making herself a bigger and better target.
Ya know, this is actually a good thing: as long as they’re having tooo much fun griefing Prok as they get such a nice response out of her, they’re not griefing the rest of the grid.
Never mind what I said Prok.. Post more articles on teh mean griefers!
Anon but not Legion
Jul 11th, 2007
Love how the quick rundown on ways-to-stop-a-griefer was completely glossed over!
>So? Let him talk. Ignore him. Move on. Obviously he had issues. Issues you can’t take the time to parse, or don’t care about and haven’t figured out how to make the guy feel served. A good customer service manager would help that person feel “closure”. You’re obviously sucky at that.
wow. just wow.
This is easily the most amusing thing Prokofy has ever said.
If the situation has been handled, the offender has been ejected or blocked or whatever, then the offended has no reason to be offended any longer. Continuing to bitch and whine and moan makes the complaining party A DISRUPTION THEMSELVES. Banning jerks who are “ruining” other people’s enjoyment of the game is something you generally support, so why not in this instance? Oh, that’s right, because they were “kicking back”, “biting back HARD”, and all sorts of other things.
In the situation Thraxis described, he certainly did the right thing – provided the best environment for the most number of users.
As a side note, I had a chance to speak to a member of LL’s staff outside of Second Life on a level. I’d hate to jepordize his job by outing him, so no names. During the course of our conversation I took the time to ask him about our resident crazy cat-lady and what the folks around the Lab thought.
It really sucks to be you Prokofy, I -almost- feel bad. The Lindens don’t even really want you around and think you are a joke. When I start to feel bad, I remember you’ve brought this all on yourself with your inability to cope or coexist with the virtual world around you and your psychotic conspiracy theories.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 11th, 2007
>You mean the one time I simply choose your low rent homes and gave you a free 400 lindens in your pocket. So thats a track record now? Funny how childish your accusations are. Let me guess you probably reported me to the Lindens for griefing you too? This is so sad.
>And I’ve told you already, I will see you at the SLCC Prokofy. I look forward to seeing you and showing you my RL outfit that I am working on as well as a print out of the outfit in SL. L
Yes, a track record of harassment, as I said. Out of the gadzillion rentals in SL — many of them cheaper given your “student’s budget,” you chose mine — uh-huh. If you make clothes, if you have the resources to travel to Japan or Chicago, it’s not hard to link to a screenshot and your failure to do this is suspect.
>I’d hate to jepordize his job by outing him, so no names. During the course of our conversation I took the time to ask him about our resident crazy cat-lady and what the folks around the Lab thought.
>It really sucks to be you Prokofy, I -almost- feel bad. The Lindens don’t even really want you around and think you are a joke. When I start to feel bad, I remember you’ve brought this all on yourself with your inability to cope or coexist with the virtual world around you and your psychotic conspiracy theories.
Um, they have no problem taking my money. And even the Lindens don’t ban people merely because griefers think they are crazy cat ladies.
I don’t have to believe in psychotic conspiracy theories; all I have to do is write down what I see.
Verbena Pennyfeather
Jul 11th, 2007
Yaknow, I’m getting awfully sick of Proko digging up old ass shite. Damn sick. So here it is. Prokofy Neva/ Catherine Fitzgerald, I’m calling you out. For all these huge crimes my old Voted 5 group committed, come after me. I was the owner/creator/ringleader/funder of it. I ran the show. I was the Mafia Don. Come get me. My Real Life information is pretty much a matter of public record, if you know where to find it. Pull a Bragg, and get some courts involved. Cause, I’m telling you, Prok, the NEXT time my name gets dragged through the mud by your crazy ass conspiracy ranting, I’m retaining a lawyer and I’m going to see what I can do.
Janelle Kyomoon
Jul 11th, 2007
>>Yes, a track record of harassment, as I said. Out of the gadzillion rentals in SL — many of them cheaper given your “student’s budget,” you chose mine — uh-huh. If you make clothes, if you have the resources to travel to Japan or Chicago, it’s not hard to link to a screenshot and your failure to do this is suspect.
Lol, your response is so laughable. I actually did notice your rentals because of you posting your slander of a university sim that I had fun out. I did notice the very low cost and for that I give you kudos on. You have marketed your rentals well. But all I simply did and which you are so hurt by is show your prejudice and your love up jumping to the whole “guilty by association” game. IN REAL LIFE guilty by assocation is really only used in cases where you see someone driving the get away car for a robbery, etc. Yes I am in a group that had griefer activity in it. Something that I did not know about when I joined the group/sim. And something that I have sent myself apart from. I simply remain a part of the group now in support of the university itself. A university that choose to give me a free spot to learn of second life without the hassles of tons of other “noobs” around me. It was a home to some of us that had no cruel intent for the Second Life realm. Yes no one else has stepped forward b/c they see talking to you is like talking to a brick wall. You only see your false second life realities and consipiracy theories. You see what you want to see. You dear Prokofy are just as racist as you say some of the /b/tards are out there. You discriminate based on a title not what you know of the person. You judge me simply on the fact that I called your consipiracy theories false. That is ALL I have ever done to you.
The fact that you continue to show such childish behavior in when people have come to try to make peace with you is very sad. You would think someone with your reputation and job in the real world would see things in a more mature light.
And as far as my trip/vacation. The Japan trip was paid for by a dear friend that actually is a decent human being and cares about making a girl who has a “students budget” happy. I was lucky enough to have someone like that around. Some of us do have real lifes with real friends who appreciate our kindness and honesty. Maybe you should try it some time. I find it highly enjoyable.
As I said… have a wonderful week
Prokofy Neva
Jul 11th, 2007
>I’m telling you, Prok, the NEXT time my name gets dragged through the mud by your crazy ass conspiracy ranting, I’m retaining a lawyer and I’m going to see what I can do.
See you in court, big guy.
>IN REAL LIFE guilty by assocation is really only used in cases where you see someone driving the get away car for a robbery, etc. Yes I am in a group that had griefer activity in it. Something that I did not know about when I joined the group/sim
*Stifles laughter*. So was it a Nissan or a Mazda?
>I simply remain a part of the group now in support of the university itself. A university that choose to give me a free spot to learn of second life without the hassles of tons of other “noobs” around me. It was a home to some of us that had no cruel intent for the Second Life realm
Janelle, um, you are a total, unadulterated, unmitiated fraud.
DF
Jul 11th, 2007
“Yes, a track record of harassment, as I said.”
Ok, tme to show some proof Prok. OTHER then you saying it’s so.
Mark
Jul 11th, 2007
While I agree that Prok is a huge dork and is given to hysterics, I am also not stupid enough to believe that you (Janelle) chose Prok’s rentals for any reason other than to agitate her more.
So. Just Stop. Insulting. Our Collective. Intelligence.
Really, please, if you have any sort of respect for the other readers here or ANY backbone what so ever, you won’t try to keep selling this line of BULLSHIT. And it IS unmitigated BULLSHIT.
And who ever came up with the idea that commenters get to comment in the form of ARTICLES here – I am waiting for my turn, Please put me in line. That’s how it works right? I get to carry an argument over from comments into an article, right?
urizenus
Jul 11th, 2007
Anyone can write for the Herald. Everyone works freelance. Submit an article to Pix and see what happens. If we publish it you will be filthy rich, famous beyond your wildest imagination, and you will as a god among men. Ooops, I accidently ran that through the English to Lindenese translator. It should have read “we will pay you up to 1K Lindens.”
Ichi Jaehun
Jul 11th, 2007
In my oppinion all of the above, which seems to deal with the quarrels of a few, is a little blown out of proportion. Instead I think the focus should be on whether it’s a sound modus operandi to erase regularly crashing places like Woodbury University. Another solution could be data.
Furthermore I honestly don’t think terms such as extremist or terrorist have any meaning in this debate.
I’ve seen people sit in campingchairs and shop for virtual bling next to the parcel of a RL radical group called Jeunesses Identitaires. This particular group is a direct descendent of Unité Radicale which was dissolved in 2002, after one of its neo-Nazi members tried to assassinate the French president. For the benefit of clarity, I think labels such as extremist should be reserved for cases of this nature.
That being said I think some good points have been made above:
No PG sims and a more transparent ban system with accountability.
I’d like to add a better integrated UI to the list and also suggest a jail sim or maybe some sort of community service. Offenders could for instance be sentenced to 100 hours of virtual time, cleansing adspaces in favor of flora.
… or something like that.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 11th, 2007
Ichi, extremists can be found on the *left* as well as the *right* and the extremists of the *right* have nothing on extremists of the *left* when it comes to world historical mass murder totals.
Your touching concern about “erased sims” is silly — there’s nothing “erased”. An island is merely server space. The content consists of texts and scripts, which can be preserved offline and in inventory, and builds, which can be stored in an avatar’s inventory and re-rezzed. And *cough* this has been done a few times, already, eh? And part of the M.O. of this “happening” has been to crash and destroy buildings (no mean feat in SL where you have to work hard at dismantling a building!)
The idea of community service is silly, because to staff it would take Lindens away from developing, policing and customer service. Why have griefers on the grid feigning community service, like W-hat goes around whitewashing its sepulchre with Relay for Life? Ban them, and if they don’t get it after 6 incremental bans, permaban them. They make alts anyway. Then hardware ban them, I guess, except i’m increasingly ceasing to believe there is such a thing given the recurrences of the same goons.
Jail is meaningless because you can log out of it any time.
And um, adspaces can’t just get “cleansed.” Gosh, that would be nice! But you can’t “cleanse” other people’s property and plant trees on it unless you want to pay their extortionist prices and assume the tier. Some of us do this when the prices are tolerable and do plant trees. But it’s a fool’s errand. The Lindens need to sell adspace on governor roads, welcome areas, and other land they control and regulate, end of story. Revenue for them, less blight and devaluation for us.
Alyx Stoklitsky
Jul 11th, 2007
“the extremists of the *right* have nothing on extremists of the *left* when it comes to world historical mass murder totals.”
Oh yes, Hitler was SUCH a leftist, wasn’t he?
Get real.
Janelle Kyomoon
Jul 11th, 2007
>>Janelle, um, you are a total, unadulterated, unmitiated fraud.
And here we go with the childish insults again. Its time to be an adult and look at the facts Prokofy. Stop point and blaming and screaming “Wolf”
I have chose to take the more adult route in this and stop with the name calling and mud slinging and only state my facts. Go ahead, scream your slander and call me names. It will only make me sit back and have a chuckle at how a 25 year old student and mother can simply pull so much hatred out of a simple response to someone’s claim.
To Mark.. I have stated in other comments in other articles, my point was not simply to seek out the cheap rentals of Prokofy (although I will say she does have very nice rental homes for decent prices.. good job to Prok on that one, she has very fair pricing.. yes folks I actually just paid Prok a compliment) But I also had another point in renting there and that was to prove her prejudice and refusal to look at fact. I AM a non griefer, as I stated before I joined Woodbury to learn with no knowledge of griefer attack and usually not on enough to even notice them. You and Prokofy have one thing in common Mark.. your refusal to look at facts.
K-FR
Jul 11th, 2007
Yeah, and I remember finding a room full of homosexual harry potter pornography in Prokofy Neva’s business tower. All of the pornographic images were under her group, Ravenglass Rentals.
Should she have to answer for the horrible, horrible taste of someone in her group? No, she says, because her group is a group for tenants, and their things are in her group so they don’t get returned from her land.
Fine. She gets to determine the nature of her group and what being a member of that group entails.
Then so do the groups she targets. If they say that being a member of XXXX group doesn’t mean you have to be a “griefer,” then she should accept that, just like we accept that she is not obsessed with Harry Potter homosexual pornography.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 12th, 2007
Ravenglass Hall is an apartment building, not a business tower.
Big difference between a tenant having Harry Potter parody gay porn in his private apartment, not visible unless you are a nosy griefer camera-zooming, and within both the TOS and my rental rules and….
…anti-gay or anti-semitic or racist textures being spewed all over the goddamn sim, grinding it to a halt, and crashing it.
One is a matter of tastelessness, but private tastelessness, and within the rules of LL and my rentals; the other is public, criminal infliction of tastelessness and worse, such as to damage and destroy.
You don’t have to fear group association, when you have something above the group, which is “the rule of law”. You could only fear it if you had a group that obeyed no law higher than itself, which was a tribe.
Mark
Jul 12th, 2007
“To Mark.. I have stated in other comments in other articles, my point was not simply to seek out the cheap rentals of Prokofy (although I will say she does have very nice rental homes for decent prices.. good job to Prok on that one, she has very fair pricing.. yes folks I actually just paid Prok a compliment) But I also had another point in renting there and that was to prove her prejudice and refusal to look at fact. I AM a non griefer, as I stated before I joined Woodbury to learn with no knowledge of griefer attack and usually not on enough to even notice them. You and Prokofy have one thing in common Mark.. your refusal to look at facts.”
Nah. I see plain as day that you chose Prok’s rentals. Given the nature of the relationship between you and your associates and Prok, I am simply calling bullshit. These are the facts I see. Save the innocent routine for someone who might believe it, perhaps a senile pensioner who talks to pigeons.
Dusk
Jul 12th, 2007
Isn’t the Harry Potter crew mostly under age? Hmm…
shockwave yareach
Jul 12th, 2007
“But I also had another point in renting there and that was to prove her prejudice and refusal to look at fact.” – Janelle
And she showed you that she doesn’t have to do business with anyone she doesn’t feel like doing business with. Point awarded to Prok. Her error was in not refunding your money. Point awarded to Janelle. And yet, all this time, you’ve been saying that you just wanted a cheap place to rent. No ulterior motives, eh? Tsk tsk tsk. Point awarded to Prok and entry of Janelle right beside Prok in the UNTRUSTWORTHY category. Prok wins the battle, but you both lose the war.
Thank the stars I don’t have any inworld dealings with either of you.
Prokofy Neva
Jul 12th, 2007
“But I also had another point in renting there and that was to prove her prejudice and refusal to look at fact.” – Janelle
Yeah, this is a bald-faced lie, and typical of their Haskelling and mendacity. It’s a game for them, how many times can they grief and do heckling, mean stuff and then say, “but I was only sitting next to you”.
Voted-5 has a long history of attempting to join the group and harassing people. Hazim began to actually spend money on rentals recently to pay for a $300 or $400 rental and blow the money, knowing he couldn’t expect it back, just for its nuisance value. Tizzers, too, rented and was immediately refunded (she was given that courtesy once; but no more). When you have Hazim and Tizzers both renting with intent to grief, paying the box, being expelled, returning, renting again, being expelled, griefing — say, when Janelle, from the *same group* comes along and uses *the exact same v-5 M.O. of griefing* you say, “OMG, am I being prejudiced against a poor seamstreamstress who is merely falling in with the wrong crowd? Or do we have another “winner” here who goes on the ban list?” Duh.
Tizzy Gazov tells me proudly that she isn’t out to get me, I’m a conspiracy freak, and she spends most of her time shooting the breeze with Intlibber on the AVIX sims. Oh, ok. Right. And that’s how she does it – worms her way into all the groups, and it’s only a matter of time before she turns on Intlibber and ultimately badly griefs him. Somebody who IMs you from their alt being prepared for escape if their main is banned, and tells you there’s no conspiracy, even as they repeatedly come on to your sim with griefing posses, is obviously a griefer.
Um, now why would I do that? The first time Hazim rented, I couldn’t see where it was at first and ignored it and it expired. He joined the group and prim littered and put up signs, so he had a track record of griefing — and of course he did all the other nasty things that got him banned. Tizzers followed his example, renting from me provocatively — I refunded her the first time she pulled that stunt and banned her. I banned her from events — she came with Hood Bury once who was in blackface with a Kentucky Fried Chicken bucket (!) pushing giant claws into the land even after being banned, by using Governor Linden land nearby as a safe haven. She stood um…idly by…while Hood Bury did all the griefing.
So after a series of incidents like that, Janelle, in the Prokofy Fan Club with people who use this provocative renting as their M.O. to harass, comes along and rents. So, sorry, that 2 entire sims have been crashed and put out of business by this same group, she doesn’t get her rent back. She’s adopted the M.O. of a griefing group; she’s stayed in it way past the sell back. No refund. Tell it to the judge.