Reviewing Inactive Resident Parcels
Monday, April 9th, 2007 at 7:20 PM by: Iridium LindenRecently, we have received a number of requests from the Second Life community to seize land from long-term inactive Residents on the Main Grid. While we are unprepared to reclaim land from Residents who haven’t logged recently, we’ve decided to embark on a different approach, one we feel will produce more palatable results for both active and inactive Residents. Keeping your concerns in mind, we have reached out though e-mail to Lifetime Residents who own land and yet haven’t logged during the past 12 months.
It goes without saying that we would all prefer to see those Residents return and participate again in the Second Life community. In this vein, we invited them to rejoin. In the event that those Residents are unable to return and in keeping with our commitments to active Residents who would prefer to see unused land folded back into the larger SL community, we have offered to auction inactive Resident land and deposit all L$ proceeds into the corresponding Second Life L$ accounts. We hope this approach satisfies all parties involved, and we will keep the community apprised of further developments.
April 9th, 2007 at 7:30 PM
I can understand the need to reclaim land that belonged to a closed account but there are enough RL situations that can drag people away from the world that I don’t see it working real well to take land back in that is still being paid for. In some circumstances there may be an arrangement with other users of that space that while the owner has to be away it was left open for someone’s use. The mainland is becoming increasingly too hectic as it is with it being tricky to find a reasonable price and location to set up on to start with while dodging all the current real estate gripes.
Please do clean up land that hasn’t been reclaimed from closed accounts but I don’t see shifting land that is still owned as being a safe or endearing plan.
April 9th, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Can this land be sold on cheaper prices…?
April 9th, 2007 at 7:35 PM
I think they’re refering to charter accounts who aren’t paying for their plots on a monthly basis but rather based on their one time fee they paid way back when.
This is pretty awful, if you ask me, but really, what can you. This is all par for the course on the part of LL.
April 9th, 2007 at 7:38 PM
As a newbie who can’t wait to pay $ cash to have the right to own land, I would live to see an auction of little 512 sq meter plots. They would have to be listed in advance. It would be a pain for SL staff. But I’d have a better chance at reasonable land.
(Would the land come with all houses and objects??)
April 9th, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Could adjacent property owners get first chance at buying these dormant properties?
April 9th, 2007 at 7:45 PM
“I don’t see it working real well to take land back in that is still being paid for”
I wasn’t around then, but as far as I understand things, at the start of SL, LL asked residents to make a financial commitment/contribution, and a few people did not knowing if LL was even going to still be around the next day.
In return those people received a lifetime free tier of 4096m². They may have left SL 2-3 years ago not having logged on since, and no desire to still log on at all, but their land will never expire unless reclaimed.
April 9th, 2007 at 7:50 PM
Can neighbors be notified of upcoming auctions for that land? I’ve suffered the view of spam litter on neighboring property long enough lol, gimme that much of a break! My land corners the property on two sides. It’s NOT being used for anything- the owner and club disbanded. It’s just full of spam litter- inside & out. Yes I looked, msg’d over and over- since Aug. 06 there’s been no activity over there at all.
I am relieved to hear something is being done. I don’t want to put up mural walls. I’d normally have a decent view if not ruined by the idiotic spam littering that continuously happens.
Thank you!
April 9th, 2007 at 7:54 PM
I don’t own land yet. I would love to see a flood of land on the market depress land prices. However, Taking someone’s land just because they have not been active for any length of time is wrong. Is there anything in the terms of service or any other contract that species ownership is only maintained through activity? SL is supposed to give one more freedom than RL, not less. In RL (at least in the countries that have grown out of English common law, a freehold is not forfeited to the state because it has been left fallow–unless use was a condition of the deed, as in many US land grants, such as the Oklahoma Rush. Who’s mountain retreat has been taken over by the state because they haven’t visited in over a year. Seized for nonpayment of taxes, perhaps but not for non-use. Government does sieze land by eminent domain but only for specific public purpose. Ownership of land and one’s ability to use it within the greater law is a basic freedom. Drop this idea like a hot medieval poker!
April 9th, 2007 at 7:57 PM
We have dormant land in the middle of a very large plot owned by several companies that are all linked by a common theme. This land was set with auto return off and had hundreds of prims and junk that could not be returned. A total eyesore that was bad for business.
The owner didn’t reply to IM and our offers to buy, or requestes to turn on auto-return, and after several months, we managed to get the land cleared by the Lindens, with a few for sale signs remaining. We tiled over the land to make it look neat and filled the land with hidden prims to prevent junk being dumped.
Derelict land is bad for second life and if someone is not interested in contributing to the overall community, it deserves to be taken back. We applaud LL for this move but would request that land is offered to nearby residents first before being openly auctioned as this would also ensure a fair price is paid to the previous owner.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:02 PM
Is this an example of redistribution of assets where tier is current? That doesn’t seem to be fair to the person who is paying the billing even though the assets are inactive. In other words, those accounts who payed for virtual hosting of items to be displayed are being booted when they keep tier and premium fees current? Why don’t you up the price of tier on mainland to keep up with private islands if you need money to support the servers?
April 9th, 2007 at 8:08 PM
So eminent domain comes to second life. You’ll do something about unused land that bothers other residents, but you won’t do something about people having their land sniped by landbots when mistakes are made in pricing or possibly bugs in the interface? The excuse being that you don’t do anything about resident to resident disputes? Isn’t unused land that bothers other residents a resident to resident dispute?
Not really annoyed by this form of eminent domain so much as this is the problem you’re paying attention to, while a resident recently got hosed for 2k USD by a mistake in pricing and a landbot operated by a total scumbag. Really, do something about that too.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:16 PM
It appears something needs clarification.
As @4 has suggested. In the past a single one time contribution by residents was rewarded with a lifetime tier-free 4096sq.m of land.
Is this the majority of the ‘dormant’ land…. or is the land owned by “inactive” residents who are still continuing to pay their membership and land tier fees regularly?
April 9th, 2007 at 8:16 PM
the price of land has gone up-investment land is a possibility-if a person owns land it is theirs,even if they do not use it-as long as it is paid for-ask the owners of the land
April 9th, 2007 at 8:16 PM
The beta users may decide to relog some years from now. Their land should still be theirs, no matter how long it takes. What kind of ingratitude does it show to take someone’s land, when they trusted you in the beginning?
As for non-beta users, if someone’s okay with paying their premium fee and tier every month, it’s nobody’s business what they do with their land, even if it’s nothing, forever.
If this is entirely opt-in, so if someone responds “auction my land”, that’s fine; there’s no reason they can’t do it themselves, though.
The whole idea is pretty awful, and very transparently an attempt by land-scammers to take the land around them, which they can then flip.
Every time a real-world country tries a similar “land reform”, it very quickly degenerates into real-estate scammers and criminals using peasants as proxies to seize even more land. It won’t go any better here.
There’s no land shortage in Second Life and never can be: you can create new land indefinitely, as long as people are paying for it.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:20 PM
I would love if you did this for all inactive land that isn’t life long. A tremendous chunk of SL has become a wasteland for useless prims and junk simply because people leave building on on their parcel and everything goes there and trashes it, and then the owner never returns to clean it up or take notice.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:26 PM
All I can say is - Its about time anyone that isn’t interested in having land in SL nor wishing to return had the land returned for sale.
As long as the people have been contacted beforehand and given a chance to rejoin or tell them to sell the land is done.
Kilandra
April 9th, 2007 at 8:27 PM
While there are many RL reasons why people do not log into their accounts, it still doesn’t change the fact that it is frustrating to own property beside an untextured block of wood that occupies a 512sqm lot and which has remained that way for the last 6 months! Not only that, but I have done a name search for the owner of that land and the search engine comes up with “No Such Person”.
There is also a property a few lots away surrounded by an (annoying*) red barrier that has also remained unchanged and unoccupied for the same time period and there is never a reply to any of the IMs sent by any of the neighbors.
Or a how about a nice green, undeveloped lot where “greifers” come and place exploding rocks on it, remaining that way for months before a Linden finally does something about it…
Lets face it, most of these lots in question (at least the ones I am referring to) are “1st Land” 512 lots and in my opinion, it is ABOUT TIME that something is finally being done about neglected and apparently abandoned land.
I do agree that owners of property adjacent to abandoned lots should have first option to buy. If none are interested, then place it on the auction block.
* I think there should be a weekly fee to maintain barriers around land. Use doors and other security measures if you have to but this unregulated use of red (or green) barriers dramatically diminishes the enjoyment of flying around to explore the surrounding landscape…
April 9th, 2007 at 8:28 PM
let them get the process down pat for this concept. this way when they make landbotting (and other automated activities that subvert the intent of the code) a TOS violation they can instantly sieze and auction the assets of criminal minded parasites that are ruining SL.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:28 PM
What of owners who have created a land for 1) selling items and then is taking care of the money via the account login, but not going in-world? or 2) set it up for sl residents to enjoy (i.e. a park), but once done, the owner is not needed there. Would it be fair to take the land from them? If their land tiers are being paid and their billing is not delinquent, then we have no right to take it from them. Perhaps you could send them an email with the OPTION to sell at auction, but not to take it from them directly.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:37 PM
I’d like to make it very clear that we will only auction off land belonging to lifetime account holders if they respond to us that they would like us to take that action. We are not planning to declare eminent domain; only ask people who are inactive if they’d 1) like to return or 2) have us sell off land they aren’t using and return the proceeds to them.
Also, @4 is correct in stating that this would only apply to people who have lifetime accounts, and therefore 4096 m2 of land free of tier payments. We would not ever repossess land from a customer who is actively paying for their land, regardless of how long it was since their last long-in.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:39 PM
That is was SL should do #13. Any one owning, selling or operating a Landbot should hava is account instently close, all linden & USD balance seize and the criminal individual behind the account ban for life and all is land put on auction. Only direct action agains criminal land baron will get ride of them. But LL is more interested in introducing new bugged feature then do someting about rampant criminal activities in SL
April 9th, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Much has changed in 3-4 years. Long ago auto-return was not the absolute necessity that it is today.
There are many parcels that are “clearly abandoned” some have had the same land-fill style junk on them for longer than I’ve been in SecondLife… (nearly 3.5 years now).
Personally, I think that after three attempts from LL to contact a life time account without response… say over a period of 90 days, (using the active credit card contact information, not just an email address), that it should be safe to declare the account abandoned and reclaim the land.
Good luck with this endeavor. It will be very nice to see some of the stagnant landfills released!
April 9th, 2007 at 8:40 PM
Another question that then comes to mind then is if you have auctioned the land of the inactive resident are you going to continue charging them the tier it took to hold that land or are you going to make an account decision for them and scale them down. Which could get complicated quick if they are in one of the larger tier categories and have land donated to groups. And what about group land, are we going to have residents initiating LL to check groups they think have gone idle.
I really do understand the frustration of having a messy inactive lot beside your home or business and can understand how this idea got started. But I see this as being a time consuming and likely messy fix idea. If the main concern is the clutter on a neighbor plot then the simplest fix is to just clean it up and set the auto-return to ten minutes. If the actual goal is for people to expand their holdings from a surrounded position instead of moving to a larger space elsewhere I’m less sympathetic.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:42 PM
I think the 4096 of everland tier will remain once the land is reclaimed. So if the person ever comes back they can simply buy more land with the L$ they have in their account….
It’s a good move as long as every effort has been made to contact them first…
April 9th, 2007 at 8:46 PM
I think maybe there should be an official procedure for abandoned land… say if a neighbor complains about it and you don’t respond within 1mo of emails and/or automated phone calls, all your stuff is stored and construction is prevented (to prevent junk from building up). If after another month or two you still don’t respond and haven’t logged in at all then your land gets put up for sale and your stuff returned.
Either way, the policy should be very public and everybody should know about it.
also, when is the next town hall? it’s been a while…
April 9th, 2007 at 8:50 PM
Can anybody help me?
My avatar cannot interect in world. nothing working here
my msg not working, my btn right not working in apparence
in sandbox I can make, but anybody see me
Im gray, not sound, IM LOST here
my version is 1.14.0.1
only today i have this problem
April 9th, 2007 at 8:50 PM
Oh, I was typing my last comment when Robin responded. If this post was just about that legacy land then I have no problem with this plan especially if fair attempt at reaching the owner was made. We probably could have saved some time if it had specifically said that these were the accounts you meant at the beginning of the post instead of making it sound like it was applicable to any inactive user.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:55 PM
That sounded to me as though contact would be made and then land only auctioned with the permission of the owner, not default to reclaiming. Which seems vastly sensible, and even potentially helpful to said residents: if any of them are as vague as me it’s possible it hasn’t occurred to them that they have an actual asset sitting there that could now be exchanged for real actual money.
There may be an argument for implementing autoreturn on such parcels should neighbours ask for it. Maybe on a case-by-case basis, if the junk on them really is junk, dumped by dozens of different people over time, and not actually the owner’s exciting alternative sculptures for which they may cherish vast misplaced love. The land would still be empty, yes, but at least it would be actually-empty, not a fly-tipping site. This would only be after the owners had been contacted and either agreed to it or failed to respond for a length of time like, say, three months. It’s not theft - the objects would go back to inventory, after all - but it’s not a source of irritation either. And odds are none of these owners would actually want to think that their unreal estate is causing people irritation by being filled with thousands of wooden pyramids. It’d be long-winded to implement if every site needed checking, but it could be worth it.
April 9th, 2007 at 8:57 PM
I proposed something like this a while back and I’m glad something is being done. The issue first came to my attention involving a sim known as FEDERAL. it is fullly terraformable old sim land, some of the most valuable in SL. It is carved up like a thanksgiving turkey and and a good amount of it is covered in dumped items. Some of the residence there are lifetimers who haven’t logged on in over two years. Yet they have oddly cut lots that block views and there is no way to contact the original owners. I know Robin says that this will only be done if LL can get confirmation to take the land, but at least it is something. Before the Lindens couldn’t even send an email asking about the land. Now they have a program to at least attempt to save some of the old, valuable land in SL.
For once in a long while, I say koodos Linden Labs!
Now if you could just find a decent way to keep the Landbots honest…
April 9th, 2007 at 9:02 PM
There are many possible reasons for someone to go inactive, perhaps for years. If they have lifetime entitlements, they should not forfeit them simply through inaction.
If the concerns are really that this land constitutes eyesores, then do what the local council does if you don’t clean up your mess. They move in and clean it up FOR you. Turn it into parkland, set autoreturn, but otherwise leave it alone against the day those people return. Anything else is an infringement of their rights which LL granted (perhaps foolishly) IN PERPETUITY.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:04 PM
Robin, how long will you wait on a response from those residents, before you sell off the land.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:04 PM
This could turn into a very complex issue. One issue that I’d like to ask about is this. What about land that was bought under the ‘First Land’ program for newbies. This land was bought in 512 parcels and was tier free, if I remember correctly. What about those users who have a free account (tier free) and have not logged in or used their land for a period of months? Could these ‘tier’ free plots of 512 be made available if that account has not been used for an extended time? With the client base that Second Life is building and the recent termination of the ‘First land’ program, I am sure there is a lot of land out there that could be put back into the main stream and used.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:06 PM
bravo. i can appreciate the above comments against this, BUT… if a ‘resident’ isn’t maintaining the land that they own, (no matter how they came to own it) and someone else is willing to buy and maintain it, then that’s how it should be handled.
If you die IRL and there’s nobody to maintain the estate, your land becomes the property of the court. (right?)
And if you don’t pay property tax on RL land, no matter who’s living on it, the squatters don’t automatically get the right to purchase the land. Same scenario: if they can’t afford to buy it, they don’t get it.
in the case of SL, if you’re not playing the game, then you’re just tying up resources.
i would totally disagree with Petunia, ppl on adjacent land should NOT be given first choice (or right of first refusal) . LET THE MARKET SET THE PRICE. if you can afford to spend more than your rival, then you win.
12 months is plenty long enough to consider the land abandoned. Most ppl say that SL time runs at 5x the speed of RL time… not sure why that is but it sure feels about right!
April 9th, 2007 at 9:18 PM
I’m slightly surprised that land that was purchased, and most likely billed on a regular basis can be considered inactive.
In the case of land that has been repossessed. What happens if the original owner returns? Will the previous owner be able to chose between: a credit of land of equal size?
If one year is the in-active mark, Will LL halt billing on all accounts that fall past the one year mark? Not just the accounts LL is repossessing land from.
In the case of repossession will LL be making any attempt to contact the land owner? Considering that the residence may not have an internet connection will such contacts be made via phone and mail? How long will such contact attempts made before repossession?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:21 PM
Read again, Frans. Robin stated that the owners are being given the OPTION of selling the land. It isn’t an ultimatum. “We will only auction off land belonging to lifetime account holders if they respond to us that they would like us to take that action.” People who cannot or do not respond will not lose their land, according to Robin.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:23 PM
I have seen some good and bad ideas listed here.The easist way would be for the land to remain owned by the present owners and just set to return everyones junk and not the owners why is that a problem?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:25 PM
I’m worried about the possible loss of high quality builds.
Is it time for Second Life to have it’s version of the National Trust?
April 9th, 2007 at 9:35 PM
I am a resident member of one of the oldest themed communities in all of the grid, the Darkwood sim. This sim originally had a covenant with the Lindens during the earlier beta stages and which even carried on afterwards. It has many long standing residents who are ‘Chartered’ lifers because they stepped up to donate money to an at that time fledgling company that they believed in (Linden Lab). This early fundraising was crucial in the early growth and now success of LL.
Through the years there have been changes in the sim but the sense of community has always remained. Darkwood’s charter residents often when they knew they would be absent for long periods of time due to real life priorities, would share land (not neccessarily group deeded share) with the other sim residents so as to continue to contribute to the community and allow the ever nurturing of a themed, co-owned space.
I think the possibility of not only disrupting older long-standing communities but also going back on a promise of thanks to charter doners who were there when so needed is insensitive.
Between issues of a good number of people not having been able to log in after the gigantic password resets of before. (let us remember too older residents never even had a secret question and if they can’t remember and can’t get anywhere via phone on their available schedules or emails of these residents has changed then how can we be sure it could even be a fair process that LL has in mind.
I am just saddened that in places where perceived dormancy might not truly mean abandonment that communities and individual residents will suffer.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:42 PM
Linden Lab according to the contract, shouldn’t even bother attempting to contact. The land for life means its theirs. No ifs, ands or buts about it. Unless they’re planning on going back on their word. Land is very expensive to buy these days, keep that in mind. They probably don’t realize how expensive its become. To me, even contacting them on seeing if they’d like to sell is a breach in contract.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:44 PM
If someone hasn’t logged in for more than a year, it’s pretty certain that they no longer hold any interest in Second Life. They should be informed by email and by regular mail or telephone that their land will be recovered UNLESS they respond. If they really do care, and aren’t say, dead, or in prison, they will make the effort to get in touch. I know several people with lifetime accounts and they refuse to set their land to return prims but they do log in every six months or so to complain. They are just being dogs in a manger by refusing to do something with their property.
April 9th, 2007 at 9:50 PM
Most of the problems people seem to have with dormant land is the junk prims - maybe LL should run an update script once a month that sets the auto return of all non-owner objects ON for parcels owned by residents who have not logged in to SL for X months/years.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:04 PM
Wait you ask those mebers to pay for lifetime accounts. NOw your taking it away? This witchhunt been going on for over a year now. You asked them to pay 250.00 ONE TIME FEE. Now your going to take it away? This is not about people in the world asking to put land up for sale. Its about LL taking those land that they paid for years ago at a one time fee.
April 9th, 2007 at 10:37 PM
Yes, it’s the junk that has accumulated on derelict land that is the main problem with it. But derelict land that has no-entry barriers set is a problem too. It’s a real pain bashing into those barriers all the time when flying around a mainland sim.
So, if the owner has not logged on for 60 days:
(a) Set autoreturn to 1 minute. (This will get rid of the junk, but not the owner’s stuff.)
(b) Take down any no-entry barriers that have been set.
I also have a question: If a landowner cancels their account, or simply stops paying their monthly charges, is their land reclaimed automatically (i.e. by software)? Or does a Linden have to deal with it in person? Since it would take the Lindens forever to get around to it, that might explain why there is so much apparently derelict land.
(I’ve submitted this question a couple of times to Support, but never got an answer.)
April 9th, 2007 at 10:38 PM
“we have offered to auction inactive Resident land and deposit all L$ proceeds into the corresponding Second Life L$ accounts. ”
Could we get this Auction system for *active* accounts as well please?
April 9th, 2007 at 11:00 PM
Smartest thing Nimrod has said since, “The grass is greener when you turn on full bright”
April 9th, 2007 at 11:05 PM
I can only speak from my own experience. Land that is abandoned, without autoreturn on, and without restriction on spatial sound, once filled with junk builds and massive particle poofers and endless looped sounds, makes for a very unpleasant SL experience. This used to not be so bad when the land management forum existed, as you could actually get results in a day or 2 with an intelligently crafted post of the situation. Since the dissolution of that forum the same result took over 2 weeks. I followed to the letter the FAQ that was supplied in the blog as how to craft a replacement request in light of the forum being gone. What did I get back? I got a word-for-word quote of the same FAQ that I followed to report the issue of abandoned land becoming a problem. I was stunned. After firing back a rather heated response the issue was finally forwarded to the correct channels, and finally after 2 weeks it was addressed.
In summary, something better needs to be implemented. The resources available to residents has diminished, while at the same time the problems are getting larger.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:20 PM
I think, you should set them to auto return and make them protected land, please stop the greed, and make the grid a bit better, it is so overfilled, some parks, or protected land would be most welcome, and it would allow for the owners to reclain them should they return.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:21 PM
To clearify, I meant greed of user wanting to pick up the land,not on the part of LL.
April 9th, 2007 at 11:34 PM
This is fantastic news. I feel that there were a lot of players who signed up under the “First Land” system who played for a short while and then left their plots abandoned. When I used to live in a first land SIM I found it excessively hard to contact residents, and over 6 months saw many valuable and needed plots go abandoned and unused. In the end I had to move because my business’ growth was significantly stunted by high levels of abandoned land. This is an excellent solution to the problem of abandoned land and I think it is fair to both the user and the greater SL community! Thanks!
April 9th, 2007 at 11:39 PM
In 99% of cases… YAY! Good news!
Literally tens of thousands of junk prims, some of them scripted should soon be vanishing from the mainland. That’s got to be good!
One thought though.
Could our Linden pals set auto-return on when they know the land is going to be auctioned. The market might not pay current value for a parcel so covered in prims and adverts that you can’t tell what you’re buying.
Looking forward to the spring clean!
F.
April 10th, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Let’s get this right, you are saying that this action is only to address the problem of land owned and abandoned by beta members?
Is this a big issue? How many parcels are involved?
Why not auction the land in US$ and credit the persons payment method with that amount if they have left SL? Seems a more reasonable action than dumping a bunch of L$ into an inactive account.
April 10th, 2007 at 12:12 AM
In some cases residants have deleted their accounts without clearing and selling their land first. In these cases will LL wait a full 12 months before clearing and selling the land even if a tier is no longer being paid?
I know of one such large parcel of land at least so will watch with interest.
April 10th, 2007 at 12:28 AM
I don’t think such parcels should be offered to neighbours first, but should be properly auctioned with a fixed end-date and an open end-price. There’s too many corporations and groups already who control huge areas, and these corporations WILL generally have neighbouring plots as well. Opening the auction for everyone will enable citizens to get an own plot as well, instead of the local lag-hogging-mall just getting more prims to fill with too big textures. I’d even applaud breaking up these plots into unjoinable and unseperatable 512sqr mtr fragments of random shapes between a 2:3 and 3:2 size. Not too useful for a mall or a shop, but great for residents.
April 10th, 2007 at 12:45 AM
| agree with the comments of 28 and 29. However I would go further and suggest that all new land be sold with building and scripting set to off. This may help where land is bought initially and never actually used.
April 10th, 2007 at 1:05 AM
Reclaimed land in anyway should go to open auction. Neighbours just has to follow their region on the MAP.!!
April 10th, 2007 at 1:24 AM
G’day Heretic (and Robin)
I am increasingly concerned about people with land adjacent on the mainland that think they can impose their own values, rules and ideas on their neighbours land.
I feel your post here is encouraging this sort of behaviour.
Let us ALL get this one point straight - as long as I abide by the TOS, I can do the follow:
NOT set auto return
Build big ugly buildings
Build NO buildings
Build on the ground right up to my property lines
Build up in the sky at ANY level even if my neighbour built at the same height
Let newbies drop stuff all over my land
I have recently been threatened by a neighbour because they didn’t like what was built on my land and given I have done nothing untoward (or against TOS), this is just ugly bullying.
For all you above that posted - if you don’t like what’s on your neighbours plot - move. Move to an island, with a covenant.
But stop saying you don’t like what’s on someone elses land - it’s their choice and taste and it’s diversity that makes Second Life what it is.
And I don’t set auto return because I like seeing what newbies drop / build or put down because they are squatting on my land.
And I don’t use some portions of my land because I have separate land parcels on some sims and therefore use some of those prims on divided parcels.
So Heretic and Robin, while it’s fine to post that you are going to contact inactive accounts, I think it’s irresponsible of you to post you are doing it because of public pressure.
MY land - my choices.
Not so cheery
Alex
April 10th, 2007 at 1:43 AM
Please folks, read Robin’s posts carefully!!
You are all reacting to what you WANT or what you FEAR!!
Not to what they are saying.
What they are saying is sensible.
Contect Lifetime residents who have not been here for a while.
ONLY auction their land IF they say that is what they want.
Give them the money from it.
Nothing else.
Remain calm. The Lindens still care.
April 10th, 2007 at 1:46 AM
[...] Lab announced plans to recover parcels owned by charter members who have been MIA for very long [...]
April 10th, 2007 at 1:56 AM
@40 That’s the spirit… to hell with your neighbors… right? It’s this kind of indifference that makes SL what it is…
/sarcasm mode off
April 10th, 2007 at 2:13 AM
i agree with Dingus (41) , look and actually absorb what robin is saying, its actually a positive think in the quest to reduce the Linden per square metre problem that land barons have created.
Instead of jum,ping to the next problem lets just take the time to see that someone has started what could be a great chain of events in response to YOUR e-mails.
This is great news.
Kat
April 10th, 2007 at 2:14 AM
G’day Kenbro
As many of my inworld neighbours would gladly attest, that’s not my attitude at all. (And in fact when I sell any plot of my land, I offer it to my neighbours first (who just so happen to be on my friends list as well) rather than try to sell to the highest buyer.
And my sentiment is far from indifference, in fact it’s pro freedom of expression. And that really is what makes SL what it is.
Please re-read the post with an open mind. *wink*
Cheers
Alex
April 10th, 2007 at 2:22 AM
larger SL community
LL asked residents to make a financial commitment/contribution, and a few people did, those people also trusted LL, to do what is in the best interests of sl.
Those members who own forever land should have some kind of rolling buy out plan. Like a stock option with a back date option on the sale.
What if ? the forever members original master plan was to come back in say four or five years and see what’s happen in sl ?
Best interest of sl? I agree with creating more protected land.
Adjacent land owners should have some considerations but it must not be a closed door process.
April 10th, 2007 at 3:02 AM
I think it is an excellent idea, in fact i would go one step further, people who make eyesores just for the hell of it, i would auction their land too.. we have a neighbour who keeps putting junk on his land and this is bad for business, when we build a wall to hide his junk he threatens us…
April 10th, 2007 at 3:21 AM
First of all, how does one become a lifetime member nowadays? It sounds real interesting.
And then my second statement… How do we know that these lifetime memberships haven’t ended? Technically, lifetime means they’ll end when the member dies. And dead members are unable to reply to any incoming emails, right?
I like the suggestion of contacting those who haven’t been online during the last 12 months. But I wonder if it’s not possible to move their land to another region in case they don’t respond within 6 months. (After trying to contact them once per month or so.) That way, they will still have their own land if they ever decide to return.
These pieces of land can’t be that big anyways since they only have up to 4096 sq.m. for free with their membership. If they own more, they would still be paying for it every month, thus they would be active.
One other suggestion… Donate $1 on the bank accounts of those missing members. If their bank account bounces, it’s very likely they’re dead or just closed their account… Otherwise, they will get an additional reminder on their bank invoices.
April 10th, 2007 at 3:31 AM
I guess “lifetime” doesn’t mean lifetime anymore. Yet another dirty little secret.
What an absolutely horrible idea, and yet another example of trying to fix something that isn’t broken.
April 10th, 2007 at 3:35 AM
I would recommend reserving a server then for those why may return in the future and would like use of their 4k of land. Having a server setup with open space for them would be a good solution I think. Those that are not active at the moment and who might return in the future can ask to have a plot of land assigned to them if they return. This way the mainland can be reclaimed and added back to the active residents.
April 10th, 2007 at 3:38 AM
Although I don’t own land and am not interested in it, Alex’ comment rings a bell here. What makes SL different from everything else is it’s freedom, even it’s freedom to do stupid things.
While I think Robin’s approach is sensible and useful, and while I even think that turning on Auto-Return for land from accounts inactive over 12 months, I must say that I become concerned about the increasing attempts of regulation in SL. With more and more regulation, SL will become like first life and looses the point of being here alltogether.
The more people want to impose and dictate their values onto others (or succeed to do rather than just want), the more “your life, your imagination” will become an empty phrase.
As said, it’s got nothing to do with this particular approach of this particular as handlesd by LL, but in the Casino Advertising thread the term “slippery slope” was coined, and once a door of opportunity is ajar, more people will want to squezze in. First ageplay, then casinos, then land reform, then land councils and down the road waits a life regulated as in a gated community.
April 10th, 2007 at 3:47 AM
Everyone, PLEASE READ A BIT BETTER!
The suggestion isn’t to close the inactive accounts. What the Lindens will be doing is contacting the inactive members and asking them if they would like to close their accounts. In return their land will be auctioned off and they will will be paid whatever people have offered for their land. Considering that the average 512 sq.m. piece of land can be worth at least L$ 6500 and even more in auctions. Converted to real dollars this would be an interesting offer for those who do not wish to return to SL.
Basically, the Lindens will just buy them out of the virtual world. Which is a good idea in my opinion.
>>>>> No one is forced to quit, leave or sell their land…
April 10th, 2007 at 4:00 AM
“we have reached out though e-mail to Lifetime Residents”
ME MAKE SENSE NOW?
April 10th, 2007 at 4:01 AM
lol.
April 10th, 2007 at 4:08 AM
“Basically, the Lindens will just buy them out of the virtual world. Which is a good idea in my opinion.”
In a sense, yes.
I think it’s a good idea to e-mail them first, and from what i read you won’t be taking land from those who don’t respond or don’t want to?
Another thing is, what if people manage their SL through the website and their e-mail? I could easily run my business through my e-mail and not log in for 12 months… I’m just a sucker for making new stuff is why I log in
April 10th, 2007 at 4:17 AM
Does this mean your will be mulcting us if we are contacted via email and can’t log in or check mail for whatever reason– maybe we’re out of the country, doing volunteer work, in a coma, etc? Logging in after a hiatus only to find that the land we bought in good faith has been bought back from us without our knowledge seems like a bit of a swindle. This is especially so, considering this is a _virtual_ world.
If the architecture is “infinitely scaleable,” then whip up new land to meet the new demand.
I feel like I’m not seeing the whole picture. :confused:
April 10th, 2007 at 4:18 AM
Does this mean you* -der
April 10th, 2007 at 4:31 AM
If you haven’t logged in for a year… why should you care? It’s obvious to most people that you aren’t playing any more, and if you decided to quit and not sell the land, then its your own fault.
In Sims Online, if you go unpaid for just 3 months, your account is wiped. Period. That’s more than generous I think.
I’m sure half of the problems that LL have is the tens of thousands of dead accounts and objects sitting in their database.
Hopefully ’stage 2′ is contacting all accounts that haven’t logged in for 6 months and giving them a month to activate their accounts or to be wiped. That should reduce search load by 80% without dead data to dig through each time you look for something.
Broccoli
April 10th, 2007 at 4:33 AM
Sorry, I missed Robin’s post:
“if they respond to us that they would like us to take that action”
(Although I must admit that I question whether this “if” policy will remain)
I think the other part still stands: Why not whip up some new demand? Are the lifetimers’ landholdings really such a big concern?
April 10th, 2007 at 4:41 AM
Broccoli Curry: “I’m sure half of the problems that LL have is the tens of thousands of dead accounts and objects sitting in their database.
Hopefully ’stage 2′ is contacting all accounts that haven’t logged in for 6 months and giving them a month to activate their accounts or to be wiped. That should reduce search load by 80% without dead data to dig through each time you look for something.”
__________________________________________________
If the system isn’t scaling to meet the demands of the user, then revise the system. Don’t punish the user. This is supposed to be the baby version of an infinitely scalable 3D internet, not a closed system like the Sims.
April 10th, 2007 at 5:27 AM
I don’t often agree with the policy changes LL makes mid-stream like this, but this actually sounds like the right idea.
The number of Beta Charter Members who have this free tier is probably pretty small, but at 4096 m2 of abandoned land a pop, just 50 of them would be almost 205,000 m2 of land (more then 3 whole sims), right in the heart of the old mainland, that no one is paying tier on, owned by people who have gotten the sh*ts of SL long ago and left (maybe because LL makes policy changes mid-stream, who knows).
The point is, these Lifetime Charter members who havent logged into SL in a significant amount of time probably could care less at this point about SL, thier land or the policy change that would bring about the reclaimation of the land they’ve abandoned. And by giving these residents the proceeds of the abandoned land sale, the initial monetary investment they made that allowed them this tier-free land for the duration of their SL like will probably be re-couped. Which should make anyone who’d thought that investment was money down the drain and walked away happy.
April 10th, 2007 at 5:46 AM
I support the idea of allowing nearby residents first refusal, but also would welcome an official policy on clearing objects off land as much as a policy to reclaim land. Although we would prefer to buy the junk sites a clearance (or hiding or burying) of the objects would be better than nothing. Holding objects in escrow by Lindens and returning to green pasture????
April 10th, 2007 at 6:23 AM
I would be hesitant to assume someone hasn’t come back because they’ve lost interest. It’s possible they’ve been upgraded right out of participating. Also, there are other reasons not to use land. I have land now that I can’t use because someone around me is using a strobe light… there are many reasons people aren’t using land. However, I think making the auction opt-in is a good way of dealing with the situation and making sure that land only gets auctioned from people who really have lost interest in SL.
April 10th, 2007 at 6:32 AM
I would have no problem with SL clearing objects from land that has not been visited by the owner or by those to whom the owner has granted some authority only if (1) those objects have been there more than six months and were not placed there by the owner or any one or group to whom the owner has granted permission and (2) if the owner has not responded to two notices, delivered three months apart, about SL’s desire to clear those objects.
After the squatting objects are cleared I think SL should set the land to PG, disallow rezing, prevent the removal, relocation, or editing of objects, textures, etc. that were placed by the owner or those authorized by the owner but otherwise allow open access to all until the owner, or those authorized by the owner, returns.
I would also allow SL to turn off (but not trash the scripting for) any sounds or lights, even if originally owner-placed or authorized, if those sounds or lights reach beyond the property, SL judges that they can reasonably be considered a nuisance to surrounding properties, and they are not judged to be integral to the architecture or other developed aspects of the property.
April 10th, 2007 at 6:42 AM
After reading Robin’s post, the autioning off of land per confimred contact is a good thing. Now, about prim litter…
In most towns, there is a yearly “community cleanup” where the schoolkids and other residents go around and just pick up all the litter and junk, and have other refuse that has been dumped on unused property removed.
The same thing can be applied to SL, since SL is supposed to be a online community. My suggestion:
Non-owner prims can be returend from a “littered” plot if:
a)a owner of a plot on that sim makes a request to do so.
b)the owner of the littered plot has been inactive for at least 6 months
c)does not respond to e-mail or letter withing 60 days of being contacted
This is just a sugession. The time frames can be changed, but the key points is that you have to be absent for a specific duration, they do not respond to requests to clean up their land, and can only be initiated by another land owner on the same sim.
I think this would be a happy medium, that way no one is telling you what you can have on you land, and if you are away for an extended period, you can be secure in the knowledge that it won’t be full of garbage when you get back.
April 10th, 2007 at 6:53 AM
Would these “requests” have come from land speculators, you know the vultures who contribute nothing but an upward trend in property prices? It seems to me that you have a contract with theses lifetime account holders, and now you are attempting to re-negotiate your contract with them so the vultures can have more “illegal” RL income. You would better spend your time providing the relivant countries Taxation authorities with the transaction details of these ppl so they can be prosecuted rather than pandering to their whims. As for the rest of you, listen to yourselves. “Can I have first refusal on it?” “Can I get it cheap?” you should be ashamed of yourselves.
April 10th, 2007 at 7:07 AM
By the way, I believe the Lifetime Membership was something you purchased (I think it was around $200, not sure on that) in the beginning Beta.
I think the idea of cleaning up unused accounts (THIS meaning, profile empty, inventory the basics, L$0 balance) the things that would obviously show that the account is completly inactive. They could even move them to another database, to be brought back if someone requires.
I would think this would improve on the load just a bit.
April 10th, 2007 at 7:08 AM
Kal the cant set the land to pg if its in a mature area it just doesnt work you cant set individual parcel settings to be mature or PG just does not work.
Now then….. They are only getting rid of land from life time account holders. This was an opt in program in which people paid a set fee in the early days of SL and got a life time premium account with a Tier of 4096 square meters of which the set fee they paid covers it. They will continue to have their land tier itself and this will be an opt in program to get rid of it.
LL wont just seize the land if the owner doesnt respond. They are letting these people know that they still hold land in SL and that LL can do something for them with it if they so wish. Like auctioning it off and giving them the proceeds. This doesnt cover anyone that isnt a Lifetime account. There were a few periods of Lifetime accounts as well. One of which earned people the title Charter Member. This was the second last time they offered it before that as well was charter but after charter dissipated and a few lifers dont have the title of charter member! Aa good example of someone who has that title (charte rmember) for payment info would be Esmay Rand.
Opt-In for only lifetime members is the only way to do this without pissing off a bunch of people. Yes some people buy land that are simply premium and dont come back for numerous reasons…. We had one guy in the sim I’m in that bought land but couldnt use it because he went off to the war soon after purchasing it and then the payment faltered which was how we ended up buying it. There are many reasons for abandoned parcels but if they are upkeeping the payments its likely that they plan to return or dont know about it.
It’s good to see some initiative to clean up some of the Lifetime members accounts while still giving them viable options of what to do with it though. Avoids panic confusion and many other things that could happen if you simply got rid of it. Kal getting rid of something because the owner hasnt been there for awhile is a bit drastic in light of numerous things that could be going on. I had a friend who’s net was down until just yesterday for several months for instance,
While you may have no problem with it they should not get rid of that persons land if they make payments. Have you tried Im’ing some of the people that own the said junk or whatever if they are there. Most of them arnt aware that they left stuff there and will get rid of it if you ask kindly (i have this happen alot for some stuff…… I ask first though) While stuff may be a nuisance to someone that really doesnt give them the right to ask for stuff to be torn down…. Only stuff nto owned by the owner of the land i could see warranting it.
April 10th, 2007 at 7:47 AM
I understand the problem the lindens have to deal with. The problem isn’t in the 4.5 million accounts that are dead now since no one is using them anymore.
The problem is that there are some members sentenced to life imprisonment in SL who have a large piece of land allocated to them. They have a great advantage over all other members since basically, they can stay away from SL for years and still expect their account to exist 5 years from now, completely intact.
So LL wants to buy them out. And of course those lifers without any land aren’t much different from the other dead members. But those who own land have something that could be of value for others. Actually, they own land in one of the first-created sims. Areas that might be real interesting because most around these areas is probably well-developed. (And probably split in blocks of 16 sq.m. for casinos and ad farms…)
Still, LL has to respect their paying members and can’t just take away anything from them. So I think this is a nice offer just to get rid of those lifers… Call it an early parole…
Of course, for other members things are a lot easier. If you own land then you always have to pay for the tier or for a premium membership. Probably even both. So if you’re offline for years yet still pay your bill, no problem. It is your right to leave things as they are. And if you stop paying? Well, then you would lose your land after a while since you’re obliged to pay your bills. Can’t be helped anyways.
So if you’re not convicted for life then LL has the means to take your land away from you again. Unless you continue to pay for their services, of course.
Which reminds me… I need to add more credits.
April 10th, 2007 at 8:03 AM
At the dawn of SL, Lifetime accounts paid a large lump sum for a special account in a very small little-known world with an uncertain future.
As long as they keep paying their premium membership fees they’re guaranteed that 4096sqm of tier for as long as SecondLife is around.
Personally, I think lifetime accounts should have been explicitly non-transferable. I’ve heard of many cases where the original owner has sold them, and their coveted 4096 of “free” tier off to other people, which I suspect is a violation of the ToS.
Land ownership, and eminent domain are slightly separate issues than account suspension or cancellation due to inactivity, and I think that LL’s announced plan is a safe respectful and decent approach to the problem of seemingly abandoned lifer land.
I fervently hope certain specific lifer’s take LL up on this offer.
April 10th, 2007 at 8:08 AM