[#MISC-1350] Eliminate Stand-alone parcels under 512m2 or subdivdes under 64m2- Purpose - Eliminate ad parcels and their associated blight.

4. Second Life Misc Issues - MISC

Eliminate Stand-alone parcels under 512m2 or subdivdes under 64m2- Purpose - Eliminate ad parcels and their associated blight.

Created: 04/Jul/08 07:59 AM Updated: 06/Jul/08 12:11 AM

Return to search

Component/s:

None

Affects Version/s:

None

Fix Version/s:

None

File Attachments:

None

Image Attachments:

1. Ad Farm -1.JPG
(147 kB)

Environment:

All - Mainland

Issue Links:

Duplicate

This issue duplicates:

~~MISC-129~~ Limit parcel division to a minimum of 512 sq. meters, to slow the growth of 'ad farms'.

Description

« Hide

These changes would only be applicable to MAINLAND.

1) Make the minimum stand-alone parcel size 512m2.
2) Make the minimum subdivided parcel size 64m2. (Would require owning the adjoining land on at least two sides in a
contiguous piece of at least 512m2).

First - using a minimum parcel size for stand-alone parcels only makes sense. There is no legitimate reason (other than ad farms) for creating a tiny stand-alone parcel. A 512m2 parcel has only 117 prim. Less prim count than that is pretty useless.
Second - Allowing a subdivide at 64m2 still gives those who need to create rez areas etc the ability to do so, as long as they own a single parcel of 512m2 or greater that borders the subdivided parcel on at least two borders.
Third - By itself, this will not illiminate the placing of ad farm style signs etc. It will however mean that in order to do so, you would need a minimum parcel size of 512m2 at any location you wanted to put the signs on. This should bring the costs of the operating an ad buisness into line with those of other buisness in SL, and hopefully in the end, reduce the all the horrible view and experience impacting blight that ad farms represent at this time.

Owners of existing 16m2 parcels would be given a period of time, say 60 days, in which to bring them into compliance, sell them off or abandon them. After that period, the parcels would revert to Gov Linden and either be offered to the adjoining property owners, or left as Gov Linden land if they bordered a linden road or water. It would be suggested that a maximum of L$25 per m2 be set as a legitimate selling price for these parcels.

I know this is severe, and I know many may not agree. That is why there is a voting process for issues like this. I welcome any and all opinions in the comments, but please be aware, any name calling, or personal attacks, on me, or any other poster to this JIRA, will result in an AR being filed.

If you are tired of this blight on SL, please vote on this issue.

DRD

Description

After a recent attempt to address certain aspects of the ad parcel issue (use to extort high sales prices) the proliferation of ad parcels continues unabated. While in some areas the number of ad parcels has decreased due to purchase by surrounding residents or apparent abandonment (now Gov Linden land), they continue to be a real source of issue for many landowners whose property values or views have been severly affected by them. I would like to propose the following change to TOS / Land Edit > Subdivide: These changes would only be applicable to MAINLAND. 1) Make the minimum stand-alone parcel size 512m2. 2) Make the minimum subdivided parcel size 64m2. (Would require owning the adjoining land on at least two sides in a contiguous piece of at least 512m2). First - using a minimum parcel size for stand-alone parcels only makes sense. There is no legitimate reason (other than ad farms) for creating a tiny stand-alone parcel. A 512m2 parcel has only 117 prim. Less prim count than that is pretty useless. Second - Allowing a subdivide at 64m2 still gives those who need to create rez areas etc the ability to do so, as long as they own a single parcel of 512m2 or greater that borders the subdivided parcel on at least two borders. Third - By itself, this will not illiminate the placing of ad farm style signs etc. It will however mean that in order to do so, you would need a minimum parcel size of 512m2 at any location you wanted to put the signs on. This should bring the costs of the operating an ad buisness into line with those of other buisness in SL, and hopefully in the end, reduce the all the horrible view and experience impacting blight that ad farms represent at this time. Owners of existing 16m2 parcels would be given a period of time, say 60 days, in which to bring them into compliance, sell them off or abandon them. After that period, the parcels would revert to Gov Linden and either be offered to the adjoining property owners, or left as Gov Linden land if they bordered a linden road or water. It would be suggested that a maximum of L$25 per m2 be set as a legitimate selling price for these parcels. I know this is severe, and I know many may not agree. That is why there is a voting process for issues like this. I welcome any and all opinions in the comments, but please be aware, any name calling, or personal attacks, on me, or any other poster to this JIRA, will result in an AR being filed. If you are tired of this blight on SL, please vote on this issue. DRD

Show »

All

Comments

Change History

Sort Order:

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 04/Jul/08 11:05 AM

This was proposed already in ~~MISC-129~~.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

DR Dahlgren added a comment - 04/Jul/08 11:43 AM

This item is NOT RESOLVED and is not a duplicate of a similar JIRA issue, though similar it provides further detail and mitigation for solving the overall problem of ad parcels, Harleen Gretzky's opinion not withstanding.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

DR Dahlgren added a comment - 04/Jul/08 11:54 AM

I have made a couple of updates to my original post, I changed the title to better reflect the issue and added some ending text that I somehow managed to leave out the first time.

I have also reopened this issue after Harleen Gretzky felt it was their right to close it as resolved after they felt it duplicated another JIRA. It does not. While similar in content, this proposal goes deeper into the issue itself and adds several pieces for better mitigation and control of the parcel situation and how to deal with those already in existance.

If you feel this is a duplicate, by all means, post a comment. But don't mark this as resolved. It is not your post, and not your place to do so.

DRD

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 04/Jul/08 12:06 PM

That is not the way the JIRA works, please read the guidelines at: https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Issue_tracker
Resolving an issue is sending it back to the reporter for review.

Resolved
This is an implicit assignment back to the reporter of the issue. It is not closed yet, but rather in a state of limbo that depends on the resolution. It's up to the Reporter to decide whether to reopen an issue, or close it.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 04/Jul/08 12:26 PM

>There is no legitimate reason (other than ad farms) for creating a tiny stand-alone parcel

As was stated on ~~MISC-129~~ several times, there are plenty of legitimate uses for these parcels, having different parcel options, having different media streams (imagine a museum type parcel where as you stand in front of an exhibit it streams an audio piece on the exhibit) and now with web content streaming this could be visual, land to hold in-world objects that depend on the UUID not changing, like vendor servers.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 04/Jul/08 12:31 PM

>Owners of existing 16m2 parcels would be given a period of time, say 60 days, in which to bring them into compliance, sell them off or abandon them.

Shouldn't this be "Owners of existing 16 to 496 m2 parcels"?

And what happens when someone owning a 496m2 parcel in a region has no 16m2 parcel around them to buy to become compliant?

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

DR Dahlgren added a comment - 04/Jul/08 12:35 PM

I give up. Trying to use this system is simply not worth the effort when a few busy bodies or malcontents can hijack or close the issues. I give up.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 04/Jul/08 12:39 PM

It was never closed until you just closed it. And how was it ever hijacked?

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Cotytto Bonetto added a comment - 05/Jul/08 06:01 PM

I do understand your frustration, DR. I hate ad farms too. People have made a real mess of things with them. Unfortunately the answer just isn't this simple.

Let's take a look at your assumption that no parcel under 512 sq m is practical. I recently bought a nice 20x20m parcel just to have a home spot to land on. (i was in transition, selling off split up land holdings in several sims in order to buy one unified block.) I assembled a nice 20x20x20 sky cube for it using megaprims in around 20 prims...leaving me plenty to work with for just a home base. In fact I liked it so much myself I added it to my prefab building line for anyone else wanting a building for such odd lots. It has become a very popular seller, showing that I am not the only one using small, odd lots for a simple home base.

Under your proposal I would have had to give up my home. Every other available lot in that sim was priced at over 20L/sq meter. So buying more land was NOT a reasonable option. Nor did I even want or need more land for my purpose.

The point the I and others are trying to make here, DR, is that your proposal is not well thought out or researched. For another example, your proposal for the disposal of small lots owned by LL is already in place. LL already has a system where, if they own a 16m lot adjacent to your property you can put in a request to have it set for sale specifically to you and they will usually do it.

There is almost never a quick easy solution to problems like this and this one is a classic example. I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I'm with Harleen on this one...this should be sent back to you for further study and research into the problem.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

DR Dahlgren added a comment - 05/Jul/08 06:55 PM

I have closed this issue. Please let it go at that.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Cotytto Bonetto added a comment - 05/Jul/08 07:28 PM

well, sorry, but no. While you may have started this discussion and chose to close it, this is still an open, public forum and we all have the right, and even responsibility to comment when it seems appropriate. This is not "Your" issue. You have accused people of being busy bodies and malcontents and hijacking this issue then demand that no one respond to your personal attacks. While in your own original comment you state straight out that you will file abuse reports against such name callers. Sorry, DR, but that isn't the way to deal with these problems.

As I said, I understand your frustration, we all do. And many of us are working hard, even getting into some pretty strong debates, to try to find good solutions. But we aren't the enemy, DR. Don't take it so personally when someone posts an opposing view and don't try to censor others here.

Take a few deep breaths and give yourself time to think things through before you reply, please.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

DR Dahlgren added a comment - 05/Jul/08 08:14 PM

I completely give up. I have not called anyone names, and I have abused no one. I have not attacked anyone. I have no desire to censor anyone; opposing views are part of discussion. I said I would AR to prevent some very personal attacks I have witnessed on the JIRA pages in general. How in heavens name did all that stuff about censoring and attacking people come from what I said??? Where is it I said I think people with opposing viewpoints are the enemy. I was not even specifically referring to this discussion when I spoke of hijacking. I have seen that in other issue posted here. I was commenting on this system in general. I was upset because someone just came along and marked it - RESOLVED.

RESOLVED - Verb - simple past and past participle of RESOLVE. Meaning - solution has been found.

I opened this issue, it was marked resolved by someone else, I reopened it and got taken to task for that. I don't take it personal, but Yeah, myself and others I have spoken to feel like there are a few bullies in here who oppose everything or try to start flames instead of discussion. Marking the post resolved to me was not the way to handle things. Comment yeah, but why mark it resolved?? Has a solution been found?? If there had been a way to delete this, I would gladly have done so. There does not seem to be, so I closed it, just hoping all the flack would go away. Now you come along and take me to task for asking it be left as closed. I give up.

This whole series of comments is exactly what I wanted to avoid. Obviously, I failed. If you want to continue this thread, by all means do so. For me, the whole discussion on the actual issue has gotten lost in the noise. I will just keep buying up the ad parcels that offend me when I can, and for the moment, go back to using the JIRA for bugs.

DRD

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Cotytto Bonetto added a comment - 05/Jul/08 09:22 PM

I am sorry if I misunderstood, DR, but in light of the fact that the discussion was about someone closing the issue and you made the comment "I give up. Trying to use this system is simply not worth the effort when a few busy bodies or malcontents can hijack or close the issues." Well, it was only natural for me, and others here, to assume you were referring to this issue and not life in general. If you re-read it yourself you might be able to see where the problems arise.

I don't believe the issue should be closed just because it was disagreed with. I believe it should be closed as a duplicate, which is indeed proper. But that issue has also been closed and I personally think it should remain open. The pros and cons need to be available for the next concerned person who comes in to easily find and consider. This suggestion is not one that is just going to go away just because it has a lot of negatives. For that reason I think people should be VERY slow to consider closing such discussions. There are some very respected individuals who have posted their thoughts on this in the other thread and I certainly wouldn't cut them off. Not to mention that frivolously closing threads can lead to losing the privilege.

And I do strongly encourage you, DR, to continue to bring your input into the Jira. Yeah...there will always be people who push and shove. We all have to deal with them. But don't give up. And try to stay level. I know it is hard sometimes when things like this happen, but even talking about the jira in general and other threads, it is best not to call people busy bodies and such. That will only reflect badly on you.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

DR Dahlgren added a comment - 05/Jul/08 09:55 PM

Please read again the line you so thoughtfully included in your comment Cotytto. It says, "when a few busy bodies or malcontents can hijack or close the issues." issues, plural, making a reference to issues posted in general. I did name anyone by name until now when replying to you. I did not say - that busy body xxx xxx or anything of the sort.

I closed the issue because I was told it was a duplicate, just like I closed another one that was "resolved" for me. I DID NOT CLOSE IT BECAUSE OF DESENTING OPINION.

I have had my words twisted and taken out of context. I have been accused of being so narrow minded I would close a post because of desenting opinions. I have been hassled for posting in the first place, and hassled for closing the same post later. I have also been hassled in-world over this post.

Folks, give me a break. I agree that the issue of ad farms and similar blights is a complicated one. I agree that we need to see if there is a viable solution that will work for us, for LL and hopefully not upset too many others. I have seen some very tasteful ads on little plots, so I am not trying to slam ALL the ad parcel owners.
But in general, they are a blight.

However, after my experience with this mess, (desenting opinions excluded from that generalization,) I am not sure I will ever post here again. Instead of a post on tiny parcels and how to deal with them, it has, as so many others I read, degraded into a post on how (insert any name here) should comport themselves when using the JIRA. How in the world that helps resolve the actual issue is beyond me. Now hopefully, I have made myself clear and not stepped on anyones toes. If I have, you have my deepest apologies. It was not intended.

DR leaves and quietly closes the door behind him.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Harleen Gretzky added a comment - 06/Jul/08 12:11 AM

By resolving this is was not my intention to make you feel this way, this is simply what resolved means in the JIRA. I understand that lots do not understand this and in fact, WEB-690 and WEB-247 have been opened to address this. When an issue is resolved, it is not closed, it is simply asking the reporter if they agree to the resolution. If you as the reporter disagree, you simply reopen and state why you disagree, which you did in this case and I fully support that you choose to do that. The fact that you say "I closed the issue because I was told it was a duplicate" should not be the case, you should close the issue only if you agreed it was a duplicate.