Yesterday, I tried to write a neat little script. When placed in an object, it would distribute itself to every prim in that object, and delete the contents of the object, including itself. A simple little cleaner, if you will. To save the hassle of looking at each prim individually to try to find a script you put in because you forgot where it is. But I ran into a problem. When passing the script to other prims in the object, the scripts were given in a non running state. Of course, this is a security measure to prevent you from giving an llDie script to someone else's object.. The solution to it, . Is to set a pin, and use llRemoteLoadScriptPin to pass a running script. Except that llSetRemoteScriptAccessPin works only for the single prim it is in. Even if used in the root of a linkset. To my mind at least, it seems it would be most logical for it to set the pin for the whole object. Or that you shouldn't even need to do this for other prims in the same linkset. But changing either of those two might break existing content, which would be bad. I could put a script into every prim, of course. But that would take time and effort, which defeats the whole purpose of writing a script to save time and effort. Having to do something inconvenient to make it work, defeats the purpose of writing a script for convenience. So I propose: llSetLinkRemoteScriptAccessPin(integer linknum, integer pin) This would set the pin for another prim in the linkset. And should also accept the LINK_SET constant to set a pin for an entire object at once. Adding a new function for this would allow us to deal with this apparent hole in LSL functionality, without breaking any existing content.