|
|
|
[
Permlink
| « Hide
]
IntLibber Brautigan added a comment - 15/May/09 01:00 PM
5491 does not properly troubleshoot the source of the problem, but this one does.
I'm going to nudge the priority down from major. Late thinking is much the same as
If one can edit objects, there are many ways one can force a return. They can be moved above the build ceiling, moved below the ground, moved to an adjacent parcel with a return time, deleted, and killed with an llDie script. As a result, removing the return option wouldn't offer new protection. I'll ping a couple folks who have been around longer than I have, but this one may actually be by design as well. If so, it's worth explicitly spelling it out in the interface and documentation. I agree that the sharing issue is something unavoidable, unless we totally castrate the ability of people to build content as a group. Since this obviously goes against the content creation goals of SL, the problems with rental businesses needs to be addressed in another manner. The simple fact is that objects that are deeded to the group should have separate usage rights: operating scripts, modding prims, returning deleting objects are all abilities that should be at different levels of authorization. You dont want any group member to be able to return or delete group objects. It is simply insane to think this is a good idea to allow it, but those individuals do need to be able to be giving the ability to operate scripts, reset them, etc.
Continuing to allow these sorts of exploits is legally a lack of due diligence by LL wrt the assets of competitors. If the manipulate group objects bug is by design then the design is flawed and needs to be fixed. Rather than downgrading the issue I would suggest rather to try to devise a plan to satisfy the needs of all sides here. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||