• All submissions to this site are governed by Second Life Project Contribution Agreement. By submitting patches and other information using this site, you acknowledge that you have read, understood, and agreed to those terms.
Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: VWR-174
Type: New Feature New Feature
Status: Closed Closed
Resolution: Misfiled
Priority: Normal Normal
Assignee: Unassigned
Reporter: Haravikk Mistral
Votes: 9
Watchers: 2
Operations

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
1. Second Life Viewer - VWR

Exempt allowed-list from auto-return option

Created: 01/Mar/07 08:02 AM   Updated: 07/Feb/08 03:07 PM
Return to search
Component/s: Land, Permissions
Affects Version/s: 1.13.2.15, First Look - 1.13.2.57278, Source code
Fix Version/s: None

Environment: In-world
Issue Links:
Duplicate
 
Relates
 


 Description  « Hide
*This should technically be a service/simulator issue, however the options for land and permissions server-side do not appear to be present anywhere, I may cross-post this*

This is fairly self-explanatory. It is quite simply an option somewhere on the object tab next to auto-return, which allows us to exempt users entered into the allowed list for a parcel from having their items auto-returned.

Imagine the following scenario (and it's the reason I would like this):
I am renting out an apartment space which is located on its own little plot of land. To keep the area tidy I wish to enable auto-return, however this presents a number of problems. Namely, if someone rents a room in the apartments, then they must be part of the group set on the land in order to place items within it, otherwise they will be auto-returned.
However, adding them to the group manually can take time, time in which they want to be using their room. The alternative is to have the group have open-enrolment, but this prevents further problems as it means that anyone can join it then litter the apartments anyway.

This suggestion however would enable the allowed-users list on plots of land to be used for this purpose. So the system would work like:

  • User pays rental box L$ to rent the room
  • Rental box uses llAddToLandPassList() to add the user to the allowed list for the parcel
  • Auto-return now leaves their items alone when clearing land
  • User's rent expires
  • Rental box uses llRemoveFromLandPassList() to remove the user
  • Auto-return now returns all the user's items

This doesn't involve groups at all, but allows for a flexible land-management system using scripted items and settings already available in-world.

The allowed list could also optionally be used for adding extra capabilities for the build, object entry and script running options. ie: object creation would have three radio-options; everyone, allowed users, group. Also the ability to let allowed-users set the plot as their home location. But these are not as important as the ability to exempt them from auto-return.

Also, I would like to note that this feature would be independent of access controls. That is, scripts could add/remove from the access list regardless of whether the access restrictions are turned on. So long as "Exempt allowed list from auto-return" is turned on, then they would not be affected by auto-return.
This means it can be used without requiring the "ban lines" everybody hates, and thus can be used purely to keep land clean.



 All   Comments   Change History      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
WarKirby Magojiro added a comment - 20/Mar/07 07:26 PM
I think this would be better done as part of the group tools, to be honest. You say it takes time to manually add someone, but the few minutes to type in a name, pick a role, and hit send invitation, is barely time at all.

Autoreturn exemption is needed, although it would be best if we could assign different auto return times to different roles within a land owning group.

WarKirby


Haravikk Mistral added a comment - 21/Mar/07 06:15 PM
The purpose of this suggestion however is two-fold; it allows a way of setting people whose items will not be return on a specific parcel, but most importantly, it allows a measure of 'add to group' functionality for scripts which simply can't be done otherwise without huge potential exploits or other issues.
This way you can add a person to a group /for a single parcel only/, extremely useful in the case of renting, this is done automatically in real-time, and instantly they can start placing items. But it doesn't affect groups, there is thus no potential permissions issue, or overloading of group invitations/invitiation spam or such.
It also takes advantage of functionality that is already present in the system, we already have an access list, scripts can already add/remove users from it, so by simply exempting them (or adding the option to exempt them) from auto-return will allow a very fine degree of control over a system.

Imagine for example a sandbox with a 1 minute auto-return time. It could easily have a scripted control whereby in order to use the sandbox a user must first touch an object which looks at their registration date, if the avatar is older than X days then it gives them a Y hour land-pass, allowing them to build in peace, extending the pass if needed. This would keep out overly new accounts.
Or renting an apartment room, if I have a hundred apartments, adding people manually to a group is excessive and slow (what if I'm away for a while?), it allows a measure of automation without any concerns for security/griefing.
I'm sure there are other uses, but basically a script can be used to much more finely control access to a parcel, using all kinds of registration criteria, even sending someone out to a web-form to validate, or answer some questions or something.


Mercia Mcmahon added a comment - 20/Nov/07 09:35 AM
Just did a quick test on the Allowed list, appears to me that at present you cannot add anyone until you limit access, obviously that feature could be changed to accommodate this feature request, just pointing out the current limitation.

Argent Stonecutter added a comment - 07/Feb/08 02:52 PM
This absolutely should be filed in SVC.

Haravikk Mistral added a comment - 07/Feb/08 03:06 PM
Moved this to SVC-1466 since it should never really have been filed under viewer, but viewer was the only project that scripts or any land-related stuff as an option.

Anyone who has voted for this please transfer your vote for SVC-1466