Inviting an avatar to a group
deanpence at mac.com
Fri Jul 27 17:09:30 PDT 2007
On Jul 27, 2007, at 5:43 PM, Soft Linden wrote:
> Are there other features you'd want to use the lists to control?
> What functions would you want supported for controlling the lists --
> would you be happy with a set of functions for region and parcel lists
> that mirror the current ban and access lists?
No. The simple idea of an allowed/disallowed list isn't sufficient. A
more fine-grained ability list would work better. Just a few things
off the top of my head that I, as a land-/house-renter, would need
(from current group capabilities):
- Ability (or not) for the renter to eject/ban others
(My "tenants" role has this ability, but not "Everyone".)
- Ability (or not) for the renter to terraform
(My tenants can't do this, but others may need it.)
- Ability (or not) for the renter to modify parcel multimedia settings
(Vital for residential leases.)
- Ability (or not) for the renter to invite others to be able to build
(My tenants can invite others to the "Everyone" role, who can then
I'm sure there are others.
If the goal is for such a system to eliminate the need for groups to
manage an agent's abilities on group-owned land, then I think most of
the possible group abilities (land-related at least) should be
considered. While only an "agent can build here" option is a step up
from group land (in terms of scope), it's not really enough.
PS - Sometimes I wish LL would let us know what exactly their
database setup is (not that they have any obligation to do so). There
are several decent methods for doing lots of reads and writes and
distributing that load across many machines. Being in the dark leads
me to wonder whether they're just using some really bone-headed
More information about the secondlifescripters