Ban Woodbury

Hat tip to Adric Antfarm and Daniel Voyager for this picture of graffiti on the real-life walls of Linden Lab in San Francisco made during SLCC, apparently the only news the lame Woodbury gang could get itself out of SLCC despite all their pledges of frat-boy antics in advance.

It seems pretty clearly the work of the Woodbury "students" given that all the chimes are rung -- the obsession with "Ban Prok" and the tags "Plastic Duck was Here" and "Patriotic Nigras". (It's a rather lame example of graffiti; of course in NYC we have much more artistic and complex work than these white n' nerdy nuisances in California can produce.) I hope LL caught it on a video camera and will call the police -- but probably all they are doing is sending an intern out with a sponge, chuckling to themselves because that's how they roll.

Adric's seasoned military analysis of these "punks" is that they are mom-basement dwellers abused in their childhood who spend 14 hours a day online jerking off and griefing people because they are immature juveniles. God, I wish our U.S. military would go back to studying history and ideology better, maybe we would win some of these ill-advised wars we get into around the world.

I don't buy that theory -- or rather, I don't buy it in full. Because Woodbury University's presence in SL with the narf-narfing about the PNs and the under-the-radar griefing of Prok is done by people who have the title "professor" and who go to international conferences and write papers and are under the supervision of other such august personages. The griefer-in-chief Pixeleen Mistral AKA Mark McCahill of Croquet and Duke University who fans all this and incites it and participates in it is a balding wispy hippie-haired middle-aged expert on the Internet with numerous credentials in his field. This is not about "juvenile" or "hijinx" but a steady-state persistent Leninist-style nihilist creed that is all about having control over other people and forcing them with violence to use the Internet only in the way they deem fit, i.e. for extreme coding and de-civilization.

The way to deal with this phenomenon is not to coddle it or get into a pretzel about benefit-of-doubt-giving. For example, Imnotgoing Sideways, a member of the Woodbury group and a frequent flyer at the griefing posses coming to disrupt the discussions at the Sutherland dam, is also someone defending hentai and pushing the "ageplay" envelope constantly on forums and inworld. Why have somebody like that in NCI helping noobs? That only enables them to worm their way into something respectable and make it seem as if there are "only a few bad eggs" in Woodbury -- which is bullshit, of course, by the time you count all the hundreds of people who have been in that group and griefed me and my tenants over the years. A chief boilerplate of this Leninist group is to claim that they aren't really doing anything bad, that it was only a few of them, and they are reforming anyway. All total lies and deception.

I recently had to go many rounds with Beverly Montgomery of the NCI group who couldn't "gasp" grasp why I would ban her odious little volunteer Imnotgoing Sideways, and who repeated this "only a few bad eggs" meme. There's be no reason for IMG to come along on a griefing posse. This pretense that a dozen bobbing and weaving avatars dropping particles and self-replicating prims and spewing memes are "just here for the discussion" is not something even the liberals who come to my dam meetings believe anymore -- they've seen it now too many times.

Reforming, so, um, I guess that's why they get to commit RL vandalism.

The key to stopping griefing is to diagnose it right, first, and not pretend it's about "juveniles" and "high spirits" and "pranks" but understand it's about middle-aged men with criminal minds pursuing a relentlessly communistic (or fascistic, if you prefer) ideology of control and destructive nihilism. You can pretend that because this is "just pixels" that it isn't serious, but as it becomes a mentality pervading many areas of society to one degree or another you have to take it more seriously.

Recently the 4chan gangsters threatened massive violence, including attacks on executives of AT&T because...waaahhhhh.....their site was blocked when it became targeted with Denial-of-service attacks by their own. All kinds of line workers, shock-troopers, and Twittering hangers-on sprang into action,making thuggish threats and lulzing about it. For example, you could see one seemingly respectable Digital Beltway consultant who pals around with State Department and White House officials and Silicon Valley executives snickering and hoping the 4chan attack would be successful because...he doesn't like the way AT&T "locks out" Google voice. Vandals, all of them. No, worse, Bolshevik *thugs*.

So diagnosis is important, naming and shaming, but also ending their ability to recruit and gain recognition with groups. Once you end this empty-headed faux-liberal notion of "can't invoke guilt by association" about these assholes, you realize that in a civilized democratic society under the rule of law, criminal conspiracy, i.e. groups formed for the purpose of committing crimes, don't enjoy endless exoneration on the "no guilt by association" meme. If you don't want any guilt to accrue to you, um, don't join groups like that?

Somebody like Imnotgoing Sideways dines out on the ability of libs to feel guilty and make knee-jerk empty-headed reactions about "protecting" them, but what they should really do is tell them they can't work at NCI unless they leave a known griefing group whose members in their masses are consistently reported for harassment -- and BTW, this isn't just my little pet peeve and only about me, it affects other communities and rentals and events on the grid. When a group like Woodbury can't gain respectability by burrowing into NCI, then it helps separate the wheat from the chaff, and people have to get off the fence about crime. If they really want to "reform" they leave the group and cease the griefing.

LL, if they had their head on straight about attracting business for real, would look at their videotapes, see the culprits, and ban their SL accounts and take down their island if they can show the relationship. Oops, I bet they have no video cameras. Oops, I'll bet they'll say they can't make a positive identification. Oops, I bet they don't care, just like they ignored the vandalizing of their Facebook account.

Comments

[Prokofy Neva]

Desmond, what is your point? The claim isn't about IMG going to SLCC; but we can't be sure, because so many people use alts and lie in this group.

The claim is about griefing inworld.

[Maklin Deckard]

"A LOT of people are going to think *exactly* the way Maklin does on this issue, to the great detriment of Carl and everything he's built.

Does Carl need this? This doesn't tear down Prok. It tears down all the rest of us." - Desmond Shang

As you know from when we have talked, I am an older player (not up with Prok, but not right out of school like most of the strident griefer-defenders seem to be) and by direct life experience RL and in many, many online game communities its CRYSTAL CLEAR that if you let in griefers and assorted thugs they eventually will destroy your reputation and community / organization from within.

I am sorry for Carl, the one time I met him in passing at one of your events he seemed like a nice guy that genuinely wants to help others. BUT he's still going by what Prok calls liberal values (but are actually not real liberal values at all, closer to some watered down libertarian worldview). I am politically and socially liberal, but damn it, there is a difference between liberal and the 'can't take a stand for anything because that is judgemental' mindlessness he's exhibiting.

For my own part, in Carl's place I would show leadership and not gamble with all of NCI's reputation. I would punt the person mentioned in the best interests of NCI, even if they are friends (and the way he called him/her/it 'Immy' I suspect a friendship or at least associate relationship) THEN I would go through the membership list and remove all Woodbury, W-Hat, /b and other associated grieftards from NCI. Clean house and make it public that I did...place the integrity of NCI as a SERVICE to newbs first and foremost. NCI does great things...but let it get the rep of 'griefer haven & recruiting station' and that will destroy their credibility.

Anyone know any other newbie help groups one can refer folks to, until NCI cleans up its act?

[Rinoa Rives]

I guess I cant quite sit idle by while my friend for over a year here in SL gets trampled and villified by name on a heavily read blog.

Immy is a very good person, I can vouch for it, in fact she's very concious of how people see her. I often advise her.. umm or him, on many different things in this world and the real one. She was NOT at the SLCC, I should know I talk to immy almost daily inside and outside of SL.

I have talked to her about accociating with such groups as "woodbury", she has her reasons that have nothing to do with griefing and sincerly focus on the SOCIAL aspect for which the group was most probably founded in the first place.

Now to be honest I dont know much about woodbury, wHat, or any other social(/griefer) groups... frankly I couldnt care less since none of them are for me. That said, from what I've seen of these respective groups, everything should be judged on an individual by individual basis. Most people within these groups tend to be very easy to talk to, and NONE that I know personally have any hidden agenda to cause chaos, I've in fact been protected from it BY these people on many occasions.

Dont get me wrong.. I can understand an event organiser being weary of such associations, and rightly so. However I thoroughly believe that the groups in question have just been completely associated with these unrully, roudy individuals and not the other way round. Everyone else just becomes guilty by association. I truely believe that.

As for Immy, I believe in what she's told me so far, I have no reason to not believe her, she's never ever told me a lie yet and she's backed up everything she's said. I was pretty much the first person she talked to following one of the banning events, she was at a loss as to why she was banned. It took days of digging to even work out WHY she was banned, the answers we were getting back were increadibly vague and confusing.

At NCI Immy has many MANY friends and duties which she forfills... she follows the rules to the letter, is an EXCELENT helper to new and experianced members alike, and she is a respected and trusted land officer there... not to mention she's an official SL Mentor. Outside NCI, other than being somewhat less PG, she's still the same person, she wont cause greif and seeks to be accepted within the communities of SL. She's worked damn hard at it too, and has gained many highly respected friends in the SL world, AND some among the Lindens themselves.

Well thats as much as I can say. it's up to you to ban her or these groups from your land, that's the decision you made as an event organiser, I can respect your decision to avoid risking these groups based on previous experiance, it makes sence. However, I think your critisms of NCI's employment of Immy is unfounded, greifer by association is unfair and misguided, she earned her place and the trust of others there and thats all there is to say, after all it's their decision to make, and untill you bought it up here, it was a good choice by most people's opinion

[Mercedes Zepp]

i had a blast doing this. it was nice to see the vast array of subcultures within sl to actually have a good time without business seminars or panels on the science behind sl. get over it. the easiest way to fight this is just ignore it. very comedic essay though!!

[Mercedes Zepp]

I had a blast on Friday night. Thank you WU for putting on such a refreshing event short of panels, seminars, and all the rest of the srs bsns that the sanctioned community convention events were full of. get over it, the easiest way to defeat your opponent is ignore it rather than provide further opportunities for us to get more free publicity on your blog :3

[Desmond Shang]

When I said "here" I meant: inworld.

* * * * *

Immy seems to have a response on her own blog, but that's for her to link to, not me.

Is it an accurate characterisation? Is Prok's?

I have personally seen Prok completely blow things out of proportion, or get things wrong. In my case and in the case of others, where I knew the backstory or the intent.

But even so, how the hell could anyone possibly be a member of Woodbury and *not* realise that Prok will ban you on sight?

* * * * *

What all this has done, has thrust Carl into a position of having to be judge and jury. Regarding events out of his jurisdiction, based on hearsay.

This scares the hell out of me more than anything. I can fully appreciate Carl holding this at arm's length, unless he saw what happened himself.

What next, inworld or forum trials?

[Prokofy Neva]

Carl has been present when the Woodbury gang has griefed the meeting in Sutherland, Desmond. Carl knows better than to have any "benefit of the doubt" regarding this.

I don't care how many shrill drama queen griefer enablers come up here to rant and rage about their little gal pal here, IMG is a griefer. She has been *caught at it*. That's something that fails to penetrate the tiny little minds here. You don't come to meetings like this repeatedly, with a gang of people spewing particles and self-replicating prims, and pretend you know nothing and see nothing when *you're in the group*.

IMG was banned because she was with a griefing group descending on my meetings not once, not twice, but at least three times I recall because I right clicked and ban/ejected them and found them and their goofy names in the list. IMG has also hung around the Woodbury grief build in Ravenglass as part of the scene whores.

If you don't want to be associated with guilt, don't associate with guilt.

NCI is a cover for this operative who is happy to illustrate that she's a griefer and nihilist by evading bans, showing the hacker nature and criminality at work.

Honestly, you kids are so stupid -- and maliciously so.

[Hiro Pendragon]

Chalk isn't vandalism. Especially when approved. Else, we need to arrest a lot of little kids who chalk up sidewalks with hopscotch boxes.

You know, I tell Woodbury the same thing I'm 'bout to tell you: Why don't you just ... stop prodding them? Some people may get the impression you enjoy it.

p.s. zomg you got a photo credit wrong. ;)

[Prokofy Neva]

Um, chalk is vandalism. It defaces property, it incites more hate and vandalism when it is used to denounce someone like me, and it means somebody has to clean it up.

That part where "somebody has to clean it up" eludes the self-indulgent infantile coder like Hiro Pendragon.

Er, I don't "prod" anybody. When they commit crimes, I abuse report then and now and then I find it effective to name and shame them on my blog, because it's wrong, and the Big Lie they tell about Woodbury University has to be exposed again and again.

I've just had a dozen of them attack inworld again with names like "Niggerflavoured Coleslaw" and "Sgt Authorius". Sigh.

and here's a lovely chat:

Facekick Haystack: What was that for?
Prokofy Neva: No weapons
Facekick Haystack: Oh well wouldn't a WARNING be nice?
Facekick Haystack: Instead of an instant ban?
Prokofy Neva: no, go away
Prokofy Neva: People with a malicious name like yours get exactly what they deserve from me.
Facekick Haystack: Malicious name?
Prokofy Neva: Face kick? Meet kick in the face. Bye.
Facekick Haystack: I find it to be humorous, haven't you ever seen the russian dancer that spun kick the little kid in the face on accident?

[Prokofy Neva]

Desmond, stop being a FUCKING IDIOT.

Carl knows that Woodbury is a griefing group because he's seen them grief, not only at the Sutherland dam, but elsewhere. He doens't have to see *this particular person griefing* (he may not have seen *this particular* incident with IMG) to conclude, as any sane person would conclude, that it is a griefing group.

Anyone coming to Ravenglass and seeing how they have put up two big grief builds to harass me, and seen the other harassment builds elsewhere in Furness and Refugio (to sale at an extortionist price) would "get it".

It would only be a smarmy little burgher like you saving their own ass and making sure they go along to get along with whatever they need to get along with that wouldn't see the reality here.

[RemyGale]

Wow. What a cluster-fuck this became. And what a bunch of DRRRRRRAMA! queens people are being about it.

The party bus event was, for most folks, just that - an event. There was a bus, there was free booze - it was like a Persian nightclub on wheels.

For most of the folks on the bus, the chalk thing was just a chance to see Linden Lab and do some harmless doodling on the sidewalk, with the understanding that it was non-malicious, temporary, and had wink-nudge acceptance by LL.

That people wrote on the building was stupid, but the first trip or two most people did nothing more odious than scrawl "So-and-so rezzed here" and take pictures of themselves with their "art."

[Hiro Pendragon]

Prok,

You do realize, you've long since had enough reach where your celebrity status makes you fair game for humorous making-fun-of, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell

Your definition of vandalism does not apply when the property owner gave permission. And legal definitions of vandalism make no distinction about cause / motivation, so appealing to "it incites hatred" is moot in the eyes of law.

Now, you'd be 100% right to call it for what it is: "Putting 'Ban Prok' on the wall of Linden Lab was mean-spirited and juvenile, and perhaps not something Linden Lab should permit". But realize, when one makes accusations that something is an illegal activity (as vandalism is), they should refrain from it when facts surface showing that the act is not illegal.

When one persists, it's crying wolf. It makes the person be taken less seriously. It's like your habit of comparing griefers and people you perceive as exploitively insider with Linden Lab ... to Communist dictators who massacred millions of people.

I don't know how to say it more clearly - it's like you don't get the fact that when you exaggerate and get histrionic about subjects, you lose any credibility facts may contain.

[Rinoa Rives]

"...now and then I find it effective to name and shame them on my blog,"

not to critisizing your policy of naming and shaming, I mean I'd rather a more sensitive aprotch than trying to insite disgust in others against an individual, I mean you could have quite easily made your point about help groups taking risks by hiring people with potential greif groups in their lists, WITHOUT mentioning Immy's name... heh, I guess I did critisize. However my point is in "naming and shaming" you've still yet to back up a single claim you've made towards this individual. Imnotgoing Sideways or Immy for short, to this point, has so far not only backed up her case but has even sighted and referenced your own blog chatlogs.

the claims being made are as far as I can see... Immy is in a group called Woodbury, Woodbury is a griefer group, and Immy came to your events and at these events caused grief. Extending that last one, Immy came WITH group members of woodbury to cause grief, and it happened 3 times in total. These are the claims being made.

Immy is in a group called Woodbury, this isnt up for debate it's fact, she admits it and thats all there is to say.

"woodbury is a known griefer group". this is a matter of opinion, OP-IN-I-ON, it's not fact and is open to debate. By your experiance, a number of members of the woodbury group who have attended your events have been disruptive, and as a result you've taken the initiative to ban this group from future events. This is fine and all, it's an appropriate action, as I said above. However, whether this trend is the same for ALL members of this group is another matter, and that matters if your sole claim against an INDIVIDUAL is that they are a member of a group to which some disruptions have been associated with.

With that said that last claim, that Immy is a griefer, is still completely under scrutiny, the only association you've made between her and the people that caused disruption at your events is having woodbury in her list and a "goofy name".

...the extended claim that Immy came with a group of griefers to your events, TO GRIEF, has already been disproved by Immy herself, using your own chatlogs of at least one of the events at that. At least she can back up her claims...

Point is if you're going to "name and shame", back it up and prove it... otherwise it's just becomes slander. If you can back up any of the claims you've made I'll listen. So far though, all I've seen is junk claims made without any proof.. the only time you did try and back up something in this artical is citing "Ban Prok" and various other chalked graffiti, to prove that "Woodbury" was at Linden Labs' office during SLCC.

...So to sum up, you didnt need to cite the individual in question in your arguments about NCI's employment of a woodbury group member, and the Naming and Shaming was entirely uncalled for in this instance since this member clearly hasnt done anything wrong having only been banned for her associations, (the reasons why you banned her arent in question, it's the naming and shaming I'm addressing). OH, and on top of that she wasnt even at the event for which this artical is directed at in the first place...

...With that said, what is it you have against Imnotgoing Sideways that deserved such public ridicule? I mean group association isnt enough to deserve such treatment, it's not something you can AR and ban for, after all that would be just rediculous if LL suspended accounts or even banned them for joining a group or having a funny name, ...and the fact that she's actually giving to the community of SL as part of NCI and various other social groups, can only be possitives to her name. So why such a slanderous attack?

[Filthy Fluno]

BLTwith Mayo's profile says:
"If you hate me because I'm black, you're a racist.
If you hate me because I'm a sandwich, you have no taste.
If you hate me because of the groups I belong to, you are a bigoted genocidal fascist. This means you, Prok."
Given you actually are bigoted against people based on what groups they belong to, he is not expressing any hate toward you, he is illustrating YOUR hate toward him, which is not an ARable offense.

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=737005381]

Linden Lab DOES ban groups based on group member activities. And will continue to do so and reclaim their islands, disband their group and block IPs. Greifers get the negative attention they seek. If NCI chooses to legitimize these folks by associating with them - then NCI gets what they deserve also.

[Prokofy Neva]

If that's actually you, Filthy, I'm surprised that you'd fetch up with a lame-assed comment like this.

It's not genocidal, bigoted, or fascistic to condemn a conspiratorial group that commits crime.

It's like condemning the Black Panthers because they use violence and extreme radicalism to achieve their goals. It's ok to condemn such groups; it's ok to try and sentence them for their crimes. That's not "racism"; it's civilization. Is there some Black Panther who shouldn't be condemned because he is "merely" a member and never committed violence? No, because who join radical extremist groups promoting violence know what they are joining (unless you can show they've somehow been duped) and it's ok to condemn them for promoting extremism and violence.

it's not "hate" to report on the griefing expeditions and expose the nihilism and cynicism in griefing groups; it's a report, and it's proper condemnation.

It's not being "bigoted" to condemn Woodbury and all its works and all its members and all its fake agitprop, it's normal and perfectly reasonable, indeed a civic duty to do so.

[Prokofy Neva]

Bladyblue, I've only seen the Lindens appear to ban one group in my time (Voted 5) which may not actually have been banned but simply disbanded by default when its members were permabanned, not sure.

I have never seen them do this, so if you know examples, please provide them.

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=737005381]

http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/07/woodbury-univer.html
Linden Lab deleted Woodbury once before. And I know of the island that was using actual 16 year old girls to cyber for money that was deleted - and whatever happened to Diaper Island and its groups? It takes quite a bit to offend LL's principals (if they have any left) but when it happens - the results are no laughing matter. The offenders loose all virtual holdings and have to start all over again. NCI will not suffer that fate - but they are leaking credibility with every keystroke in defense of Immy's greifer group affiliations.

[Eshi Otawara]

You have yet to realize, Prok, or maybe you do, is that the primary reason you get trolled is that you seem to intentionally set yourself out there to be trolled, typically by being a troll yourself.
The chicken thing is the latest example: you leave them out in the open on unprotected land as if you are baiting people to come screw with it so you'll have something to rant about.
You'll never get any sane person on the grid to agree with your collective guilt argument, esp wrt Woodbury, especially now that Woodbury University has proven its a real school, run by real people, and they are taking an active role in the SL community.
You hold your little fake political discussion noshes but ban anybody you think is going to challenge you intellectually: IntLibber, for example, who afaik has never griefed anybody. His only 'crime' is having disproven your stupid "war on e-terror" approach to dealing with griefing and getting the Herald to put you under editorial supervision. You try to libel him as being this evil arch-villain, but you fail to realize that hundreds of people in SL know Int personally, either from inworld business, socially, or in RL, and know that your portrayals of him are utterly false. All you succeed in accomplishing is marginalizing yourself further and further.
The graffiti episode at SLCC is one example: you got every fact wrong, primarily because you simply were not there and didnt talk to anybody who was, now the community is coming down on you for your blatant falsehoods, and all you can do is curse people and continue your spinning.

[Imnotgoing Sideways]

Just testing. Doing nothing special here. (O.o)

[Imnotgoing Sideways]

Prok. I don't think I'm banned. I sure as heck don't know how to get around it if I were. (T_T)

[Prokofy Neva]

As a fake post from Eshi has been filed into the spam barrel (I checked with her), I'm going to consider the one from Filty is likely fake too, just the usual agitprop trolling stuff.

1. No one should have to live in a bunker just to have a second life online. No one should have to close their sim to the public and hunker down like in a war just to function. That's ridiculous. There's no need for that.
2. I don't "run a chicken market" where live chickens are put in boxes but have a tenant farm, where in fact the chickens are all in protective pens. None of them have been attacked - only mine have, regardless of whether they were penned or free-range, doesn't make any difference when you can get at them and shoot them with web camming ultimately.

3. I fail to see why I have to turn off scripts and object entry which is a huge inconvenience to tenants and visitors trying to socialize and go to markets and such -- that's ridiculous. This is an open sim and will continue to be run as one. I'm not the problem; griefers are the problem. There are only a few of them; the Lindens need to deal with them.

4. I didn't say Tizzers was the only person who could invite people to Woodbury, but *on the group itself it says that he is the one to IM*. So that clinches it.

5. We've heard this fake theory many times before that W-hat or b-tards or PNs just infilterate the good Woodbury and get it in trouble. Bullshit. Again, the theory that "W-hat just tries to get them in trouble" completely doesn't wash when you see that Tizzers and others are authorized to do invites, -- that makes them FULLY responsible.

anyway, I'm busy, and done answering the trolls on this issue.

[ichabod Antfarm]

"you leave them out in the open on unprotected land as if you are baiting people to come screw with it so you'll have something to rant about."

Fucking idiot. I leave my lawn chairs out a night in my backyard; it isn't to "bait" the drunk 20 somethings who piss on, then knock over the mailbox outside my house. It's because I have faith in civil society. How nuts is that?

[VBMeister Young]

...ichabod, did you just compare your real life backyard to a virtual piece of land? I am dissappointd.

[bladyblue Bommerang]

Prok need a forum attached to this blog.
VBMeister - there are virtual property laws being penned now. There was time that a website name would not be something people would go to court over. Virtual property has real value - just like the lawn chair. And just because your hiding behind an anonymous avatar does not give you license to mess with anyone's possessions - be they virtual or real.
But you already knew this anyway.