Sorina Garrigus Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 irihapeti wrote: for a game to fall under this policy it must meet all 4 criteria in your case it dont meet no. 3) + just on games where is pay to play and get no pay from the win. As a option then: leaderboards are good. Like can play for free. But if want to enter your high score on the public leaderboard then that be 1?L please. Pay or not as you like This would not work. This is exactly why the policy says payment is required or permited. Paying leader boards will not work or last as a work around for the policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Just a curiosity... Unless you've left a bit out of the LL quote, it's wrong. It says that "Any game of skill that offers a Linden Dollar payout is subject to this policy.", but that's not true. Such a game would also need to be capable of accepting payment to play. Nothing was left out. That was an exact cut and paste from the FAQ. Your confusion is understandable. The FAQ and policies were clearly written VERY poorly and for me to elborate further will only sound like a direct insult to the writers. But you have to your quote's context. The question was "I do not want to ‘operate’ a game of skill that offers a Linden Dollar payout as a business; I just want to play it myself / with my friends. Can I still do that?" Any game of skill that offers a Linden Dollar payout is subject to this policy. I think the question was having a skill game for personal or with friends. For example having a real slot machine in your real house that your friends might play when they come over as opposed to be used for more obvious commercial use. Through the entire policy it refers to the policy addressing "Skill Games" which is clearly defined. “Skill Game” refers to any game: 1) whose outcome is determined by skill and is not contingent, in whole or in material part, upon chance; 2) requires or permits the payment of Linden Dollars to play; 3) provides a payout in Linden Dollars; and 4) is legally authorized by applicable United States and international law." Are “freeplay” games in Second Life subject to the Skill Gaming Policy? Freeplay games, in which the sole payment required or permitted is a nominal Linden Dollar payment for the sole purpose of triggering gameplay and is immediately and automatically refunded without conditions of any kind, are not within the scope of the Skill Gaming Policy. It is best to go off how LL defines skill games then from a poorly worded response to using a skill game that pays out for use for only for friends or yourself. They were trying to say it doesn't matter if its for personal or friend use as opposed to commercial use, the polices hold the same for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Jetaime Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Sorry wrong again. The question was asked and the answer means what it says. Not your made up "I want to interpret this my way" wish. Anyone would be foolish to follow your advice. If what you say is true then why did the maker of Greedy update his products and remove the pay option then give them for free to anyone that has a Greedy Table? He is not licensed and has no intention of making skill games that fall under the policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sorina Garrigus Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Amethyst Jetaime wrote: If what you say is true then why did the maker of Greedy update his products and remove the pay option then give them for free to anyone that has a Greedy Table? He is not licensed and has no intention of making skill games that fall under the policy. You answered your own question. " He is not licensed and has no intention of making skill games that fall under the policy" Exactly. Karsten has no intention on going through the skill game creator process. For him to continue to selling his games he can not have his games require or permit pay in and win options. He used a funky work around with his prize server for years. "Skill game creators" have to be approved with this new policy in order to continue to sell their games including multiplayer games. That question was very CLEARLY about using a game for personal use or with friends instead of for commercial use. AGAIN go off the definition of what LL is calling a skill game. If you take that response out of context for non reality based reasons and assume that is the definition of what a skill game is instead of a question about personal use, then it would conflict with the policy and FAQ in innumberable spots. It would also mean all freeplay games no matter what the kind are within the policy but the policy and FAQ CLEARLY states freeplay are not within the skill game policy. Don't go giving advise and quoting a random blurb CLEARLY out of context. It destroys any credibility you might have on future subjects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Jetaime Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 The policy does NOT say it only applies to commercial use. Show me where it says that. It applies to all uses even private use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Sorina. Amethyst wasn't condfused, a you suggested. She quoted LL and it was LL's writing of the quote that was simply wrong - which I pointed out. Also, I don't think you two have a disagreement just now. According to my reading of your posts, you both correctly think that it makes no difference how a game is used - private ot public - it is still subject to the polciy if it fulfills the four criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Sorina Garrigus wrote: Don't go giving advise and quoting a random blurb CLEARLY out of context. It destroys any credibility you might have on future subjects. This, coming from a person who was so confused by LL's correct usage of a semi-colon that they claimed it rendered their whole definition of skilled gaming indecipherable, is simply laughable. ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irihapeti Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Sorina Garrigus wrote: irihapeti wrote: for a game to fall under this policy it must meet all 4 criteria in your case it dont meet no. 3) + just on games where is pay to play and get no pay from the win. As a option then: leaderboards are good. Like can play for free. But if want to enter your high score on the public leaderboard then that be 1?L please. Pay or not as you like This would not work. This is exactly why the policy says payment is required or permited. Paying leader boards will not work or last as a work around for the policy. is not a workround is a game in its own right with its own merits, not subject to the Skill Gaming policy. Not subject bc it dont pay out. The player pays to get entered onto the leaderboard + if leaderboard games were subject to this policy then so would Bloodlines be. Bloodlines is a leaderboard game you pay money (buy the stuff) to play the game. No pay. No play. Your only tangible reward for paying to play Bloodlines is to see your name on the leaderboard. The only other reward the players get is the pleasure of playing which is a intangible reward. Same like any other game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arabellajones Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 I agree. It's just as much paying-to-play as is walking into a shop and buying a copy of Dungeons & Dragons or a set of chess pieces. I am not sure the Lindens always manage to explain these things all that well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandria Mosely Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 No...it does not mean that. It means if your state does not offer gaming then you will not be allowed to teleport to the casinos and other gaming places where you can win lindens. The new policy is a check and balance...it why these new gaming places must be on linden labs land. They can monitor more easily by you contact and payment info. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Jetaime Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Sandria Mosely wrote: ... these new gaming places must be on linden labs land. They can monitor more easily by you contact and payment info. Hope this helps. This is not true. A private estate owner can have a sim converted into a gaming sim and run a gaming venue or rent it out to someone who will. They just have to be willing to pay the extra tiers and assume responsibility that all operaters are licensed and all games are licensed. See section 5 of the Skill Game Policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Amethyst Jetaime wrote: Sandria Mosely wrote: ... these new gaming places must be on linden labs land. They can monitor more easily by you contact and payment info. Hope this helps. This is not true. A private estate owner can have a sim converted into a gaming sim and run a gaming venue or rent it out to someone who will. They just have to be willing to pay the extra tiers and assume responsibility that all operaters are licensed and all games are licensed. See section 5 of the Skill Game Policy. Also this statement, "It means if your state does not offer gaming then you will not be allowed to teleport to the casinos and other gaming places," is a little backwards. The State must not inhibit gaming. There is nothing about a State having to offer it. While it is true that (to the best of my knowledge) all states have Laws regulating Gaming, it is always assumed any action is legal unless prohibited by Law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonardoMyst Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Even though I'm new (celebrating my 30th day today), I've already formed my opinion about this. I believe they should remove skill games altogether. And here's why: If they do a blanket ban across the whole grid, creative people will find (legal) alternatives that will benefit everyone. As it is now, the majority are unaffected while people who live in the ten banned states are treated as second class Second Life citizens. And as the majority will still have access, nothing will be done to give the ones left out something that they can do as an alternative. Also, I've found another side effect of this is that some things like Virtual Fishing is gimped because as several boueys are on Skill Regions, the ones that can't access them are at a disadvatage in tournaments. At the very least they could offer a space that bans the people from the 40 states and only allows people from the 10 skill banned states. Perhaps we can get together and have exclusive parties... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainbow Fairymeadow Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 You dont have to have a premium acct to have your payment history on file. So people that have free accts can still get in, its basically just so they can check where you live because there are those 10 states that arent allowed at all. Big Brother is watching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 LeonardoMyst wrote: Even though I'm new (celebrating my 30th day today), I've already formed my opinion about this. I believe they should remove skill games altogether. And here's why: If they do a blanket ban across the whole grid, creative people will find (legal) alternatives that will benefit everyone. What legal alternatives could there possibly be? There is no alternative for pay-in/pay-out games, except games that don't do one of those, and they already exist for everyone to play. As it is now, the majority are unaffected while people who live in the ten banned states are treated as second class Second Life citizens. And as the majority will still have access, nothing will be done to give the ones left out something that they can do as an alternative. Just like thay are traeted as second class citizens in the real world if you want to look at it that way. So it's nothing new to those people. Also, I've found another side effect of this is that some things like Virtual Fishing is gimped because as several boueys are on Skill Regions, the ones that can't access them are at a disadvatage in tournaments. That's irrelevant, imo. The answer is to use tournaments that don't take place in skill gaming regions. At the very least they could offer a space that bans the people from the 40 states and only allows people from the 10 skill banned states. Perhaps we can get together and have exclusive parties... That would be a bit silly, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonardoMyst Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 What legal alternatives could there possibly be? There is no alternative for pay-in/pay-out games, except games that don't do one of those, and they already exist for everyone to play. Well... except that if 80% of the population have the option they would not use them because they have access to the skill zones. Which means that the non-skill zones are left barren. If you took the skill zones away from everyone, those areas would fill up. That's irrelevant, imo. The answer is to use tournaments that don't take place in skill gaming regions. However, the tournament allows the use of boueys that are grid wide. You can choose (or be forced) to go to the non-skill areas to fish but the ones that have access will by default get 40 more points per spot they fish at. That would be a bit silly, imo. No more silly than allowing special priveledges to some and not to others. It should be all or nothing. I'm not saying they should go against the laws to allow it for the ones who can't participate. Just remove it entirely so that it won't create an economic imbalance when people who can go to those places have the chance of winning L$ (of course, they could easily lose their money, too), while those that have no access can't just drive to another state for a chance to "hit it big". What if one day they were to decide that for some reason half of the citizens could buy and rent out land and the others coud not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 LeonardoMyst wrote: What legal alternatives could there possibly be? There is no alternative for pay-in/pay-out games, except games that don't do one of those, and they already exist for everyone to play. Well... except that if 80% of the population have the option they would not use them because they have access to the skill zones. Which means that the non-skill zones are left barren. Since the only alternatives already exist, everyone can be satisfied. Those who can, and want to, can use skill gaming regions, and those who can't can use the existing alternatives. What there can be no alternatives to are pay-to-play games that pay winnings out, without having to be licensed. What you seem to be suggesting is make the 80% who can, have to settle for not being able to, just so that the 20% can feel happy. That's not really on, is it? If you took the skill zones away from everyone, those areas would fill up. That's irrelevant, imo. The answer is to use tournaments that don't take place in skill gaming regions. However, the tournament allows the use of boueys that are grid wide. You can choose (or be forced) to go to the non-skill areas to fish but the ones that have access will by default get 40 more points per spot they fish at. There is only one tournament? And it uses skill gaming regions? Find another passtime then That would be a bit silly, imo. No more silly than allowing special priveledges to some and not to others. It should be all or nothing. I'm not saying they should go against the laws to allow it for the ones who can't participate. Just remove it entirely so that it won't create an economic imbalance when people who can go to those places have the chance of winning L$ (of course, they could easily lose their money, too), while those that have no access can't just drive to another state for a chance to "hit it big". There are no special priviledges in the skill gaming policy. It's not that most people get something extra. It's that some people aren't allowed the full measure of SL. Your politicians are responsible for that. What if one day they were to decide that for some reason half of the citizens could buy and rent out land and the others coud not? That would be a bit silly. But this isn't about arbitrary silly decisions like that. This is about complying with the real world laws, and LL doesn't have a choice except to ban any semblance of gaming altogether. I suppose that would suit you and those who can't can't access skill games, but it would a bit selfish and mean, wouldn't it? The better attitiude is to feel happy for those who can access them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeonardoMyst Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 As we look up to the city of Metropolis and wave in vain. Oh and something else to consider... Businesses and events are drawn to where the people are. And if a bunch of locations started moving or developing in those areas because of the traffic, then the 20% will lose access to those as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Then be happy for the 80% who have access to those businesses and events But SL isn't like RL. There aren't any busy roads, streets and centres in SL for businesses to be drawn to. Events are much the same as RL though. They open where it's convenient, and draw people to them by such things as advertising. They don't needs busy places for that. Also, there are more than enough businesses and events that are not on skill gaming land, so there is no justifiable reason at all to give everyone access to everywhere by getting rid of skill gaming altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HikariChino Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Question: So I have a Paypal Account as my payment method (I've been gone for a while), so my question is this: Would I also need to add my Credit Card to be allowed access, or is my PayPal account enough? I read through the policy: I am over 19 and currently live in Illinois, a legal state for skill gaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 HikariChino wrote: Question: So I have a Paypal Account as my payment method (I've been gone for a while), so my question is this: Would I also need to add my Credit Card to be allowed access, or is my PayPal account enough? I read through the policy: I am over 19 and currently live in Illinois, a legal state for skill gaming. A simple test is to try and go to a Skill Game Region. If you can't you'll probably need to contact support to find out why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xantai Posted November 16, 2014 Share Posted November 16, 2014 I am curious, I have played the old games, and recenty had the pleasure of playing the new "SKILL" games. I am a bit shocked as the rules that do not apply to operators. My question is, will lindens labs hold the operators responsible for freud or running a sim that takes lindens and gives only 1 percent back? I feel, the operators have a free run, and they are excluded from the rules, why? I do understand to enter those sims are one's choice, however...If a person spends lindens, and leaves logs off feeling they have been ripped off, and there is nothing they can do, and if the advertisment of said sim states "90 percent of the games is returned to the player" (not true) and when the operators creates alts and play against the player, taking away their chances, as they can set the machines to win or lose or however they do it. Why is linden labs not looking into this issue, and why is it possible to allow freud when the TOS clearly states it is a violation. Just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dresden Ceriano Posted November 16, 2014 Share Posted November 16, 2014 The TOS doesn't disallow Freud or any other dead psychoanalysts, as far as I can tell. ...Dres Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feldspar Millgrove Posted November 17, 2014 Share Posted November 17, 2014 Madelaine McMasters wrote: irihapeti wrote: Madelaine McMasters wrote: irihapeti wrote: is some really well-designed AI programs that can create self-modifying executable code I have very fond memories of writing self modifying code on Dad's PDP-11 and on my Macintosh. People look at me funny when I suggest that as a way to solve thorny problems in real-time systems. have never understood why this isnt done more often. Given that they used to do it a lot back in the olden days on the metal. And is still doable today with higher-level language interpreters maybe bc resources like memory and that got cheaper. So just chuck space at the problems I can understand it. Self modifying code must be done in assembly language,[...] As an embedded system developer, I grew up close to the "metal", and I love it there. But the siren song of high level languages is hard to resist. I think it's just fine that self-modifying code is largely forgotten. But I'll never forget the fun of doing it! Many high level languages support self-modfying code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madelaine McMasters Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Feldspar Millgrove wrote: Many high level languages support self-modfying code. Some interpreters allow execution of string variables which, like the rest of the source code, are actually data elements. That's a trick I used (hijacking the lexical analysis of the interpreter) to become the only student in my compiler design class to actually get something working by course end. Outside of that hijacking, or to have fun, I can't readily think of a reason to write self modifying/generating interpreted code. I don't think it increases performance, as the interpreter's overhead dwarfs efficient program structure. So that's not the sort of self modifying code I'm thinking about. Compilers can't support self modifying code unless the compiler is always running, or you write actual machine instructions into memory and call them. If the OS allows programs to write into application space, you might be able to pull this off via something like jumping through function pointers. Digitial signal processing folks used to do this, but modern DSP chip architectures have made it difficult to outperform the straightforward way of doing things. Today, even down at the assembly level, there's little reason to use my old PDP-11/Mac tricks to make speedy code. Unrolling a loop to save the branch overhead is no longer necessary in a world where chips do branch prediction and speculative execution. When I first did it, it was because it was great fun to write programs that wrote programs. Then, during my career, there were a couple times when the advantages of self-modifying code outweighed the near total opacity of the method. The people who followed me did quite a bit of head scratching to figure out what I was up to. I like to leave a trail of happy campers behind me, not frazzled coders sitting amidst clumps of pulled hair. ;-). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now