Jump to content

Does anyone else think we need more than 42 group spaces?!?!


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1774 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

I just need to vent about this issue...WE NEED MORE THAN 42 GROUP SPACES!!! Seriously, if i wanna belong to 100 groups then why can't I????

I mean really no increases since 2011?????

We really need to do something....that is why I am starting this. We all need to vent here and see if they pay attention. What do ya think???

Diannah Winslet

aka d1d12266 Resident

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Seeing as how laggy group chat is with just three people in it, there might be a reason behind the 42 group limit. The more people in a group the worse it is going to be on their servers. I am not sure why there is chat lag, but if there is that means something in the system is being pushed too hard. So lets consider that before we put more pressure on the servers than needed ^.^

And 42 groups seems like plenty to me.. How many different things do you need to be doing at once o_O

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just the group chat that is utilized by joining groups, in fact, most of the time I rarely use the group chat unless I have a specific need. Groups are also utilized by people for receiving notices from favorite stores and vendors announcing sales and specials and for clubs announcing events. Within clubs alone, they may utilize several groups to manage different aspects of the club and access to items or areas. Land owners may setup separate groups to manage different parcels on a sim(s). When you work at several places and/or own land in several different areas groups can add up quickly. That I believe is one of the number one reason we need to be able to join more groups... not nessesarily the group chat aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


MIstahMoose wrote:

Seeing as how laggy group chat is with just three people in it, there might be a reason behind the 42 group limit. The more people in a group the worse it is going to be on their servers. I am not sure why there is chat lag, but if there is that means something in the system is being pushed too hard. So lets consider that before we put more pressure on the servers than needed ^.^

And 42 groups seems like plenty to me.. How many different things do you need to be doing at once o_O

The chat lag is per group, so a person can belong to one group and it can have chat lag  Belonging to more than one group won't cause more chat lag.  

As to the number of groups, I need more than 42, as I routinely have to drop a group to add another one.   Performers that I book routinely have to drop a group to add one so they can rezz and manage the stream.  (Performers probably are doing this weekly, as they may be booked to various places, and each place has a group to join to be able to function)

I've been maxed out on groups for years.  I even have my alt in more groups to try to help with it, and still need more groups.

(When managing sims, music venues, DJ gigs, creation groups, it's easy to max out the 42 limit. That's not even counting the groups for other sims I visit or live performers, promotional groups to post in, etc.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we do need more than 42 groups, because there may be more than 42 interesting groups in Second Life.

a group is supposed to be a name on the server that has a list of users that belong to it, when someone send a message it has to appear in the interface of all the users that are subscribed to it, the appearing of the message in all those accounts seems to be too much effort by the server, so to discourage groups with too many subscribers they decide to force people to choose only their essential groups they may want to join, hopefully not many will choose the same group.

they need to fix the way messages are displayed, by giving acces to a view of a flow of messages to just the subscribers, instead of making the process to deliver a message to each subscriber for every comment that is written, repeating the process over and over, they can do so by having a notecard that will add the new messages and refreshing the view of the group chat window with the updated notecard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to have more as i am all the time leaving one group to join another due to my business.  But i am not holding my breath.  It took years of requests to get the group limit to 42.  It would also require a lot more server space to hold group data if they increased the number of groups we could join.

Personally think they should fix the groups before adding more groups to our limit.  Groups were never designed to be used as they are today, but as a vehicle for owning group land.  If we were allowed more groups the number of people in some groups would increase a lot, since more people could join, which may just increase the problems with groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what do you need 100 groups? What groups are you missing out on joining?

Having a limit of 42 is not an unbearable low limit. It allows you to carry a varity of groups with you, but still gives meaning to joining a group. Would it mean something to join a group, if you could be in 100, 200...or endless numbers of groups? Probably not. Inactivity would grow inside groups even more, because some would simply forget that they even joined all those groups. And with the still broken groupchat a sudden increase in members for each group won't help. (I still think they should fix that...but I doubt they ever will).

Questioning the benefit each group gives to you is far more satisfing, than covering yourself in groups, which are dead anyway or annoy you at best. Yay, 58 more spaces for club-groups that spam you every 30min? 58 more spaces for shops that _need_ to have their own group instead of a subscriber? 58 more spaces for groups that nobody uses anyway?

I adapted a habit of questioning each groupmembership I have at that time at least once a month. I leave groups, when I can't name a benefit they give me. And I created my own group, so I don't feel like staying in a group just because I like to have a certain funny grouptag above my head.

I wouldn't mind if they deciede to give us more groups...but first I like to see if they fix current problems. More groups is a luxury need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the past, I have hit the group limit on numerous occasions.  I have all kinds of reasons for wanting, or needing, to join any particular group. That said, I learned to take inventory of groups.  If any particular group hasn't offered me any kind of benefit in some time, odds are I will drop it.  Even though I am nowhere near the 42 limit.  I can always rejoin a group, if need be.  The only ones I do not drop, are those I paid to get into.  Those groups, when I take my "inventory", are groups that offer me some kind of benefit on a regular basis.  So I have no real need to eliminate them.

It seriously takes seconds to join a group-minutes if your system, or the servers, is/are being a butthead, so I am not going to be someone who understands the "UGH, joining groups is so hard" kind of excuse for wanting more groups.  Although I can see benefit to having more groups for some folks, I also think using the fact that you think it takes too long to rejoin a group, is a pretty weird and silly excuse. That said, I suppose it's not my place to judge others for their reasons, either, lol. I do not believe most residents need, or even want, more groups at this time. Some do, definitely, and some truly need them, but I do not believe it is the majority by a longshot. Though I also do not believe the fact that only a minority would use extra groups is any reason to not have them, either-so please don't think I am saying that at all.

The bottom line, for me, is that before we even think about introducing more groups, they need to be fixed in the first place. If the servers and the "system"(as most seem to lovingly refer to it) cannot handle what we have now, introducing more is going to make it a TON worse. It will not fix anything. I actually forsee it getting much, much worse if things are not straightened and more load is added to the "system", as it were. So the urgency of "needing" more groups, in my opinion, is completely demolished by the urgency to fix group chat and groups in general.  Groups have had issues, on and off, for quite some time, almost near their inception, actually. They've simply gotten progressively worse, and not better. I honestly do not have a whole lot of faith they will be fixed anytime soon-though I am more than happy to eat those words should that actually happen in my slifetime.  It took us years to get to 42, and regardless of the management we may have now, compared to then, I don't see this request as getting much attention due to the position groups are in right now. IN fact, I hope it does not get any attention until they are fully repaired.  I would actually be quite disappointed in LL if they introduced more groups, in the state they exist now. That would be a horrible, horrible decision on their part.  Surely not the worst(no, I'm not calling you Shirley), but definitely a very poor decision, regardless.  Adding fuel to a broken gas tank, isn't going to repair the hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of us remember when the limit was 25 groups.  We were so tickled when it was raised to 42.

Back when it was only 25 some of us who weren't Premium Mmebers even said we'd go Premium if additional groups were added as a benefit.

This was the announcement when they raised it to 42:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Tools-and-Technology/Technology-Improvements-for-Q1-Including-Raising-Group-Limit-to/ba-p/673513

Note the comment:

"That said, if there is an unexpected load, then we may need to lower the group limitation to maintain acceptable performance levels across the grid."

I'd love to have more Groups.  Likewise I want Group Chat improved/fixed.

But I generally stay quiet on the subject because I know that I don't really know the technical implications.  But I know enough to know there is more to it than most people ever give thought to.  In other words, it ain't as simple as people think.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at your groups and then check out the stores. See if the store offers a subscribomatic. That's taken the place of a lot of my groups that I'm in just for announcements. The groups I have now are either related to the sim I RP in, ones I've paid for that I get regular gifts with, or general informational ones.

The thing with groups that you have to remember is that when a chat goes out, the server attempts to send it to each and every member. The larger the group, the more places is has to try. One thing that might help with that would be for group owners to be a bit more proactive and eject any players that haven't logged on in a year or whatever limit they decided on. That would help keep the server from having to try to send out notices to those people.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Bobbie Faulds wrote:

Look at your groups and then check out the stores. See if the store offers a subscribomatic. That's taken the place of a lot of my groups that I'm in just for announcements. The groups I have now are either related to the sim I RP in, ones I've paid for that I get regular gifts with, or general informational ones.

The thing with groups that you have to remember is that when a chat goes out, the server attempts to send it to each and every member. The larger the group, the more places is has to try. One thing that might help with that would be for group owners to be a bit more proactive and eject any players that haven't logged on in a year or whatever limit they decided on. That would help keep the server from having to try to send out notices to those people.

 

I've seen some groups with over 90,000 members where ejecting people who haven't logged in would take forever, an other problem is groups that are no longer used but still exist, if LL could add a check box and an impute for the amount of time before ejecting nonactive member that would solve both problems. or an other way to do it it with out ejecting is to set a time frame and only send messages and notices to people who have logged in during that time that way returning people would automatically start getting new notices when they return.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Bobbie Faulds wrote:

Yes, it would take time at first but once done, it's easy to keep up. You can sort by online status so that the ones that haven't been on for a while are at the bottom of the list, making it easier to eject them, though.

I put in a new feature request to automate this, and not just to eject people but all so as a filter for sending notices and chat only to people who had logged in during a set amount of time, that way you don't need to eject them and if they come back would start getting notices again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Parrish Ashbourne wrote:


Bobbie Faulds wrote:

Yes, it would take time at first but once done, it's easy to keep up. You can sort by online status so that the ones that haven't been on for a while are at the bottom of the list, making it easier to eject them, though.

I put in a new feature request to automate this, and not just to eject people but all so as a filter for sending notices and chat only to people who had logged in during a set amount of time, that way you don't need to eject them and if they come back would start getting notices again. 

I think group chat already only goes to the people who are logged in.  There is the 'participants pane' in the group chat window. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time you cross a parcel or Sim boundary everyone of your groups needs be checked to see what permissions you have. That's what groups are really for, managing land. If you have 100 groups or more, that's 60 ish more groups that need to be checked each time. I wouldn't hold breath for too many more groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LL screwed up the very moment they made the stupid decision to tie land access/abilities to groups.  Social groups, business groups (such as the scripted announcement type that have been instituted by user innovation) and land rights should have been separate from the very beginning.  Instead, what we have is every type of group performing every type of function and not all the very well.  But then foresight has never been one of LL's strengths.

...Dres

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Dresden Ceriano wrote:

LL screwed up the very moment they made the stupid decision to tie land access/abilities to groups.  Social groups, business groups (such as the scripted announcement type that have been instituted by user innovation) and land rights should have been separate from the very beginning.  Instead, what we have is every type of group performing every type of function and not all the very well.  But then foresight has never been one of LL's strengths.

...Dres

Based on what I've read I'd agree there should have been a special type of group when land rights were involved.  Of the 42 groups I'm in, eight are for land rights I have/need.  The rest are purely social or business like stores.

I wonder if even LL knows how many groups there are right now.  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who knew that SL would turn out like it did when code for groups was written? 

Remember  Facebook was started in 2004 after SL and was limited to college students for a while.  "Social media" was not even a term back then. SL also started out and was designed as a creative sandbox platform. No one knew that SL would turn out to be so social.

Saying they should have had land groups and groups for commercial and social purposes is looking at things in hindsight.  However I will say that they should have done more to fix groups by now once they saw which way things were going and especially before the push to attract people from social media.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree there some many great club in sl  and there some little room for group you want to add you will have to leave on that you dont want to leave to join the  group you are at i think we sould have more room for group so we add to our list

:matte-motes-big-grin-wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i can't imagine myself needing to belong to 42 groups.  I sometimes ran up against the old limit of 25, but that was usually solved by leaving groups that I'd been invited to join by some DJ or other who I never met again!   Perhaps the group limit could be rounded up to 50, to give a nice round number.  

I don't know if there are any performance issues for LL if they allow people to belong to 100 groups.  It would enable a landowner to form 100 groups for 100 pieces of land they rent out, I suppose, but is that what groups were really intended for?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, i remember a time when we could only be in 10 groups. And then they went to 25, so count yourself lucky, 42 is penty. sure, it may take a bit of juggling, but 42 is doable. And why on earth should we get rid of group chat just to have more groups?? This defeats teh purpose of the groups. I use the group chat, and so do a lot of other people.


42 is a very Douglas Adams number though. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1774 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...