Jump to content

Skill Gaming Policy Thread


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1553 days.

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

Recommended Posts

Demonika,

The common Sploders are a game of chance, with a pay-out in L$, that require payment in L$ to participate and as such, are not allowed.
The relevant wiki page states that LL will enforce the policy on gambling:
"Our staff will review, investigate and respond to appropriate notices. When we discover objects or games within Second Life that meet the policy's definition, we will remove them from Second Life."

In short, if you encounter a working sploder that pays out L$, then most likely that sploder has not been reported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


Qie Niangao wrote:


daisybloomer wrote:


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

I wonder.. Is a gatcha machine technically a game of chance? Its like those claw games at the mall.

It's a good question, though I think the distinction is in where the element of chance is. In a skill game, you put money in and you can end up with nothing coming out. In RL, those claw machines you are talking about, you put money in and you can end up grabbing nothing and end up with nothing coming out. Gacha machine, you put money in but you do get sometihng out every time. The difference is the first two is chance "of winning something" versus the last is chance "of what you win." 

You may not want to go down this rabbit-hole. I tried to explore it over in the corresponding SLU thread, and got very hostile reactions from folks rabidly defensive of their gacha addictions. In practice, though, there's no question that LL has already defined their way out of it by stipulating that the payoff must be in L$s, not gacha "merchandise." (Yeah, I know there's a loophole there big enough to drive a truck through, but see that SLU thread for how folks react to it.)

Actually, the stuipulation is

If the "payout" involves objects that are more akin to novelty objects that cannot readily be converted into Linden dollars, real-world currency or value, then that activity will likely be permitted.

Seeing as there are tons of places to buy catcha items at hugely inflated prices....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm seeing a lot of people posting messages about sploders and other "games" which are clearly games of pure chance, haven't been allowed by the TOS for quite some time, still will not be allowed, and therefore are not relevant at all.  If they haven't been removed, it may be because the amount that people generally put into them is so insignificant that they simply do not care, or that they just never received an AR on that particular item.  We can all talk about how this policy may apply to anything and everything within SL, but it is unlikely to help get the relevant questions answered.  It would really be nice if these somewhat off-topic posts could stop so that maybe those questions that actually have something to do with these changes may be answered, and the people involved in all of this can get the facts they need to continue with what they are all doing on this matter.  Of course, the new policies can, and most likely will, apply to things like breedables and several RP games within SL, but I think everyone here knows the type of games that are being targeted here.  The others will be handled if/when LL receives ARs on them, I would assume.


I've been asking questions about actual skill games in SL, and haven't received an answer, while questions about sploders do get attention.  I don't know if it is intentional oversight on the part of LL, or that they just have too many questions to answer...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:


daisybloomer wrote:


Phil Deakins wrote:


daisybloomer wrote:


amanda Carousel wrote:

Hi, I am not the creator of the games I have on my sim, I rent a sim that has these games on them, I am not sure if that makes me the operator sorry am a little confused on this stuff. Do  need to fill out an application just because I have the games on my sim? Also am hearing a lot of rumors such as child avis are not going to be allowed on these sims? Is this true or not. Thank you

 

Totally confused lol

amanda, I am going to try and break my response into two parts for the two different questions you have. I am going based on what is stated in the policy, faq and wiki Linden has issued so far.

Your sim with games -
If you did not rez these games there and they are pay-to-play and someone else did, then that other person needs to apply for an operator's license
and either the games have to be moved to a Gaming Region or the current sim it is on converted to a Gaming Region. If you did rez them in addition to being the renter of the sim, then you need to apply for an operator's license and also subjected to the Gaming Region conversion or would have to move them off to one that is. This is also assuming that the games that are rezzed there have been approved by Linden and the creator also has been approved for a creator's license.

The child avatars - If they don't meet the Gaming Residents requirements as stated in the policy they won't be allowed into any Gaming Region. In general, it doesn't matter if they are Santa Claus or a goat avatar if they don't pass the requirements Linden has set then they won't be allowed in. Here's the definition of Gaming Resident as posted in their policy:

"
Gaming Residents
  1. Should you wish to participate in Skill Gaming in Second Life, you represent and agree that you: (i) are at least nineteen (19) years of age; (ii) have the legal authority to agree to this Skill Gaming Policy; (iii) reside in, and are accessing a Skill Gaming Region from, a jurisdiction in which participation in Skill Gaming is legally authorized; and (iv) are of legal age to participate in Skill Gaming in your jurisdiction.
  2. In order to enter a Skill Gaming Region, you must establish and maintain a Second Life account with accurate, current and complete information about yourself, including a valid payment method. Any Skill Gaming conducted in a Second Life region that has not been recognized as a Skill Gaming Region is not permitted.
  3. If you fail to satisfy any of these requirements, you are not permitted to enter any Skill Gaming Regions."

You are mistaken. Pay-to-play games are nothing to do with it. They are only something to do with it if they also pay out to the players.

Paying to play is not gambling.

Receiving winnings is not gambling.

Paying to play AND receiving winnings is gambling.

Gambling is only allowed if it's a game of skill. Those are the games that the new setup is about.

"
“Skill Game”
or
“Skill Gaming”
shall mean a game, implemented through an Inworld object: 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. Games in which Second Life residents do not pay to play are not within the scope of this Skill Gaming Policy. “Skill Games” are not intended to include and shall not include “gambling” as defined by applicable United States and international law."

Based on the definition of a skill game in the Skill Gaming Policy, very high likelihood pay-to-play games are skill games. If not then they either are a freeplay game (no money needed to play) or a chance game (prohibited by TOS). There is no gray area about this. And if it's a one way pay into the machine and no money comes out, then only thing I can think of would either be a vendor, rental box, gacha machine or tipjar.

There may be a very high likelihood, but that's not the point. What you wrote was wrong, so your advice to the person you were advising was wrong - as #3 in the part you quoted clearly shows. If it doesn't pay out as well as pay in, then it's not gambling and doesn't come under this new stuff. If anyone took what you wrote as being right, then they might easily remove perfectly legitimate games from their land.

Someone suggested that you leave LL to answer the questions. It's not a bad idea.

I am not sure if you carefully read my response to that person and the Linden materials they put out on skill gaming.

"What you wrote was wrong, so your advice to the person you were advising was wrong - as #3 in the part you quoted clearly shows."

-The part I quoted was for the second question she had about child avatars trying to enter Skill Gaming Regions. The quote was the rules set forth by Linden in their new gaming policy, so I am not incorrect there.

"If it doesn't pay out as well as pay in, then it's not gambling and doesn't come under this new stuff."

-That's right, hence why I said that it would have to be "pay-to-play games." I do not think there is a "game machine" in which it is one way in either direction, either paying money in and don't get anything or not paying anything and getting money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Romina Heron wrote:

I dont got an answer of my simple question......what does LL will do with all the gambling casinos. and please dont say LL doesnt know about it.....there is gambling....and all this games aren't skill games.

and who is liable? the player...the owner or the creater?

 

 

LL makes the answer to this clear in Linden Lab Official:Second Life Skill Gaming FAQ.   Both the creator and the operator of existing games of skill that require pay to play and give out cash prizes must, by August 1st, submit applications, backed up by legal advice, to register them.   Furthermore, the owner of the region must have converted it to a skill gaming region by then.   Since no mainland regions will be skill gaming regions, anything on the Mainland or Zindra will have to move.

If the creator or operator don't apply for registration by then, or if the owner of the region doesn't have the region converted, then after August 1, the games must be removed or they'll be subject to AR and removal by LL.    

I strongly suspect that , what with the fact a lot of creators, operators and land owners will have spent a lot of money on applying for registration, and what with the fact a lot of people don't like gaming machines anyway, there will be plenty of people looking out for unregistered games and operators to AR.   

You ask about gambling casinos where the games aren't skill games (i.e. gambling games).   They're banned anyway (at least in theory).    They've survived because their creators and operators have claimed they're "games of skill."   LL are saying, "OK.  Prove it."   

If creators and operators are unable or unwilling to register their games of skill as such, they can't fall back on the excuse, "it's actually  a game of chance, we've just decided" because those aren't allowed either.   So, one way or the other, they'll have to remove them, or, if they want to keep them out, remove their ability to receive and pay out money (which I think is what the creator of Greedy is doing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


daisybloomer wrote:

-That's right, hence why I said that it would have to be "pay-to-play games." I do not think there is a "game machine" in which it is one way in either direction, either paying money in and don't get anything or not paying anything and getting money.

Whether you think it or not, it's always best to be accurate or you could steer people wrong. You don't know that pay-in only games don't exist in SL. You only know that you haven't seen any. LL saw fit to include both pay-in and pay-out, and, if LL thought it necessary to include both, so should you. There's no point arguing about it. What you wrote was wrong, and would mislead anyone who took it at face value.

Also, this isn't about "game machine"s. It's about gambling games, not all of which are machines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if someome make a token system?

 

What if i'm giving away a vendor that's selling you a game for price X and the payout system of playing that game is grid-wide kind of thing? Technicaly, you don't buy-in to play the game! You just buy a game (an object) that allows you to play it and potentialy win money... in the same way getting into a free-to-enter building contest, where let's say.. you paid for the textures you are using.

 

This policy is unfair, it has potential to kill some of the biggest markets in Second Life or create a monopoly of them

if i'm contacting a lawyer it will be to figure out if some of the loopholes I can think of can be used with no problems.

 

Hey, everything have a good side! ... this whole policy is so crazy that it motivates me to be productive again and find a workaround!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:


daisybloomer wrote:

-That's right, hence why I said that it would have to be "pay-to-play games." I do not think there is a "game machine" in which it is one way in either direction, either paying money in and don't get anything or not paying anything and getting money.

Whether you think it or not, it's always best to be accurate or you could steer people wrong. You don't know that pay-in only games don't exist in SL. You only know that you haven't seen any. LL saw fit to include both pay-in and pay-out, and, if LL thought it necessary to include both, so should you. There's no point arguing about it. What you wrote was wrong, and would mislead anyone who took it at face value.

Also, this isn't about "game machine"s. It's about gambling games, not all of which are machines.

Furthermore, if I were the owner of a club where sploders are a popular feature, I'd be seriously considering making them free to play and putting in all the prize money myself.     That's pretty much what happens anyway at most places I go to -- the owner or the host always seems to put in a thousand or so L$, while most of the punters put in trifling amounts like L$10 or L$20 (trifling in terms of the pot, I mean.   I realise they may not have much, particularly if they're new).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Zak Kozlov wrote:

Hey, everything have a good side! ... this whole policy is so crazy that it motivates me to be productive again and find a workaround!

:-)  

Unfortunately it might be like pissing in the pants to keep warm since whatever creativity people come up with will most likely not transfer to SLv2. But it saves your day in the short term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Innula Zenovka wrote:


Phil Deakins wrote:


daisybloomer wrote:

-That's right, hence why I said that it would have to be "pay-to-play games." I do not think there is a "game machine" in which it is one way in either direction, either paying money in and don't get anything or not paying anything and getting money.

Whether you think it or not, it's always best to be accurate or you could steer people wrong. You don't know that pay-in only games don't exist in SL. You only know that you haven't seen any. LL saw fit to include both pay-in and pay-out, and, if LL thought it necessary to include both, so should you. There's no point arguing about it. What you wrote was wrong, and would mislead anyone who took it at face value.

Also, this isn't about "game machine"s. It's about gambling games, not all of which are machines.

Furthermore, if I were the owner of a club where sploders are a popular feature, I'd be seriously considering making them free to play and putting in all the prize money myself.     That's pretty much what happens anyway at most places I go to -- the owner or the host always seems to put in a thousand or so L$, while most of the punters put in trifling amounts like L$10 or L$20 (trifling in terms of the pot, I mean.   I realise they may not have much, particularly if they're new).

I have never understood the draw of a sploder on the owners part, since traffic no longer matters in search, why throw your  money away to people who don't have any? Every sploder i have seen used the newbs pay a pittance and the regulars that have been around a while pay more for fun. The newbs are actually trying to make money, while the regulars don't really care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Zak Kozlov wrote:

What if someome make a token system?

 

What if i'm giving away a vendor that's selling you a game for price X and the payout system of playing that game is grid-wide kind of thing? Technicaly, you don't buy-in to play the game! You just buy a game (an object) that allows you to play it and potentialy win money... in the same way getting into a free-to-enter building contest, where let's say.. you paid for the textures you are using.

 

This policy is unfair, it has potential to kill some of the biggest markets in Second Life or create a monopoly of them

if i'm contacting a lawyer it will be to figure out if some of the loopholes I can think of can be used with no problems.

 

Hey, everything have a good side! ... this whole policy is so crazy that it motivates me to be productive again and find a workaround!

Fine, but some free advice from someone who's not a lawyer (as far as you need to know), just don't waste your time on the token scheme. That was done to death after the first gambling ban back in 2007. The Lab wasn't born yesterday.

You can make everyone's life arbitrarily miserable with tokens asymptotically approximating gacha prizes, but ultimately the most miserable of all would be you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:


daisybloomer wrote:

-That's right, hence why I said that it would have to be "pay-to-play games." I do not think there is a "game machine" in which it is one way in either direction, either paying money in and don't get anything or not paying anything and getting money.

Whether you think it or not, it's always best to be accurate or you could steer people wrong. You don't know that pay-in only games don't exist in SL. You only know that you haven't seen any. LL saw fit to include both pay-in and pay-out, and, if LL thought it necessary to include both, so should you. There's no point arguing about it. What you wrote was wrong, and would mislead anyone who took it at face value.

Also, this isn't about "game machine"s. It's about gambling games, not all of which are machines.

"Your sim with games - If you did not rez these games there and they are pay-to-play (pay L in and it pays L out) and someone else did, then that other person needs to apply for an operator's license and either the games have to be moved to a Gaming Region or the current sim it is on converted to a Gaming Region. If you did rez them in addition to being the renter of the sim, then you need to apply for an operator's license and also subjected to the Gaming Region conversion or would have to move them off to one that is. This is also assuming that the games that are rezzed there have been approved by Linden and the creator also has been approved for a creator's license."

Ok, in that case just a few words to add in and has been edited in the original post as such. So now it is correct and your argument or gripe is now moot.

How about now adding some productive infoirmation to this thread instead of picking/policing what people post here, like you did with someone else also. Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


daisybloomer wrote:


Phil Deakins wrote:


daisybloomer wrote:

-That's right, hence why I said that it would have to be "pay-to-play games." I do not think there is a "game machine" in which it is one way in either direction, either paying money in and don't get anything or not paying anything and getting money.

Whether you think it or not, it's always best to be accurate or you could steer people wrong. You don't know that pay-in only games don't exist in SL. You only know that you haven't seen any. LL saw fit to include both pay-in and pay-out, and, if LL thought it necessary to include both, so should you. There's no point arguing about it. What you wrote was wrong, and would mislead anyone who took it at face value.

Also, this isn't about "game machine"s. It's about gambling games, not all of which are machines.

"Your sim with games - If you did not rez these games there and they are pay-to-play (pay L in and it pays L out) and someone else did, then that other person needs to apply for an operator's license and either the games have to be moved to a Gaming Region or the current sim it is on converted to a Gaming Region. If you did rez them in addition to being the renter of the sim, then you need to apply for an operator's license and also subjected to the Gaming Region conversion or would have to move them off to one that is. This is also assuming that the games that are rezzed there have been approved by Linden and the creator also has been approved for a creator's license."

Ok, in that case just a few words to add in and has been edited in the original post as such. So now it is correct and your argument or gripe is now moot.

How about now adding some productive infoirmation to this thread instead of picking/policing what people post here, like you did with someone else also. Have a nice day.

I did. I was the first to ask about the popular Greedy Greedy game, and I got the answer. Later, I posted that the Greedy Greedy maker will be producing a free updated one by the end of the month that doesn't have the payout in it. I also informed people that the maker won't be applying for any licenses. Plus, I corrected your mistake, because it would have misled anyone who took it at face value. I think I've been quite productive in this thread :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

I have never understood the draw of a sploder on the owners part, since traffic no longer matters in search, why throw your  money away to people who don't have any? Every sploder i have seen used the newbs pay a pittance and the regulars that have been around a while pay more for fun. The newbs are actually trying to make money, while the regulars don't really care.

 I think that's the point -- the regulars are doing it for fun.   It's a bit like those "best in ..."  competitions.   When you start, the L$500 or L$1000 prize seems a great deal of money, but after you've been around for a while, the money is secondary and people enter them for the fun of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Drake1 Nightfire wrote:



I have never understood the draw of a sploder on the owners part,
since traffic no longer matters in search,
why throw your  money away to people who don't have any? Every sploder i have seen used the newbs pay a pittance and the regulars that have been around a while pay more for fun. The newbs are actually trying to make money, while the regulars don't really care.

While you are correct that traffic no longer (is supposed to) effect search, that does not mean that us "Oldbies" do not look at traffic counts.

A high traffic count tells me that something about a place is attracting people and adds impetus for me to go check it out.

Also remember that retention is a big key to remaining profitable.  So sploders, etc, give people an additional reason to return.  You are right, most Oldbies aren't there for the $L's, but it can add to the fun. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About a year ago I was in a venue with a sploder, and saw a Linden drop in.  He just said "nice tunage" and stayed for about half an hour.  A couple did ask him for help, but he told them to lodge tickets on the SL website's help desk.  He never comment on the sploder and it's still there to this day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So after alot of reading and speaking different people and at the suggestion of multiple posts of the same thing over and over by LL here is what I am thinking about Contest Boards in the form of "Best in" situations at clubs, these would not fall under skilled gaming as there is no chance involved nor skill in playing, the contestants at our club do not put Lindens in to the board and the winner is chosen by the crowd in the form of voting for the win, the club owner puts in the lindens themselves for the prize and it can not be raised by the people entering the contest etc. If I am wrong about this I would appreciate some input from others in regards to it, as by it's own definition the contest boards themselves, are not by chance or skill.

I fully understand and agree with sploders being a totally different barrell of monkeys. Along with Raffles lotteries etc. I really am not worried about those it was just the contest boards that had me stumped for a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Delion Ivercourt wrote:

So after alot of reading and speaking different people and at the suggestion of multiple posts of the same thing over and over by LL here is what I am thinking about Contest Boards in the form of "Best in" situations at clubs, these would not fall under skilled gaming as there is no chance involved nor skill in playing, the contestants at our club do not put Lindens in to the board and the winner is chosen by the crowd in the form of voting for the win, the club owner puts in the lindens themselves for the prize and it can not be raised by the people entering the contest etc. If I am wrong about this I would appreciate some input from others in regards to it, as by it's own definition the contest boards themselves, are not by chance or skill.

I fully understand and agree with sploders being a totally different barrell of monkeys. Along with Raffles lotteries etc. I really am not worried about those it was just the contest boards that had me stumped for a bit.

some contest boards have a pay to play mode. even if you don't use this option, it will be the safest to use a conest board that doesn't support this mode at all.

a paid contest board is in an unsafe position  winning the contest is all about chance, if the voting is not rigged.

 
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:

While you are correct that traffic no longer (is supposed to) effect search, [...]

Is that right? People were discounting an effect of traffic with the GSA, but it always had an effect, allbeit a small one. Is it known that they don't make any use of traffic in the current search system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Phil Deakins wrote:


Perrie Juran wrote:

While you are correct that traffic no longer (is supposed to) effect search, [...]

Is that right? People were discounting an effect of traffic with the GSA, but it always had an effect, allbeit a small one. Is it known that they don't make any use of traffic in the current search system?

I meant to stick a question mark in there.  I hear varied opinions.  The traffic rules were written in 2009 and their have been no substansive updates.  And while I know you do SEO, your conclusions are still anecdotal because none of us can actually see inside the search engine.  So if they currently have an effect no one knows how much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1553 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...