The No-Mod Rebuttal

[Love Zhaoying]

6 hours ago, Rhonda Huntress said:

First time discussing with Penny?

She has her crusades but usually has done her homework before starting.  However, you will never budge her opinion.  Whether she is championing progress or tilting at windmills it's all the same.  Read what she has to say if you want and then either take it or leave it.  Discussing it is just an exercise in frustration.

That explains it. She wants to create a 1-Post locked thread.

[Love Zhaoying]

MY point is, you can b*tch and moan about mod vs. no-mod all you want, but it won’t change a damned thing. You don’t set the rules. Unless you are a creator, or a buyer and just buy what you want.

Edited January 16, 2018 by Love Zhaoying

[Phil Deakins]

@Qie Niangao

A correction to my previous post concerning my temp-rezzer.

I've been running on old memories and I've remembered that the rezzer's operation is different to how I described it. What a user did was rez the required objects and position them where they wanted them. There was no script in them at this stage. Then the rezzer was rezzed in a suitable position - usually somewhat central to the objects. At this point a script is dropped into each object, which automatically tells the rezzer its position and rotation. (I think the script also sets the object to temp. Either that or the user did it by hand. My memory hasn't remembered that bit yet). Then the object is taken into the user's inventory. When they are all done, the user puts them all in the temp-rezzer, ready for temp-rezzing when it's turned on.

The positions of the objects can be changed when they are temp-rezzed, and the script inside the object automatically tells the rezzer that it's moved and the new position and rotation.

I think I've got it right this time

Edited January 16, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Callum Meriman]

3 hours ago, Tari Landar said:

But, a LOT of what I buy can absolutely be optimized better.

Even just removing those darned shadow prims.

Nothing looks worse than walking into a lovely home full of double shadows, and not all of them can be hidden in the wall or floor, especially when you want to place something half on a rug and half off.

[Chase01]

Value is ultimately determined by the buyer (what fits their needs), so while I can understand why the OP would not want to purchase any products that are no-mod; I can't say I entirely agree. When it comes to structures, furniture, and decor items; I'd like, and prefer to have permissions.The lack of those permissions has in some cases stopped me from making the purchase. I could  also say that in some cases I felt that the need to have those permissions did not supersede my need for the item so I did make the purchase.

Do people waste money buying no mod items? That is entirely subjective.

 

 

[Aethelwine]

12 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

I sold a lot of furniture over a lot of years and, like you, it was all mod - except for one sculpture, which needed to be no-mod, or what's the point in buying it?

What is the point of a sculpture you can't scale to fit your room? At least include a deletable resize script. Mod would be better it could get used as a tip jar or in a rezzer. But I would at least expect a resize script.

Edited January 17, 2018 by Aethelwine

[Aethelwine]

13 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

I don’t disagree with Penny about no mod. My point is that ultimately demand determines supply, unless there is a monopoly of an essential product (which SL does not have). If people buy no mod products, creators will keep making them. If there is no demand for a product, creators will stop making it. 

So the target audience for penny’s message should be buyers, not sellers.  The reasons a seller chooses no mod permissions is really not that relevant. 

I would think that sellers would benefit more because they are the ones that (in my experience) that end up patiently redoing their furniture as mod when I ask them so I can use them in a rezzer.

 

[Aethelwine]

4 hours ago, Chase01 said:

Value is ultimately determined by the buyer (what fits their needs), so while I can understand why the OP would not want to purchase any products that are no-mod; I can't say I entirely agree. When it comes to structures, furniture, and decor items; I'd like, and prefer to have permissions.The lack of those permissions has in some cases stopped me from making the purchase. I could  also say that in some cases I felt that the need to have those permissions did not supersede my need for the item so I did make the purchase.

Do people waste money buying no mod items? That is entirely subjective.

 

 

I have wasted plenty of lindens on clothes made of flexi prims or sculpts I thought would allow you to delete the resize scripts. I remember one expensive biker coat in particular that had over 300 scripts in it, completely useless to me because biking sims have a script limit of 50 to 100 scripts. That was the best part of 1000L$ wasted and the seller,  had no sympathy and I never shopped there again. An expensive lesson.

[Chase01]

23 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

I have wasted plenty of lindens on clothes made of flexi prims or sculpts I thought would allow you to delete the resize scripts. I remember one expensive biker coat in particular that had over 300 scripts in it, completely useless to me because biking sims have a script limit of 50 to 100 scripts. That was the best part of 1000L$ wasted and the seller,  had no sympathy and I never shopped there again. An expensive lesson.

Cool story? I am not sure why I had to be quoted for this lmao

[Candice LittleBoots]

For people like me who just 'play the game' I sometimes wonder what all the fuss is about.

My laywoman's view is that if I see something I like, I demo it. If the demo proves to be acceptable and I want it, I buy it. If, for whatever reason, something falls short of my hopes or expectations then I decline the purchase.

I buy nothing unless I've demo'd it first. I won't even part with one linden for a hunt item anymore unless it's from a known store whose items are impeccable.

Topics such as this just showcase the temperatures some people reach when they don't get things their own way.

Life, either first or second, must be very frustrating when everyone else is always doing it wrong.

[Paul Hexem]

39 minutes ago, Candice LittleBoots said:

For people like me who just 'play the game' I sometimes wonder what all the fuss is about.

My laywoman's view is that if I see something I like, I demo it. If the demo proves to be acceptable and I want it, I buy it. If, for whatever reason, something falls short of my hopes or expectations then I decline the purchase.

I buy nothing unless I've demo'd it first. I won't even part with one linden for a hunt item anymore unless it's from a known store whose items are impeccable.

Topics such as this just showcase the temperatures some people reach when they don't get things their own way.

Life, either first or second, must be very frustrating when everyone else is always doing it wrong.

Not knowing how things work isn't really a good argument for allowing them to remain broken.

 

[Phil Deakins]

3 hours ago, Aethelwine said:

What is the point of a sculpture you can't scale to fit your room? At least include a deletable resize script. Mod would be better it could get used as a tip jar or in a rezzer. But I would at least expect a resize script.

I actually sold a number of sizes of the sculpture, so resizing wasn't really needed, although a resize script would have been better for finely adjusting the size. The function would have been easy to add to its colour-changing script but I never thought of it. You should have IMed the suggestion to me at the time - so it's your fault!

Edited January 17, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[iamyourneighbour]

On 1/16/2018 at 12:32 PM, Penny Patton said:

My opinion on no-mod content is no secret. I will almost never buy no-mod and neither should you if you value your money, your land or your avatar.

 Okay, okay, there are exceptions. Scripts totally need to be no-mod or they are effectively full perm.  When I talk about no-mod I'm referring to objects. The prims and mesh.  I'm not suggesting scripts need to be full perm. Another possible exception would be items for closed gaming systems where modding could open them up to abuse and cheating. I'm not 100% sold on this as a simple examination of items in a game would reveal if they'd been tampered with but I'm generally willing to give this a pass as such items typically aren't used outside their game context. As for the rest...

When you buy no-mod you are giving up the right to personalize the object beyond whatever meager concessions the creator allows.

•  Do you see an easy way to reduce the Land Impact or Draw Weight of the item? Too bad, you're not allowed to take advantage of it!
•  Do you see a problem with the item that is easy to fix? Too bad, you're not allowed to fix it. Better hope the creator is offering support!
•  Is the object horrifically out of scale and there's no resize script? Well, you're out of luck.
•  Do you need to retexture the item to make it fit the scene you purchased it for? Well if it's no mod, there goes that idea! What about VRAM use? Could some simple retexturing help boost your framerates? TOO BAD! Those framerates you lose are part of the cost of your no-mod item.
•  Do you utilize a rezzing system so you can easily swap out environments and add more to your land? Well, I hope you're willing to give up the freedom and value that type of system grants you. That no-mod couch you bought is totally worth the extra $5-$300usd/month the tier is going to cost you, right? (And if you don't know what I'm talking about or think I'm exaggerating, you should click that link and learn how to get a lot more value out of the land you're paying for.)

 You give up all of this and more when you buy no-mod and get nothing in place of it. Oddly enough, the seller gets nothing by selling you no-mod items either so why, then, is so much content sold no-mod? Well, there's been a few reasons given over the years and we're going to look at each of these reasons one by one and see if they hold any water.

"It protects my work against content thieves/copybot!"

 For over a decade this was not only the most common reason given, but the only reason given. There's one major flaw in this argument however: It is entirely, 100% false. It is simply not true. At no point was it ever true. The people who cling to this justification for no-mod simply do not understand how SL or "copybot" works. Some of those still clinging to this justification today know it's not true but are unwilling to admit they were wrong.

"I don't want my customers ruining my artistic vision!"

Anyone who utters a statement like this should not be selling content, in my opinion. If they are that insecure and truly believe the modifications of others can ruin their precious reputation they have not achieved a professional level of maturity. They can sell with the perms they like, but I for one would not trust them with my money.

"It cuts down on customer support I have to deal with from customers who break their purchases!"

Or, you know, you could box the content so that your customer always has a backup copy. You can also put in nice big letters "If you broke something, get a fresh copy from the box it came in before contacting me." at the top of your customer support page. This achieves the exact same goal without crippling the item you're selling.

 

 And that's pretty much it. These are the only three justifications I've ever seen for selling content no-mod and I always point out the fallacies in these attempts at justification but the person I'm trying to discuss the issue with either doesn't reply at all, or simply restates their original argument as if repeating themselves will somehow lessen my rebuttal.

 How about you? Have you heard other justifications? Do you have some of your own that I might have overlooked? As no-mod becomes more and more prevalent (just try to buy a modifiable mesh body that isn't furry/anime these days, not to mention some of the frightening conversations on the topic over in Sansar discussion boards) I think it's more important than ever to make this a public discussion.

I will not buy no mod, personally, I think not being able to resize something is the biggest drawback, especially furnitures.

I am not that into immersion to a degree of which you cannot resize a rock wall to make it smaller. No copy is almost always no go, unless it's a clothing item. Everything I make is copy/mod, tons of sales, and it imposes less creative limits on people.

Edited January 17, 2018 by iamyourneighbour

[Phil Deakins]

2 hours ago, Aethelwine said:

I would think that sellers would benefit more because they are the ones that (in my experience) that end up patiently redoing their furniture as mod when I ask them so I can use them in a rezzer.

 

My experience of selling furniture wasn't like that. As I said earlier, all my furniture was mod (except the sculpture), but none of it was copyable, so none of it would be useful for a rezzer. In spite of that, I was never asked to sell a copyable version of any of it for use in a rezzer. I was often asked for copy versions so that multiple copies could be rezzed (rentals) but not for rezzers.

[Phil Deakins]

1 hour ago, Gadget Portal said:

Not knowing how things work isn't really a good argument for allowing them to remain broken.

Broken in what way though? Broken in that something doesn't work? or prims come apart? or broken in that it does what the creator intended but that isn't what the buyer wants? or what? Surely, if an item is actually broken, then the creator will replace it.

Edited January 17, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Theresa Tennyson]

2 hours ago, Candice LittleBoots said:

For people like me who just 'play the game' I sometimes wonder what all the fuss is about.

My laywoman's view is that if I see something I like, I demo it. If the demo proves to be acceptable and I want it, I buy it. If, for whatever reason, something falls short of my hopes or expectations then I decline the purchase.

I buy nothing unless I've demo'd it first. I won't even part with one linden for a hunt item anymore unless it's from a known store whose items are impeccable.

Topics such as this just showcase the temperatures some people reach when they don't get things their own way.

Life, either first or second, must be very frustrating when everyone else is always doing it wrong.

Thank you for correcting us...

 

[Tari Landar]

2 hours ago, Candice LittleBoots said:

For people like me who just 'play the game' I sometimes wonder what all the fuss is about.

My laywoman's view is that if I see something I like, I demo it. If the demo proves to be acceptable and I want it, I buy it. If, for whatever reason, something falls short of my hopes or expectations then I decline the purchase.

I buy nothing unless I've demo'd it first. I won't even part with one linden for a hunt item anymore unless it's from a known store whose items are impeccable.

Topics such as this just showcase the temperatures some people reach when they don't get things their own way.

Life, either first or second, must be very frustrating when everyone else is always doing it wrong.

Your methods work great fr you, and that's awesome. But that doesn't mean your choices are going to work for others. That doesn't mean people have raised temperatures, and it most certainly doesn't mean life, be it in sl, or rl, is frustrating, or that people automatically think others are always doing it wrong. That's a pretty crappy assessment of everyone else. Even if I don't agree with others on their position/opinions, I wouldn't say that about others just because I don't see it their way. I could make the same assumption of your own life, since you feel the need to judge others' based on one discussion..but I won't, because I don't know you, or your life, any better than you know anyone else or their life.

Shrugs...having a differing opinion doesn't necessarily make everyone else wrong. My methods are pretty similar to yours, in that I rarely buy no-mod items, except that I do sometimes get no-mod items I wish were mod. It's not a big deal to me, even if in the end I realized I have wasted linden. It's my linden to waste, but I'm not going to lie and say I've never felt that way, just so I can insult others  

[Penny Patton]

16 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

No money is thrown away when you buy no-mod items. You are wrong about that, regardless of what you say in your article, but you are perfectly entitled to your opinion. 

Case in point regarding my comment about "reasonable arguments". When I say you're "throwing away money" when buying no-mod it is not an opinion. It is a statement of fact and I go into detail showing how this is the case. Explaining my point with actual in-world examples that back up what I'm saying. Things I can log into SL and show you. Things you can try yourselves to see the results. Facts. Evidence. If you missed it, I'll summarize a handful of those points:

• Land in SL is a static size. Avatars and content can be made larger or smaller but land is always the same size. You cannot grab a corner of your sim or parcel and stretch the whole thing out like you can a prim or mesh object. So if you have an 8' tall avatar and all of your furniture/buildings/landscaping items are all let's say double sized (which is about accurate for almost all content in SL), you have effectively cut your land area down to 1/4th. You're still paying for all the land, but you've effectively gotten rid of 3/4th the land area. If the content is mod you can reclaim all that space. If the content is no-mod, 3/4th of your tier is like a recurring tax on your no-mod purchase. If the content was mod you could either purchase a smaller parcel and pay a fraction of the money for an identical experience, or use the reclaimed space to build a larger, more detailed environment and thus get more value for the money you are paying in tier.
• Larger mesh objects use more land impact. Linking mesh objects together can save you land impact. In both cases, mod content can allow you to reclaim land impact that is otherwise wasted. Again, every time you pay tier, you're paying for the resources your no-mod content is eating up. This is money out of your pocket every time you pay tier. If the content was mod you could shrink and link a lot of this content to reclaim resources and, just as above, either pay less money in tier for an identical experience or use the reclaimed resources to get more value from the tier you are paying.

Phil has not argued these points. Instead he dismisses them as "opinion" and says I am "wrong" without offering any further explanation. I'm apparently simply wrong and we just have to take Phil's word for it.

 This type of non-argument will never change my mind about anything and I will always call it out for the BS it is.

 

[Penny Patton]

16 hours ago, Pamela Galli said:

Penny, since demand drives supply, why not write a version of your case for mod, but directed at buyers?  It doesn’t matter how many no mod products someone sells, it matters how many mod products someone buys. 

This is what Phil and Love don't understand. For this thread I chose to call out some of the non-arguments that have been made to attempt to justify the increasing trend towards no-mod content. A lot of people may hear someone say "selling no-mod protects my content from content thieves" and believe it. They might hear "selling no-mod cuts down on customer service issues, making it so people can't accidentally break what they bought" and think " that sounds reasonable". So I point out the fallacies and reiterate points I've made in past conversations. That is all for the customers, the buyers, and to get people talking more about the issue and raising points they may not have otherwise considered.

 

[Candice LittleBoots]

2 hours ago, Gadget Portal said:

Not knowing how things work isn't really a good argument for allowing them to remain broken.

 

It was not an argument. Arguing on fora is a fruitless affair. I was simply stating things from my perspective. My own opinion, if I'm allowed.

 

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Thank you for correcting us...

 

It was not a correction, simply my view. Again, as above, just stating things from my perspective.

There are people far more capable and able on SL who can and do create things which are well beyond my own abilities and I can only admire. Those that particularly appeal to me I occasionally purchase their products when funds allow. Being a mere 'player of the game' allows me to disconnect from the apparent hassles of knowing or expecting too much. Therefor my frustration levels are negligible. 

 

50 minutes ago, Tari Landar said:

Your methods work great fr you, and that's awesome. But that doesn't mean your choices are going to work for others. That doesn't mean people have raised temperatures, and it most certainly doesn't mean life, be it in sl, or rl, is frustrating, or that people automatically think others are always doing it wrong. That's a pretty crappy assessment of everyone else. Even if I don't agree with others on their position/opinions, I wouldn't say that about others just because I don't see it their way. I could make the same assumption of your own life, since you feel the need to judge others' based on one discussion..but I won't, because I don't know you, or your life, any better than you know anyone else or their life.

Shrugs...having a differing opinion doesn't necessarily make everyone else wrong. My methods are pretty similar to yours, in that I rarely buy no-mod items, except that I do sometimes get no-mod items I wish were mod. It's not a big deal to me, even if in the end I realized I have wasted linden. It's my linden to waste, but I'm not going to lie and say I've never felt that way, just so I can insult others  

One can only base one's opinion upon what is presented. I've never been an advocate of the ad hominem approach, or to be swayed by general consensus.

Having a good moan about whatever negative state of affairs you may consider worthy does, perhaps, possess positive attributes in terms of letting off a little steam, getting it off your chest and/or sharing your thoughts with others. I hope this thread has been of use to some who feel SL users are not doing things the right way.

Being told I'm wasting my own money on a purchase because it was a no-mod item is ludicrous. In fact, it is insulting. Providing I am happy with it, having demo'd it first, then my own money has been spent how I choose. In times past I have wasted money, but in essence it was not. An occasional punt without a demo I was fortunate, but money spent on an item I am unable to adjust to fit and/or did not fit correctly becomes a lesson in demo'ing. No demo, no purchase.

My second life as a simpleton does have its benefits.

[Paul Hexem]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

Broken in what way though? Broken in that something doesn't work? or prims come apart? or broken in that it does what the creator intended but that isn't what the buyer wants? or what? Surely, if an item is actually broken, then the creator will replace it.

Not every creator supports their products like you or me, especially the ones that have left the grid.

Need I remind you about no mod invisiprim shoes?

[Phil Deakins]

9 hours ago, Penny Patton said:

Phil has not argued these points. Instead he dismisses them as "opinion" and says I am "wrong" without offering any further explanation. I'm apparently simply wrong and we just have to take Phil's word for it.

But you are wrong Penny. And I have explained in great detail why I think that. I can't help it if you chose not to read what I wrote, can I? So I'll respond to the 2 bulleted items in your post, but first I'll quote something you wrote. I'm sorry, but just about all of this post is going to be repetitions of what I've already posted in this thread, but you say that you haven't seen it, so I have to do it:-

You wrote, "I linked to an article I wrote explaining in detail how no-mod content makes it impossible to get the full value of any land you pay for, for all practical purposes forcing you to throw money away."

Paraphrasing that, you said that ALL no-mod content that is bought to put on the land makes it impossible for ANYBODY to get the full value of the land they pay for, forcing ALL those who buy ANY no-mod content for their land to throw their money away.

Earlier I said that your statement would have some merit if you'd said that some no-mod items can have that effect, simply because no more LI can be squeezed out of some no-mod objects. I went into much more detail earlier, but you claim not to have seen it. I also said that, if a thing is too big (specifically, if it isn't suitable for your needs), you shouldn't buy it, so items that are too big don't even come into it. Ok, now to your 2 bulleted items.

 

9 hours ago, Penny Patton said:

Land in SL is a static size. Avatars and content can be made larger or smaller but land is always the same size. You cannot grab a corner of your sim or parcel and stretch the whole thing out like you can a prim or mesh object. So if you have an 8' tall avatar and all of your furniture/buildings/landscaping items are all let's say double sized (which is about accurate for almost all content in SL), you have effectively cut your land area down to 1/4th. You're still paying for all the land, but you've effectively gotten rid of 3/4th the land area. If the content is mod you can reclaim all that space. If the content is no-mod, 3/4th of your tier is like a recurring tax on your no-mod purchase. If the content was mod you could either purchase a smaller parcel and pay a fraction of the money for an identical experience, or use the reclaimed space to build a larger, more detailed environment and thus get more value for the money you are paying in tier.

So you're not really criticising big buildings and furniture. You're criticising big avatars that need big buildings and furniture, and it's the fact that the avatars are big and need big buildings and furniture that you say reduces the amount of land. But you're overlooking the fact that reducing the size of objects would make them too small for those avatars, so the ability to shrink them would be useless to them. Incidentally, your idea that a tall avatar reduces the land to 1/4 is rather silly, don't you think? Tall avatars do need buildings and furnishing to suit them, but a 3/4 reduction is ridiculous - unless you're comparing it with, say, a 2' tall avatar.

That doesn't work unless the person wants to drastically reduce the size of their avatar. But they chose that size for preference, and they furnish their places to suit it. That's their choice. You can tell them that, if they greatly reduce their avatar sizes, they'll be able to get smaller stuff and fit more on the land, but that's all you can say. People usually choose their heights because that's what they want, so modding stuff to be smaller is neither useful to them, nor what they want.

 

9 hours ago, Penny Patton said:

Larger mesh objects use more land impact. Linking mesh objects together can save you land impact. In both cases, mod content can allow you to reclaim land impact that is otherwise wasted. Again, every time you pay tier, you're paying for the resources your no-mod content is eating up. This is money out of your pocket every time you pay tier. If the content was mod you could shrink and link a lot of this content to reclaim resources and, just as above, either pay less money in tier for an identical experience or use the reclaimed resources to get more value from the tier you are paying.

I dealt with large sizes in my response to your first bulleted item.

Linking objects together to gain a bit of LI is perhaps a possibility, but it's not something that anybody should be doing. What happens when you want to change a piece of furniture, for instance, but you've linked it to another piece of furniture? You can't just unlink it unless it's a 1-prim piece. You can unlink its parts but then you have to relink them, which could break the object's functionality, because you don't know it's original link numbers and, except for the root prim (and you may not even know which is the original root prim), you can't arrange the link numbers of prims you are linking even if you did know them. Linking objects together is just not worth the LI that it saves. So I don't accept that buyers linking objects is a valid argument in saving LI.

I said before that many, possibly most, objects have been optimised for LI by the creators. That's mod and no-mod objects. I agree that some probably isn't, and mod would help that situation. But you haven't said that some can be helped. You claimed that ALL no-mod objects waste LI. Not in those exact words, but it's what you said. This is where you've been wrong, Penny. You've totally neglected to accept that some no-mod objects can't be improved - neither for LI, nor for size. You've used the biggest brush you could and made your claims about ALL no-mod objects - "no-mod content makes it impossible ...". What you should have said is some no-mod content.

So your statement that I quoted at the start of this post is wrong. It's what I've been arguing in this thread. You need to use a much smaller brush, Penny. Your maximum-sized brush encompasses ALL no-mod objects and ALL avatars. If you use a smaller one about many no-mod objects and many avatars, then I couldn't argue. It's your total encompassing of ALL no-mod objects and ALL avatars that I've argued against. It's simply wrong.

Edited January 17, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Phil Deakins]

8 hours ago, Penny Patton said:

This is what Phil and Love don't understand.

You wrote that in your reply to Pamela, who wrote, "Penny, since demand drives supply, why not write a version of your case for mod, but directed at buyers?  It doesn’t matter how many no mod products someone sells, it matters how many mod products someone buys." But neither Love nor I have given any indication whatsoever that we disagree with, or fail to understand, what Pamela wrote. I don't disagree with, or misunderstand, what she wrote, and I very much doubt that Love is any different.

You now seem to want to criticise Love and myself for something that neither of us has even hinted at, presumably because we haven't agreed with everything you've said in this thread.

Edited January 17, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Phil Deakins]

47 minutes ago, Gadget Portal said:

Not every creator supports their products like you or me, especially the ones that have left the grid.

Need I remind you about no mod invisiprim shoes?

Lol. You can't remind me about no-mod invisiprim shoes, because I never knew anything about them. I do remember people using invisiprim shoes but that's my total knowledge of it.

So, by 'broken', you actually do mean broken. I can't argue against your reasoning there. I just wondered if you meant 'broken' in the sense that the thing doesn't do for me what I'd like it to do, and that I could make it do. You didn't mean that, and I'm not opposing what you said. That is a good reason for mod items.

[LittleMe Jewell]

4 hours ago, Candice LittleBoots said:

 

I buy nothing unless I've demo'd it first. I won't even part with one linden for a hunt item anymore unless it's from a known store whose items are impeccable.

 

Sure, I can get demos of clothing, hair, skin, and sometimes shoes, but how do you deal with jewelry?  I'm not sure I've ever even seen a jewelry demo.  Thus I prefer jewelry to be mod, but will sometimes buy it if there is a resize script - with the "sometimes" only applying if it is inexpensive.

 

Personally, I won't buy any furniture unless it is mod or has a resize script. Even then, it has to fall into my 'inexpensive' range before I'll buy the 'resize script' version.  Ditto for most household decorations and many outdoor items.