The No-Mod Rebuttal

[Rya Nitely]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

It's a complete non-issue to almost everybody in SL. The reason why only a very few people complain about no-mod is because everyone else doesn't find anything to complain about.

Is this based on fact? I have seen so many 1 star reviews because people are annoyed an item is no mod. I really believe consumers do care.

I remember in my very first year I bought a ring with full bright on, and it was no mod. I loved the ring, the creator didn't respond to a request for one without full bright. I also had a pair of jeans around the same time, and I wanted to wear them with boots, but I couldn't shorten them because it was no mod. In this case the creator did give me a mod version. 

But my point is we are talking about everything here, and you need to look beyond just furniture to get the whole picture of the inconveniences it can cause. I'm sure almost everyone has had these inconvenient experiences with no mod at one time or another.

[Phil Deakins]

36 minutes ago, Gadget Portal said:

Here's my problem with the concept of no modify, and people coming in and so strenuously objecting to Penny.

Many consumers buy no-modify not because they're fine with no modify or it's what they want, but because they don't know any better. Any education as to the benefits of modify is a good thing, in my mind.

Many, if not most consumers in SL don't know that over the years, a lot in SL has changed. Script functions, materials, lights, shadows, alphas and invisiprims, hell even the whole physics engine has changed.

If a creator made something no modify that relied on any of those things, it'd now be useless. Those shoes I previously mentioned, a friend of mine had them. Some of them cost upward of 20 or 30 USD, if memory serves. My friend, she bought them because she didn't know any better, they simply happened to be the "best women's boots" available at the time. When they all broke due to invisiprims, she had two options. Throw them all away or get a ripper viewer and steal 'em.

I'm pretty sure she quit SL. Had she known ahead of time that you can't fix no modify stuff if the grid changes, I suspect she wouldn't have bought them to begin with.

I have no problem at all with mod. I've said a number of times that all my stuff ('cept a sculpture) was mod. I haven't argued in favour of no-mod. I've only argued against the all-encompassing statement of Penny's, and it's only the all-encompassing aspect of it that I've argue against. I don't want to go into details about that or it will start up again.

[Phil Deakins]

1 hour ago, Rya Nitely said:

Is this based on fact? I have seen so many 1 star reviews because people are annoyed an item is no mod. I really believe consumers do care.

No, I can't be sure about it. I'm only going by what I see here in the forum, and what I don't hear inworld.

I remember in my very first year I bought a ring with full bright on, and it was no mod. I loved the ring, the creator didn't respond to a request for one without full bright. I also had a pair of jeans around the same time, and I wanted to wear them with boots, but I couldn't shorten them because it was no mod. In this case the creator did give me a mod version.

The ring was a poor piece of design then, and mod would definitely have fixed it. I'm sure (best guess) that the problem with the jeans probably happens to quite a few people, but, on the whole (best guess again), and going by what I see here in the forum and don't hear inworld, there isn't an upswell amongst SL users of 'mod or I don't buy' or 'this thing isn't mod so I won't shop there again'. If there were, then what Pam said about demand would have been having a very significant effect from long ago.

But my point is we are talking about everything here, and you need to look beyond just furniture to get the whole picture of the inconveniences it can cause. I'm sure almost everyone has had these inconvenient experiences with no mod at one time or another.

It's true that, to get an overall picture, I do need to look beyond objects. When I said I'm coming from the point of view of furniture, I really meant objects that are not clothes or avatars, so I need to include clothes and avatars, but I can't.

I don't doubt that everyone has probably had problems similar to the ones you mentioned at one time or another. I haven't, but I've never been a shopper

Nevertheless, I'm still convinced that, on the whole, the vast majority of SL users don't care whether a thing is mod or no-mod. (Again I'm not including clothes and avatars). They just buy what they like and simply use it. I'm also convinced that those who shout the loudest about no-mod as a principle, are those few who want to be able to change and tweak things, just because they have the ability to do it, rather than out of any actual necessity. I may be wrong about those two things, but that's my belief, which is based on this forum.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Penny Patton]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

if we all did that, there would no voices to question or oppose those views.

My thoughts exactly when I see people coming in and saying "Stop complaining. If you don't like no-mod don't buy it." when anyone questions the motivations and justifications for no-mod content or promotes the benefits of modifiable content.

[Phil Deakins]

Who said "Stop complaining"? Whoever it was, it wasn't me. I thoroughly enjoy getting into a good debate, so I wouldn't say anything like that

[Qie Niangao]

12 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Then, if people are inspired to mod things and are looking at merchants who sell no-mod, have them nicely tell those sellers that they'll buy their product if it was  moddable. Some merchants will go along and do a custom perm for them; some won't. However, it will give them an idea of the business they're missing out on and/or demonstrate that the workload of making things no-mod can be just as high as making them moddable.

This is reassuring about something I before considered a disappointment. When I beg, explaining why I'd really value a modifiable version and the creator responds with a one-off copy just for me, I've always thought the interaction sort of a failure because I apparently hadn't succeeded in fully converting that merchant from the dark side. Now I realize -- as I should have, all along -- that by adding that tiny bit of workload, I may be chipping away at the "mod makes more support work" excuse.

That's encouraging, and I'll make it a practice to ask for a special mod version before simply dismissing new no-mod products, as has been my practice. Even if I don't get what I want, just asking is making thing better.

7 hours ago, Rya Nitely said:

Just as no copy items such as plants (if you want more you buy more) became unpopular, and these merchants quickly learnt that to compete you need to make your plants copy...

Back in the day, there was a similar but more abrupt extinction of no-copy animations, all in the course of a few months, due to a temporary but very nasty bug in SL in which rezzed items would regularly disappear, never to return. I can't remember the details anymore, but many, many people lost many, many expensive animations when their AOs vanished. I personally lost a lot of content to this bug, which of course only really affected folks with one or more no-copy animations in their AOs -- which was nearly everybody when the bug started, and nearly nobody by the time it was fixed.

After you've lost an AO that you've spent hours customizing (for which you have no backup because a no-copy anim prevented simply duplicating the whole object, compounding the insult) you'll be very, very careful not to buy no-copy anims ever again -- not because you'll really use multiple copies but because the platform made content-destroying time-bombs of all no-copy anims.

(I've argued above that no-mod presents a similar risk of functional obsolescence -- just too gradual for many customers to realize what they're losing.)

[Love Zhaoying]

I didn’t mean to say “stop complaining”, but that your complaining won’t make a difference unless YOU are a creator, or you buy what you want (thus influencing creators). Like, if this discussion was in an extremely active merchant / creator forum. And if merchants/creators contributed to the discussion heavily. Then, your discussion may have some influence. Otherwise, you can only influence your own behavior and those you convince to Lobby merchants / creators one way or another. A debate in an echo chamber won’t necessarily influence the people you want to influence. Maybe you don’t understand, and that’s ok too. Debate for the sake of debate is fun, but doesn’t necessarily accomplish a “real” goal.

[Phil Deakins]

56 minutes ago, Rya Nitely said:

I also had a pair of jeans around the same time, and I wanted to wear them with boots, but I couldn't shorten them because it was no mod.

I just remembered a recent suit that I bought for a wedding. (Me buying anything is a rarity ) I remember that the trousers were a bit short, so I shortnened my avatar. I don't even remember whether or not I could have lengthened the trousers. My first thought was to shorten me, and that's what I did. I don't remember not being able to lengthen the trousers, but that might have been the case.

I'm only mentioning it because something similar to your jeans happened to me quite recently, and not because it's any argument for one thing or the other.

[Phil Deakins]

13 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The messaging of the OP's side of the debate has been heavily "anti-no-mod." It would probably be more productive if the messaging was "pro-mod" instead.

Qie's post reminded me of yours. I just wanted to say that I completely agree with what you wrote.

[Paul Hexem]

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

I'm only going by what I see here in the forum, and what I don't hear inworld.

 

1 hour ago, Phil Deakins said:

Nevertheless, I'm still convinced that, on the whole, the vast majority of SL users don't care whether a thing is mod or no-mod.

That's why I picked on you there, Phil. You sell modify already, so of course you're not going to get requests for modify permissions.

Further, if they don't care, it's because they don't realize what a problem it can turn out to be, not because they actually don't care. They'd care if they understood what could go wrong, what they're missing out on, and so forth.

As for Penny's 'all-encompassing' arguments... It's buried in her posts, but even she admits that there are times where no modify works, so at least she's not dealing in absolutes.

[Phil Deakins]

You may well be right, Gadget - that I never had to deal with anyone asking for the mod perm, so I didn't come across it like other sellers do. (I don't sell any more). I wasn't actually thinking of my time as a seller though. I was thinking of conversations with people - friends and such.

But I did say that my conviction could be wrong and, if I subsequently find that it is, I'll admit it. I'm pretty good at admitting when I'm wrong. I'm not a person who just fades away after having been clearly shown to be wrong. I don't know how I'd find out though. Perhaps spending time browsing through the marketplace would give some indication, but, never having been a marketplace user, I'm not inclined to spend enough time doing that. The best thing is, though, that, right or wrong, it's just one person's opinion, and one opinion doesn't carry any weight.

ETA: Yes she did admit that. Her all-encompassing statement was actually in her blog that she linked to. The statement really was all-encompassing and didn't allow for any exceptions. Still, that's old now, and best left that way

ETA2: I'm all for mod stuff in general. Mine was mod from the beginning. The only thing I've been arguing against is some of the claims that were made against no-mod stuff.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Bitsy Buccaneer]

2 hours ago, Phil Deakins said:

That's true, Bitsy, but, if we all did that, there would no voices to question or oppose those views. Or maybe other threads would be started to state other opinions. Imo, it's better to have the discussion from all sides within a single thread. I imagine, though, that most of us do what I do - I don't get into threads that have no interest to me, so I think we do what you suggested anyway.

To whatever extent that's true, perhaps it can be used to help understand some of the reasons why some people sometimes buy no-mod items, or something that's not entirely suitable in another way.

[Penny Patton]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I didn’t mean to say “stop complaining”, but that your complaining won’t make a difference unless YOU are a creator, or you buy what you want (thus influencing creators). Like, if this discussion was in an extremely active merchant / creator forum. And if merchants/creators contributed to the discussion heavily. Then, your discussion may have some influence. Otherwise, you can only influence your own behavior and those you convince to Lobby merchants / creators one way or another. A debate in an echo chamber won’t necessarily influence the people you want to influence. Maybe you don’t understand, and that’s ok too. Debate for the sake of debate is fun, but doesn’t necessarily accomplish a “real” goal.

And what I keep trying to explain to you is that a part of influencing creators is influencing their customers. I also post in the creator subforums, but this particular thread is aimed at the average SL user. Sharing information, spreading ideas.

 Speaking of sharing information and spreading ideas, taking to heart the suggestion that I strike a more positive tone, I'm going to start posting articles on my blog showcasing content I've modified, explaining what I did and why as well as showing off the results! Here's the first such article featuring the awesome "Scrapper's Retreat" from CRAnQ!

[Pamela Galli]

1 hour ago, Penny Patton said:

And what I keep trying to explain to you is that a part of influencing creators is influencing their customers. I also post in the creator subforums, but this particular thread is aimed at the average SL user. Sharing information, spreading ideas.

 

Look at the OP, Penny. It’s about bogus reasons creators make things no mod. It is not directed at your real target audience, the buyers who drive demand and therefore also supply. You are talking to creators, not buyers.

Change your focus to an audience of buyers, you may see some change in buying habits.. Nobody cares why creators wrongly think no mod is a good idea, least of all creators.

Back to buggy whip example: you don’t need to convince buggy whip makers to stop making buggy whips — they already did, when the demand for buggy whips evaporated. Increasing the supply of buggy whips will have zero effect on the demand. 

so target demand, not supply.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[Bitsy Buccaneer]

1 hour ago, Pamela Galli said:

Change your focus to an audience of buyers, you may see some change in buying habits.. Nobody cares why creators wrongly think no mod is a good idea, least of all creators.

Woah there. Speak for yourself all you want but not for the rest of us. I care - as a creator and as a customer - and it's not like I'm alone in this.

[Penny Patton]

1 hour ago, Pamela Galli said:

Look at the OP, Penny. It’s about bogus reasons creators make things no mod. It is not directed at your real target audience, the buyers who drive demand and therefore also supply. You are talking to creators, not buyers.

I'm talking to both. A lot of content creators are entirely aware how bogus these explanations are, I'm not talking to them. They know what they're saying is untrue. Some content creators hear others saying these things and believe them, so I am talking to them. At the same time I'm addressing all of the consumers out there who hear these justifications for no-mod and take them at face value. Again, sharing information so the customers can be more informed.

And, of course, there's that new post I linked to. That is also aimed at both, but primarily at consumers. Showing them ways they can improve content they may already own by explaining how I improved something I purchased.

[Pamela Galli]

7 minutes ago, Penny Patton said:

At the same time I'm addressing all of the consumers out there who hear these justifications for no-mod and take them at face value.

 Consumers do not care why someone makes content no mod, all they care about is whether the item is mod or not, if they care at all.  And if they don’t care, it’s because they never mod anything, or are unaware of the benefits of modding things. 

Edited January 19, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[Candice LittleBoots]

22 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

 Consumers do not care why someone makes content no mod, all they care about is whether the item is mod or not, if they care at all. 

I don't disagree, but just to add to what you've said; consumers don't care whether something is mod or not until they want/try to alter something and realise they cannot.

A few pages back I was that smug consumer who said 'if I like it, I buy it. If I dont, I won't'.

I must confess, the more I see this thread pop up the thread charts the more I think about and remember things where no-mod was a real pain in the a$$ for me and where the seller/creator could've very easily offered more than one version in the sale package, even if they weren't mod, just for options.

Example: (skip this tedious tale as it's pure self-indulgence)
Based upon a recent free Xmas-themed event item (a 4-step strippable boyfriend shirt) I visited their store a few days later and bought another with a texture I much preferred. So far so good, I knew the item already so effectively I only have myself to blame for its shortcomings.

Not long after I realised that simply holding down my left-mouse-button over myself to rotate my view was extremely inconvenient while I was engulfed in this over-sized invisible clickable bubble which is used to bring up the menu for the various stages of undress. It makes it almost impossible to wear due to the inconvenience of not being able to move and view around freely as I normally do using that technique. 

Anyway, to bring this tale of tedium to a conclusion (in this post) I am going to send a notecard to the seller asking for either a modifiable version or 4 shirts unscripted (without that awfully oversized clickable bubble). One at each stage of undress. Do you think this request is unreasonable? ..  If so, I'll let you know if I was successful.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Candice LittleBoots
corrected fluff.

[Pamela Galli]

9 minutes ago, Candice LittleBoots said:

must confess, the more I see this thread pop up the thread charts the more I think about and remember things where no-mod was a real pain in the a$$ for me

That  is exactly why the buyer should be the target of education.  The more you know about making modifications, the more valuable the ability to do so will be. 

I have always encouraged my buyers to mod m y stuff —   I have gotten lots of good ideas from looking at what my customers have done with my stuff.

[Phil Deakins]

16 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

I have always encouraged my buyers to mod m y stuff

Just out of interest, Pam. Are your buildings mod? If so, are they copy/no-trans? ("my stuff" doesn't necessarily mean your buildings).

The reason I ask is because I can't imagine anyone selling complex buildings as mod if they are transferable, although it may be the nature of complex buildings that they have to copyable - to replace ones that have been messed up in the rezzing and positioning.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Pamela Galli]

4 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Just out of interest, Pam. Are you buildings mod? If so, are they copy/no-trans?

The reason I ask is because I can't imagine anyonbe selling complex building as mod if they are transferable.

99% of what I sell is mod, whether copy or trans.

 

Edited January 19, 2018 by Pamela Galli

[Phil Deakins]

So you sell mod/copy and mod/trans. But I imagine that you don't sell your large homes as mod/trans, do you? I'm thinking that such a building can too often get really messed up thosee who can edit a little but aren't very experienced at it.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Pamela Galli]

Well trust me, it often does not matter: people mess up their copy mod house, they want me to come fix it for them. Like, when they have unlinked the whole thing and the house is now a pile of convex hull prims. 

[Ivanova Shostakovich]

4 minutes ago, Pamela Galli said:

Well trust me, it often does not matter: people mess up their copy mod house, they want me to come fix it for them. Like, when they have unlinked the whole thing and the house is now a pile of convex hull prims. 

   We could let customers know they've really messed things up by having the house parts (or whatever) turn physical when they're unlinked.

[LittleMe Jewell]

19 minutes ago, Ivanova Shostakovich said:

   We could let customers know they've really messed things up by having the house parts (or whatever) turn physical when they're unlinked.

But that would make no sense to the average SL user.  Heck, it only sort of makes sense to me.