Why Don't The Lindens Change This Annoying "Owner" Message?

[Prokofy Neva]

Everyone has seen it -- some of us literally see this dozens or even hundreds of times a day:

Can't rez object at {coordinates } because the owner of this land does not allow

This is a totally misleading and false claim, because it's not about any "owner" who is "not allowing"

This message occurs EVEN WHEN the owner himself, or tenants in a rental group with the group tag on their head attempt TO PLACE MESH ON MESH.

We all know that is the story, mesh cannot be placed on mesh, much of the time, with rare exceptions.

Those who don't have to place mesh on mesh all day often don't believe this - they think it "only happens sometimes" or "there's only a few poor makers of mesh who have created this problem."

NOPE, it happens with NEARLY ALL MESH MOST OF THE TIME.

I literally put out mesh hundreds of times because I am putting furniture into rentals, or taking it out, or substituting it, or putting in new furniture, or arranging a landscape, or

working on one of my land preserve parcels. So let's say if I have an average log-on of 2 or 4 hours, it very easily adds up to the hundreds.

Those who don't have this experience don't believe it, can't understand it so they'll try to shoot this down in the usual way but it doesn't matter.

Most people -- and not just landlords, but ordinary end users trying to USE their rentals or even purchased land have this message CONSTANTLY.

SO WHY CAN'T THE LINDENS CHANGE THIS MISLEADING MESSAGE?

It would literally cost them 30 seconds of time to edit their current message to something like "Rez mesh objects on a prim or on the ground to avoid rezzing problems".

But the problem with getting this simple annoyance fixed is ideology. For one, the Lindens will be stuck on the "use case" of how sometimes -- in far fewer instances --

this message is about not having the group tag on. But since the system should be able to detect when you have a group tag on -- such as to generate that message -- hello??? -- the

fact that it gives you this message EVEN WHEN you have the group tag on or are even THE OWNER of the land, then the mesh issue is what is jamming it.

The system could of course still generate "Can't rez object at { } because the owner of this land does not allow" WHEN you don't have the group tag on. But when you do, then it should give this suggestion about mesh. Why can't it? What, it can't detect when you do or don't have the tag on? But surely it does....

So it's a question of a political decision about what to say about badly functioning mesh. That's an admission that mesh really doesn't work so well -- and honestly, I think the Lindens were only beta-testing mesh on Second Life, with an eye to having it go in Sansar or something, because if they were serious, they would have a) gotten rid of this message a long time ago b) enforced standards for making and uploading mesh that ends this problem. They haven't.

What would be a better edited version of this message? I'm open to any suggestions and someone might make a Jira (not me) but it has to be a confession that mesh has to be put on a prim or land.

 

Edited February 19, 2018 by Prokofy Neva

[Lucia Nightfire]

You could have also titled this thread, "Why doesn't LL fix a lot of things?".

[Alwin Alcott]

3 hours ago, Lucia Nightfire said:

You could have also titled this thread, "Why doesn't LL fix a lot of things?".

but just change the txt of a message like this would for me still be of a super low priority

[Qie Niangao]

I know this bug has been discussed many times but I never paid much attention to it, idly accepting a general explanation that it's because the mesh maker didn't know what they were doing. Now that I've looked at the underlying jira and its attached mesh models, I'm puzzled why this wasn't fixed four years ago. I'm looking in Blender at the problem case, Mesh Quad.dae and I'm not understanding what about it should cause such horrible misbehavior when raycasting for the surface on which to rez.

Moreover, as Maestro commented, the error message refers to a perfectly good rezzable location, which doesn't seem to be the location where the failed rezzing is being attempted. If it knows the rezzable location to generate the error message, why can't it use that location to rez the object in the first place?

It would take some heavy explaining to convince me that this shouldn't simply be fixed so we never have to see this or any other error message.

[ChinRey]

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

I know this bug has been discussed many times but I never paid much attention to it, idly accepting a general explanation that it's because the mesh maker didn't know what they were doing.

I have been one of the people saying that a lot and perhaps I should have made myself a bit clearer: It is a well known bug and everybody who aspire to make mesh for Second Life at anything above basic weekend-hobbyist level should know about it by now. If they don't they haven't done their homework. It is also a bug that is very easy to work around. A mesh makers who have good work routines and are in control of the material they are working with will never even encounter that bug - not after they've learned the basics.

But it is still a bug. It shouldn't have been there at all and that is Linden Lab's responsibility.

Look at it this way:

imagine some maintenance guys from the government have dug up a hole in the road you drive to work every day. Then they forgot to cover it up when they were done. The government has been notified but they're busy working on a new road and besides, the people responsible for the hole don't work there anymore. It's not a big hole and it's easy enough to steer clear of if you watch where you're driving but yes, it shouldn't have been there at all. Every day when you drive to work, you drive right into it and break the wheel suspension of you car. Who's fault is that?

 

3 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:

but just change the txt of a message like this would for me still be of a super low priority

I couldn't agree less. Misleading error messages are in themselves serious bugs that can cause a lot of trouble and time wasted looking for a fix in the wrong place.

 

1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

It would take some heavy explaining to convince me that this shouldn't simply be fixed so we never have to see this or any other error message.

It may be a good idea file a new JIRA about it.

I filed a JIRA about the LoD bug for three and four face meshes only a few months after this one. It met the same fate: Maestro Linden looked at it, was unable to explain what was going on and sent it to the Graveyard of Undead Bug Reports. I filed a new JIRA about that problem about a year ago, this time it was assigned to @Grumpity Linden and I don't think it took her more than an hour or two to fix it.

Edited February 20, 2018 by ChinRey

[Qie Niangao]

Is the modelling workaround documented somewhere? I've never been able to sustain even "basic weekend-hobbyist level" of interest in modeling mesh for SL, so I didn't see what's wrong with Mesh Quad.dae, or even what's all that unusual about it (other than maybe that its sole surface is offset from the model origin, and that bit should only be a problem because the Mesh uploader contrives the geometric origin on its own).

[ChinRey]

17 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Is the modelling workaround documented somewhere?

Ummmmmm.... you mean officially documented?

At least there are lots of posts about it here and it's certainly something that is discussed every now and then in all builders' forums I know of. Anybody who can be bothered to do some basic research or ask some basic questions shouldn't have any problems finding the answer. And seriously: anybody who has tried to upload mesh by following the official documentation should have noticed that documentation isn't worth the paper it's written on (and it's not even written on paper) and realize they have to look elsewhere for genuine info.

They can look here for example. There are three easy ways around this particular bug. Perhaps the easiest of them is, when you upload and use analyzed physics change this:

to this:

The bug only applies to analyzed physics btw. If you have problems rezzing on a surface with unanalyzed phsyics, there has to eb some other flaw in the physics model.

Edited February 20, 2018 by ChinRey

[Prokofy Neva]

12 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

I know this bug has been discussed many times but I never paid much attention to it, idly accepting a general explanation that it's because the mesh maker didn't know what they were doing. Now that I've looked at the underlying jira and its attached mesh models, I'm puzzled why this wasn't fixed four years ago. I'm looking in Blender at the problem case, Mesh Quad.dae and I'm not understanding what about it should cause such horrible misbehavior when raycasting for the surface on which to rez.

Moreover, as Maestro commented, the error message refers to a perfectly good rezzable location, which doesn't seem to be the location where the failed rezzing is being attempted. If it knows the rezzable location to generate the error message, why can't it use that location to rez the object in the first place?

It would take some heavy explaining to convince me that this shouldn't simply be fixed so we never have to see this or any other error message.

Yes, well, sure, fixing THE THING ITSELF would be best. And I wonder that too -- if the system can tell you a location with three coordinates, why can't rez mesh there?i.e. what makes mesh "bounced," when it does seem to have a place to go?

I don't know anything about "raycaster" nor can I even see that JIRA (I'm banned) but I take your word for it -- it's funny, really, why mesh just can't be fixed to do this. Especially when SOME MESH -- a very rare amount, really, does work.

My point is that since four years have gone by and nobody wants to fix it, they could at least fix that dumb message.

That way no one would ever be confused on this point, they would then take the mesh and rez it on a prim block or the ground.

 

 

[Prokofy Neva]

10 hours ago, ChinRey said:

Ummmmmm.... you mean officially documented?

At least there are lots of posts about it here and it's certainly something that is discussed every now and then in all builders' forums I know of. Anybody who can be bothered to do some basic research or ask some basic questions shouldn't have any problems finding the answer. And seriously: anybody who has tried to upload mesh by following the official documentation should have noticed that documentation isn't worth the paper it's written on (and it's not even written on paper) and realize they have to look elsewhere for genuine info.

They can look here for example. There are three easy ways around this particular bug. Perhaps the easiest of them is, when you upload and use analyzed physics change this:

to this:

The bug only applies to analyzed physics btw. If you have problems rezzing on a surface with unanalyzed phsyics, there has to eb some other flaw in the physics model.

If it were such a simple matter of toggling from "surface" to "solid" we wouldn't have such a widespread problem, tho. We do. It's MOST mesh. I'm happy to demonstrate this for you on the last 100 objects in my inventory any time.

[Prokofy Neva]

15 hours ago, Alwin Alcott said:

but just change the txt of a message like this would for me still be of a super low priority

Neither of you go inworld and experience these issues to any significant degree so your comments are low priority too as a reason to do nothing.

The Lindens can a) fix this thing b) fix the message at least. They don't. But they should as it is a massive annoyance for everyone.

 

[Willow Wilder]

Meanwhile, as the rage and the debate continues, I sing a happy tune and marvel at the drop in my blood pressure, thanks to a certain favorite redhead for one of her latest, neatest FS viewer features for this very annoyance. Thank you Beq.  

Why can't I rez on my mesh table/floor/bed

La la la, La la la

[Callum Meriman]

17 hours ago, ChinRey said:

imagine some maintenance guys from the government have dug up a hole in the road you drive to work every day. Then they forgot to cover it up when they were done. The government has been notified but they're busy working on a new road and besides, the people responsible for the hole don't work there anymore. It's not a big hole and it's easy enough to steer clear of if you watch where you're driving but yes, it shouldn't have been there at all. Every day when you drive to work, you drive right into it and break the wheel suspension of you car.

To  that a little

Thing is, that hole in the road was really small. Well made cars, maintained by professionals who know what they are doing and care about their work can drive over it without problem, it only becomes a problem when you own a gogo-mobile sold by a weekend mechanic. (Even if he is a beginner mechanic with the fanciest shop and a huge row of gleaming vehicles to wow the average customer [Let's call those ones Fakers] the luxurious looks don't hide the rust-inside for long)

So, because the government are too occupied with other things to fill the tiny hole in the road, the people who own those cruddy gogo-mobiles have to take silly steps like placing plywood over the little holes to compensate for the poor workmanship of the people they bought from, or just putting up with the error messages and frustration.

Another solution for those with those cruddy gogo-mobiles from the fakers, would be to trash it and buy something well made.

[ChinRey]

6 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

If it were such a simple matter of toggling from "surface" to "solid" we wouldn't have such a widespread problem, tho.

I know it seems incredible but it is actually that easy.

 

6 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

 I'm happy to demonstrate this for you on the last 100 objects in my inventory any time.

That would only prove that the last 100 objects in your inventory were made by people who didn't take this precaution.

Or one of the other two methods to avoid it - both of which are really better.

I have a idea: why don't ou ask the makers of those items about it?

[ChinRey]

6 hours ago, Willow Wilder said:

Meanwhile, as the rage and the debate continues, I sing a happy tune and marvel at the drop in my blood pressure, thanks to a certain favorite redhead for one of her latest, neatest FS viewer features for this very annoyance. Thank you Beq.  

Why can't I rez on my mesh table/floor/bed

 

Oh. Well, looking at Beq's video, obviously whatever you need to rez on needs to actually have physics at the spot you want to rez something.

But, but, but...

You're not saying there are respectable SL builders so throughly incompetent they're not thinking of that????

In any case, that has nothng to do with the JIRA Qie mentioned and it is totally the content creator's fault, not Linden Lab's (although LL should still come up with a more helpful error message).

Edited February 21, 2018 by ChinRey

[Phil Deakins]

@ChinRey

(You posted as I'd just finished writing this but I'm gonna post it anyway )

Would the Firestorm feature that's described in the blog post that Willow linked to be useful to Prok for seeing exactly what's happening each time something doesn't rez where it ought to rez? If it will show the reason, then, although the message should be fixed by LL, it will allow Prok to overcome the problem each time, or most times. But maybe Prok already overcomes the problem, and only wants the message fixed.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[ChinRey]

20 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

But maybe Prok already overcomes the problem, and only wants the message fixed.

Well, that is what the thread is about and yes, that is a fair request. However, Prokofy also wrote:

 

On 20.2.2018 at 12:45 AM, Prokofy Neva said:

We all know that is the story, mesh cannot be placed on mesh, much of the time, with rare exceptions.

And the answer is:

Any competent Second Life mesh maker who makes items fit to be sold or distributed in other ways, knows about the problem, knows how to make mesh physics that avoids the problem and will routinely do so for any item that there is a chance somebody will rez something on top of. Anybody can make mistakes of course but if a good mesh maker has produced something with a product flaw like this, all you need to do is contact them and they will correct the mistake and probably thank you for alerting them. Mesh makers who are unable to correct the problem are by definition not comptetent ones, they may be good designers but they lack the technical skills needed to create commercial mesh for Second Life.

(With one exception: makers who specialize in worn mesh don't really need to know anything about mesh physics at all but that goes without saying)

That's it. End of discussion. Have a good day!

Edited February 21, 2018 by ChinRey

[Phil Deakins]

Stop whispering, ChinRey. It's difficult to make out what you're saying

[Willow Wilder]

37 minutes ago, ChinRey said:

You're not saying there are respectable SL builders so throughly incompetent they're not thinking of that????

In any case, that has nothng to do with the JIRA Qie mentioned and it is totally the content creator's fault, not Linden Lab's (although LL should still come up with a more helpful error message).

I'm saying I now have at my disposal a little tool that quickly and easily let's me know where the physics is so I know where to rez and where not to. 

And it wasn't about the JIRA, just my own little comment. 

36 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said:

Would the Firestorm feature that's described in the blog post that Willow linked to be useful to Prok for seeing exactly what's happening each time something doesn't rez where it ought to rez? 

Prok wouldn't be caught dead using a TPV.  ;-)   I agree the message is misleading, but it's hardly the only one, and I just so happen to be not interested in that particular debate. 

[ChinRey]

57 minutes ago, Willow Wilder said:

And it wasn't about the JIRA, just my own little comment.

I understood that but I think it was necessary to clarify that the issue Beq's physics display fucntion show and her video demonstrates is not the one the JIRA is about.

The fundamental solution is the same though: Before you start selling your meshes, learn how to make and upload them.

 

1 hour ago, Willow Wilder said:

I'm saying I now have at my disposal a little tool that quickly and easily let's me know where the physics is so I know where to rez and where not to.

Oh yes, those new mesh monitoring tools Beq added to Firestorm are a gift from heaven.

[Love Zhaoying]

TIL, that using all caps, bold, and increasingly larger fonts in a show of dominance is still a thing.

[Phil Deakins]

3 hours ago, Willow Wilder said:

Prok wouldn't be caught dead using a TPV.  ;-) 

Probably not. I don't use one either, but if I had that problem frequently, I'd briefly use one just to see what's happening, or to check out something that I'm thinking of buying. And then back to LL's viewer. In other words, I wouldn't cut my nose off to spite my face, just on principle.

Edited February 21, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[ChinRey]

27 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

TIL, that using all caps, bold, and increasingly larger fonts in a show of dominance is still a thing.

Annoyance in this case. This has been up so many times on this forum, I've lost count. It's been answered so many times by some many people who actually have done their homework and checked the facts. And people still keep coming up with this nonsense.

[Love Zhaoying]

Suggestions, aka “Here, I fixed it”:

1) If builder / land owner: by the 100th time you got the “owner” message when trying to rez “mesh on mesh”, you know what the error actually means.

2) If land owner renting to other: offer renters a notecard that they will get this message when attempting to rez some mesh objects into some other mesh objects - it does not mean there is a permissions issue.

3) For LL: Consider fixing the message for the use-case when rezzing mesh-on-mesh.

4) For mesh creators: a) Create your items so they will not contribute to this problem, and b) Include a notecard explaining the problem to your customers.

5) For everyone else: you’ll figure it out, maybe.

(Let the angry, all caps, bold and large font replies commence.)

[Luna Bliss]

20 minutes ago, ChinRey said:

Annoyance in this case.

Well ChinRey, for what it's worth I certainly have learned a lot from you (and Chic) about creating better mesh. Unfortunately I'm not sure it matters to most people. I see SL as more of a playground where people are experimenting, and few care about making something as best as it can be.
I remember being sooo careful when creating custom jobs for people, making sure every texture used was a low res one, taking care to repeat textures so that as few as possible were used on a sim, and even using tints to further reduce texture load while providing more variety...even using as few sculpt textures as possible by forming them into different shapes to get variety. But then my client would come along and furnish the house with all sorts of high resolution textures, and way too many of them -- sometimes there would be more textures used in that one house they furnished than I used for the entire sim!

[ChinRey]

36 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Well ChinRey, for what it's worth I certainly have learned a lot from you (and Chic) about creating better mesh. Unfortunately I'm not sure it matters to most people. I see SL as more of a playground where people are experimenting, and few care about making something as best as it can be.

Yes but that's not what this is about. We're talking abut people who are charging significant amounts of money for their builds here and apparently are selling enough to have significant income from it too. And, more to the point, they are spreading misinformation to cover their own lack of expertise. If they say it is not possible to rez on a mesh surface, they are lying. There are many builders who have no problems whatsoever making meshes you can rez on. If they said that they don't know how to do it, well that would be honest and I suppose that would be fair. It's not going to happen though, they'll keep on insisting that if they can't do it, it has to be impossible.

Edited February 21, 2018 by ChinRey