bebejee Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 WOW! people suggesting how to make basic experience worse. I FEEL LL NEEDS STOP PAYING GRANDFAERED RATES OF WEEKLY STIPEND TO PREMIUM MEMBERS, WITH ALL THE NEW PERKS IN LAND OWNERSHIP, LL SHOULD BRING DOWN ALL STIPEND TO CURRENT 300L AND DO AWAY WITH THE 50L ONE FOR OLDER NON-PREMIUM ACCOUNTS. Especially with all the alts looting LL of that money, probably living RL off of it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan Paslong Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 13 minutes ago, bebejee said: WOW! people suggesting how to make basic experience worse. I FEEL LL NEEDS STOP PAYING GRANDFAERED RATES OF WEEKLY STIPEND TO PREMIUM MEMBERS, WITH ALL THE NEW PERKS IN LAND OWNERSHIP, LL SHOULD BRING DOWN ALL STIPEND TO CURRENT 300L AND DO AWAY WITH THE 50L ONE FOR OLDER NON-PREMIUM ACCOUNTS. Especially with all the alts looting LL of that money, probably living RL off of it. if you get hysterical go sit in a dark corner and please come back as soon you'r calm again... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebejee Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 12 hours ago, Ethan Paslong said: if you get hysterical go sit in a dark corner and please come back as soon you'r calm again... Worried LL might listen? no more unused alts raking in that money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 21 minutes ago, bebejee said: WOW! people suggesting how to make basic experience worse. No. Nobody is doing that. LL hinted that they may downgrade Basic accounts and all that's been written here is ideas on what they might do. Nobody is actually suggesting that they do any of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 3 hours ago, loverdag said: I'm not fan of any restrictions like "no rez" for basic accounts - and it's not my intent to support it with this my post - but you made me confused with that statement. I unpack no copy items (gachas) with the box attached on my avatar without rez and it works for me without problem. Now I read it should not work. Did I miss something? Maybe it's different in different viewers? I use Firestorm. Now you've confused me lol People said that no-copy items can't be dragged into your inventory from an object that is worn, so I tested it, and I found that it's true - at least in the test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loverdag Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 11 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said: Now you've confused me lol People said that no-copy items can't be dragged into your inventory from an object that is worn, so I tested it, and I found that it's true - at least in the test. Hehe. So lets un-confuse it. Does't work https://gyazo.com/58e2d32c43d447a54108bc3b7a60e485 Works (drag the folder "contens", not the item itself) https://gyazo.com/4bb3569b05552f263447f5852682daca Panda unpacked, no rez needed https://gyazo.com/28d7e088c0e6692fd78449ba5af263d4 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan Paslong Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 6 minutes ago, bebejee said: Worried LL might listen? no more unused alts raking in that money. a alt that pays premium isn't unused... it actually contributes while sleeping and i don't mind whatever LL decides, i am here because i like SL, and when my personal hobby budget doesn't allow it anymore i'll go do other things, it's not depending on inworld benefits. I have 4 accounts with premium that allow me to have a nice parcel free of tier on the mainland, next to that i have a additional 4096 m parcel, so tell me please what's wrong with having another account.... ? ... and with my shopping habbits 1500 lindens weekly is really not enough to cover my costs... Your post shows you didn't read this thread at all and only got mad when seeing the speculations/ideas/thoughts about basics. I'd like to add... basics not allowed to post on the forums... ( no not serious) 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebejee Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 12 hours ago, Ethan Paslong said: a alt that pays premium isn't unused... it actually contributes while sleeping and i don't mind whatever LL decides, i am here because i like SL, and when my personal hobby budget doesn't allow it anymore i'll go do other things, it's not depending on inworld benefits. I have 4 accounts with premium that allow me to have a nice parcel free of tier on the mainland, next to that i have a additional 4096 m parcel, so tell me please what's wrong with having another account.... ? ... and with my shopping habbits 1500 lindens weekly is really not enough to cover my costs... Your post shows you didn't read this thread at all and only got mad when seeing the speculations/ideas/thoughts about basics. I'd like to add... basics not allowed to post on the forums... ( no not serious) Then why the original catty response? I have read the complete thread, those are suggestions, ideas and hints even if speculated, that's why I posted in caps so LL don't miss it either, its a nice money saving idea for them despite your sleeper alts contributions towards SL. They gave you all some benefits recently, cant have it all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bebejee Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 On 4/24/2018 at 1:48 PM, Drake1 Nightfire said: Wait, didnt they just double the amount of land they give you? Wasn't there a whole thread about how if you were a once a year payment premium member you were essentialy paying only 12 USD for it? Doesnt this now mean they are essentially paying you to be premium? Stipend: 300/week = 62.40 USD/year Land: 7usd/month = 84.00Usd per year freebies: ? Total______________= 146.40 USD per year cost_______________- 72.00 USD per year Final cost to user__= -74.40 USD per year... Id say that was a fairly large benefit myself.. Which is why i will be going premium as soon as i can. Dont forget their multiple used/unused older ones main and alts still getting 500L and 400L per week, maybe even some old non-premium alts bringing in 50L a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qie Niangao Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 56 minutes ago, loverdag said: Works (drag the folder "contens", not the item itself) I never knew it worked like that! The weird thing is it's conceptually the opposite of restrictions on script functions: llGiveInventory() works for no-copy individual items, but llGiveInventoryFolder() can't handle no-copy contents in the folder. I swear the SL permissions system was produced from a fever dream reading of the Old Farmer's Almanac. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan Paslong Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 1 hour ago, bebejee said: Then why the original catty response? because you shout like you'r in a hysterical meltdown 51 minutes ago, bebejee said: Dont forget their m..... yeah yeah we know it now.... we won't forget it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 2 hours ago, loverdag said: Hehe. So lets un-confuse it. Does't work https://gyazo.com/58e2d32c43d447a54108bc3b7a60e485 Works (drag the folder "contens", not the item itself) https://gyazo.com/4bb3569b05552f263447f5852682daca Panda unpacked, no rez needed https://gyazo.com/28d7e088c0e6692fd78449ba5af263d4 Thank you for un-confusing me I redid the test and you were absolutely right - dragging the folder moves the no-copy contents of the worn box to the inventory. And, nicely, it doesn't end up in folder. Just the contents get moved, as though they'd been dragged. I think you have taught a number of us today, or you ought to have if those who were saying no-copy can't be moved from a worn object are still reading this thread. Again, thank you, loverdog. (nice freckles, btw ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionalein Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 was the packaging object mod or no mod? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oz Linden Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 On 4/22/2018 at 3:49 AM, StrayWanderer said: My thinking about the removing abilities of just Basic-Basic (non PIOF) account to rez Ok... normally I'm happy to just listen to you all speculate about the silliest things (you often come up with good ideas I can steal that way), but this has consumed way way too much of the speculation space. We will not restrict the ability of Basic accounts to rez. 2 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 (edited) You mean we've been arguing needlessly? hrmph! It's been worthwhile though, because, on this very page, loverdag taught some of us something that we'd no idea existed. Edited April 25, 2018 by Phil Deakins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oz Linden Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 On 4/24/2018 at 10:25 AM, Penny Patton said: If they devote the time to it, they could regularly put out small quality of life improvements inbetween the larger, more costly improvements. That would be an investment that would add up more and more over time. Darn... Penny is onto us... 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionalein Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said: You mean we've been arguing needlessly? hrmpl! no the unrezzed unpacking (which we now works sometimes is still unsolved for science ... ) but yeah we should continue this in another thread Edited April 25, 2018 by Fionalein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Fionalein said: was the packaging object mod or no mod? My latest test used no-mod/no-copy packaging. My first test used copy packaging but I didn't think it was worth doing that test again, since no-copy packaging works. Edited April 25, 2018 by Phil Deakins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionalein Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 8 hours ago, Penny Patton said: I look at the Linden Homes, ... shh A FAIK (was way before my time) the Linden homes were user generated contest entries back form the 10*10 prim days... would like to see that repeated with the new homes ... LL can still design their own (or leave it to the moles) if the entries are not good enough (which I doubt)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loverdag Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 2 hours ago, Qie Niangao said: I never knew it worked like that! The weird thing is it's conceptually the opposite of restrictions on script functions: llGiveInventory() works for no-copy individual items, but llGiveInventoryFolder() can't handle no-copy contents in the folder. I swear the SL permissions system was produced from a fever dream reading of the Old Farmer's Almanac. I wonder how many useful features are hidden "out there" and we don't know them because they aren't intuitive and easy to find... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loverdag Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 29 minutes ago, Phil Deakins said: Thank you for un-confusing me I redid the test and you were absolutely right - dragging the folder moves the no-copy contents of the worn box to the inventory. And, nicely, it doesn't end up in folder. Just the contents get moved, as though they'd been dragged. I think you have taught a number of us today, or you ought to have if those who were saying no-copy can't be moved from a worn object are still reading this thread. Again, thank you, loverdog. (nice freckles, btw ) YW! (And thanks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionalein Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, loverdag said: I wonder how many useful features are hidden "out there" and we don't know them because they aren't intuitive and easy to find... many, just see that other thread: The Lindens included a free easteregg hunt for features in SL =^.^= Edited April 25, 2018 by Fionalein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 9 hours ago, loverdag said: Works (drag the folder "contens", not the item itself) https://gyazo.com/4bb3569b05552f263447f5852682daca OMG - I never knew you could drag the actual 'contents' folder item to your inventory. This totally solves the problem of unpacking a DEMO of no-copy objects without having to TP home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleMe Jewell Posted April 25, 2018 Share Posted April 25, 2018 6 hours ago, Fionalein said: was the packaging object mod or no mod? I just tested using an alt and both a mod and no-mod box, each containing 2 no-copy items. In both cases, I was able to drag the Contents 'folder' from the object to my inventory, with the result of having the no-copy items in my inventory and no longer in the box. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Meriman Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, Ethan Paslong said: I'd like to add... basics not allowed to post on the forums Hmmm, you know... <gets distracted by a kitten in a pringles can and loses the thought> Edited April 26, 2018 by Callum Meriman 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now