Jump to content
LittleMe Jewell

Inworld Store Closure - Similar to RL Blue Laws

Recommended Posts

Why do I get the impression it's actually good we can't do names as half of you would actually head over tomorrow just to troll the shopkeeper by camshopping demos?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fionalein said:

And you can camshop inside those - successfully did that at closed events many times... So Love's sentence was wrong...

no, this was the original and tháts the wrong one, no shop but taking stuff from a parcel with banlines... and Love is right, that's not possible

1 hour ago, ellestones said:

do you think it is acceptable behavior for a person in SL to take what they want from another person's parcel when that person has put their banlines up and said: Please don't take my stuff ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

See edit to prior response and see the other responses.

If you still cannot see it, that's fine. I'm not going to try and explain it any further as it's right there in plain English: Don't place active vendors or have an active MP store if you don't want sales.

Why do you get to be the one to decide these things, Solar?

All you've written is variations of Do It My Way or Don't Complain/Don't have a shop, while maintaining the right to complain about people not doing it your way.

This is what I'm trying to understand. Why do you get to be the one to decide these things?

Edited by Bitsy Buccaneer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be a bit more clear on my stance: I have no issues with RL stores closing on certain days. In Real Life you cannot buy anything from a place when it closes as - beyond being unable to access the store (legally) - none of the register systems will function even if you powered them on. They require a cashier to log in before they'll function.

No such restrictions exist with Second Life. A scripted vendor will respond to being clicked on and paid. The MP will respond to adding items to cart, going to cart and checking out.

Your direct presence is required only on the sim the store is on or being logged into the MP. The direct presence of the owner or a sales associate is not required.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

Why do you get to be the one to decide these things, Solar?

All you've written is variations of Do It My Way or Don't Complain/Don't have a shop, while maintaining the right to complain about people not doing it your way.

This is what I'm trying to understand. Why do you get to be the one to decide these things?

I'm not deciding - reality is.

Reality: Active vendor/MP - sales can (and do) happen. Inactive? No sales.

Unless there's some new script function or the backends have changed ... That's how it works. Like it or not.

Edited by Solar Legion
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Solar Legion said:

I'm not deciding - reality is.

Reality: Active vendor/MP - sales can (and do) happen.

So, you're agreeing with Mr. Neva's position on full-permission scripts?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Solar Legion said:

I'm not deciding - reality is.

Reality: Active vendor/MP - sales can (and do) happen.

So people don't have a choice in what they do or how they use vendors? Surely you're not saying that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I can think of a good reason to not sell on the Sabbath: if you don’t want to provide customer service on the Sabbath to anyone who buys from you that day.

I don't think thats an efficient way, as both sells and customer support cases aren't that timely connected. Sales on Sabbath will not always result in customer support cases and not all incoming cases will be related to sales made on the same day. Sabbath sales stop or not, you will recieve IMs from customers.

Actually I think some people might even be more inclined to contact you, if they see your store suddenly closed, because that is not common in SL. If a storeowner does not or can not do customer support on a certain day...then they just shouldn't do it. Just like all other people in SL react, when RL keeps them away from logging into SL each day. The american residents just had Thanks Giving and at the end of next month a good chunk of the world will be busy with another big slot of holidays. Most people understand, that you can't always answer within 24 hours and its possible to manage a store and vacation.

I think with behavior like this, someone probably damages their store in the long run or at least prohibit your store from growing and networking ( you could never participate in any events, for example).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ethan Paslong said:

no, this was the original and tháts the wrong one, no shop but taking stuff from a parcel with banlines... and Love is right, that's not possible

 

Depends on your definition of "buy". If you mean the "buy" button in SL yes it is true, if you mean "buy" as in "purchase" it is wrong - welcome to the ambivalent world of living languages.

Edited by Fionalein
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

So, you're agreeing with Mr. Neva's position on full-permission scripts?

Scripts can (and some do) have Terms of Service/Terms of Use.

They're a vastly different beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

So people don't have a choice in what they do or how they use vendors? Surely you're not saying that.

They have a choice: Active/Inactive.

Those are the only ways to enforce their wishes - all else relies on others to honor requests. Some won't - that's reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so everyone is clear on something: I am doing nothing more than stating the way the systems in Second Life work - the reality of their functions and thus the consequences of trying to act as has been described by this thread: Pretending to "close" your store without making it impossible for sales to happen.

I have not stated my personal views as of yet so some of the reactions to what I have posted thus far are ... Well suffice to say treating these as my personal views would be a mistake.

Edited by Solar Legion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Solar Legion said:

They have a choice: Active/Inactive.

Those are the only ways to enforce their wishes - all else relies on others to honor requests. Some won't - that's reality.

That seller has found another way. It's not one I'm keen on, but banning those who go against her request is actually a way to 'enforce her wishes' (to use your language) for the future.

I know it's too much to hope for, but what if people just respected each other? Said, ok, it's just pixels. I can come back later. She can do things her way, you can run any enterprises you're involved with your way, no stress, no bother.

But I guess someone like you can't conceive of going along with someone else's request unless they're physically prevented from infringing it?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Scripts can (and some do) have Terms of Service/Terms of Use.

They're a vastly different beast.

 

2 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

They have a choice: Active/Inactive.

Those are the only ways to enforce their wishes - all else relies on others to honor requests. Some won't - that's reality.

You're arguing simultaneously that the written wishes (Terms of Service/Use) of a script creator do supersede the capabilities in the permission system for scripts and that the written wishes of a store owner (the notification and presumably in-store signage) don't supersede the capabilites of a vending system. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Theresa Tennyson said:

 

You're arguing simultaneously that the written wishes (Terms of Service/Use) of a script creator do supersede the capabilities in the permission system for scripts and that the written wishes of a store owner (the notification and presumably in-store signage) don't supersede the capabilites of a vending system. 

No, I am not. I am stating how the system functions.

Nothing more, nothing less.

You can stop reacting as if my personal views were given - they were not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

That seller has found another way. It's not one I'm keen on, but banning those who go against her request is actually a way to 'enforce her wishes' (to use your language) for the future.

I know it's too much to hope for, but what if people just respected each other? Said, ok, it's just pixels. I can come back later. She can do things her way, you can run any enterprises you're involved with your way, no stress, no bother.

But I guess someone like you can't conceive of going along with someone else's request unless they're physically prevented from infringing it?

I suppose it is hard for you to understand the difference between stating personal views and stating how the system itself functions.

Until the post following this one, my personal views were left unstated.

Edited by Solar Legion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now for my personal view:

Want to "close" on any specific day? Go right ahead, I can come back another time.

However don't complain if someone visiting your MP store (if you have one) bought from you on the day where you in world location was "Closed for Business" - especially seeing as it is not so easy to make this clear on the MP. Your present method to do so is to make sure every product description lists the days you're "Closed for Business" ... Not exactly ideal.

Maybe next time ask - directly - if I am stating my personal view before reacting as if I had?

Edited by Solar Legion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite interesting to see how a strict follower of Judaism tries to restrict the use of technology on their sabbath. I'd say a Jewish store owner can't put the decision to not shop at their store in the hands of the non-Jewish customers. They should do more to restrict access like putting several large prims inside the store to make cam-shopping difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

Now for my personal view:

Want to "close" on any specific day? Go right ahead, I can come back another time.

However don't complain if someone visiting your MP store (if you have one) bought from you on the day where you in world location was "Closed for Business" - especially seeing as it is not so easy to make this clear on the MP. Your present method to do so is to make sure every product description lists the days you're "Closed for Business" ... Not exactly ideal.

This would have been so much easier if you'd put that in earlier rather than, or at least in addition to your repeated DO IT THIS WAY OR DON'T COMPLAIN!!! Your brevity and stated harshness occluded that, to me certainly and it seems to some others.

Thank you for doing so finally :)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bree Giffen said:

Quite interesting to see how a strict follower of Judaism tries to restrict the use of technology on their sabbath. I'd say a Jewish store owner can't put the decision to not shop at their store in the hands of the non-Jewish customers. They should do more to restrict access like putting several large prims inside the store to make cam-shopping difficult.

Probably best not to assume that the store owner is Jewish and Orthodox. We've already had a burst of antisemitism removed from the thread because of that assumption.

Seventh Day Adventist is at least as likely, perhaps more so. Or maybe one of the related groups - they have a complicated factional history. Perhaps another Christian denomination altogether that I'm not thinking of :) 

I'm still not sure why it's so awkward for people to just respect another person's request. It seems to me like a rather basic and normal thing to do.

Edited by Bitsy Buccaneer
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

No, I am not. I am stating how the system functions.

Nothing more, nothing less.

You can stop reacting as if my personal views were given - they were not.

I'm not saying anything about your personal views; I'm not stating my personal views either. I'm saying that whatever you're saying is contradictory. Either the wishes of the vendor supersede the technical permissions of a system or they don't. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly Bitsy, I had hoped someone would have thought to ask if what I had been stating earlier was my personal opinion or not.

And yes, I am a bit of an arse and a bit pedantic on that.

Yes, I will often give my opinion from the outset, especially in threads where opinions are being asked for. In this case tough I felt it was necessary to lead with how Second Life's systems treat things and what options one has on a system level.

It was not my intention to give the impression that those responses reflected my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

I'm not saying anything about your personal views; I'm not stating my personal views either. I'm saying that whatever you're saying is contradictory. Either the wishes of the vendor supersede the technical permissions of a system or they don't. 

The system doesn't care about user wishes. It cares about the permission flags that have been set, what scripts tell it to do and such.

I answered your question regarding scripts with my personal view on the matter - it is covered by Terms of Service/Use.

Your question however was born of assuming my statements prior to your asking were my own opinion on the matter. Your reaction to my answer was born of the same assumption.

Perhaps next time try asking - directly - what a person's view is instead of using a dovetailed question as a form of "gotcha".

In short - no contradiction was made.

You may continue to try and go round and round with that ... I'm not interested in playing games.

Edited by Solar Legion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Bitsy Buccaneer said:

Seventh Day Adventist is at least as likely, perhaps more so. Or maybe one of the related groups - they have a complicated factional history. Perhaps another Christian denomination altogether that I'm not thinking of :) 

I'm still not sure why it's so awkward for people to just respect another person's request. It seems to me like a rather basic and normal thing to do.

Didn't know that about the SDA. That's about all I want to know about them.

Also, this is the internet. Basic and normal behavior shouldn't be assumed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...