Jump to content

Cashout Fees To Rise to 5%


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 628 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Rya Nitely said:

Second life is a very different thing to Minecraft. There are many reasons why people join and stay in SL. I don't think many people joined for the purpose of putting boxes together. 

 

Putting boxes together was pretty much the ONLY reason I joined. It ended up that meeting people from around the world and broadening my horizons was a big motivation to come back and stay, but the primary reason I have stayed all these years and log in daily is the enjoyment I get putting boxes together. Notice I didn't say taking home a paycheck. That's simply a bonus.

4 hours ago, Elvina Ewing said:

by the response of the LL Cheerleading Team,

While I take offense at what I perceive as a slam in you're calling those of us who understand the increase "the LL Cheerleading Team", I will go ahead and claim it. But I don't cheer anyone on unless I believe they are doing a good job. I'm not a blind member just being positive for no reason. I'm also not wearing rose colored glasses. I get frustrated with the lab from time to time as well. It's just in this case I understand the financial climate in the world today and realize that for SL to stay healthy this move is necessary. If it's not meeting my financial need I would move on and find something else that would, which is exactly what you do in RL when your job doesn't provide a large enough paycheck or if you're self-employed you either close down your business and move on or go bankrupt. The fact that people can't make it on their meager income from SL is not LL's problem. Their problem is keeping SL healthy. And if you think that having some creators close up shop is going to be some kind of death nail, then I think you don't really understand SL's history.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 254
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Greetings all! We understand that discussing the announced changes can get heated, please just remember that negative comments directed at, or about, others is not appropriate.  We have remo

It's not negative to know the solutions you have presented won't work (raise prices). I know that because I've experienced it as a merchant, as have many other merchants. Please be sensitive...th

chatting about creating stuff and back in the day, got me remembering about when creating, torturing prims and sticking them together was fun for me i don't have anything left from back in those

Posted Images

and if you think that piling up circumstances that make people leave SL on top of each other for years and years will have no noticeable negative impact on SL, and that on top of the fact that SL is long passed its heyday, looks outdated compared to other modern games, has a steep learning curve for newbies, and now has lost its most important incentive to want to be a new creator here, then you are being ignorant and hiding your head in the sand.

We will see.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Elvina Ewing said:

We will see.

This is your only valid point. The thing about doom-and-gloom predictions are that they never come to pass anywhere near as quickly or direly as predicted. People have been predicting the doom-and-gloom of SL for years. And yet, here we all still are, including yourself.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

If it's not meeting my financial need I would move on and find something else that would, which is exactly what you do in RL when your job doesn't provide a large enough paycheck or if you're self-employed you either close down your business and move on or go bankrupt. The fact that people can't make it on their meager income from SL is not LL's problem. Their problem is keeping SL healthy. And if you think that having some creators close up shop is going to be some kind of death nail, then I think you don't really understand SL's history.

Yes, and it is exactly what I did. I went back to my full time day job after the increases started, and it pays so much money for hardly doing anything at all. Anyway, I did exactly what you suggest people should do, but there is no way that I would come into this thread and slam people who may not be as fortunate as I am. I completely understand why people would be upset and concerned about their reduced income, although I am not in that boat anymore.

What's wrong with just understanding?

And stop saying if some creators close up shop it won't affect SL, because everyone knows that - nobody says it will. If the majority of creators packed up and left slowly over time, well I think it would be the death nail because SL needs that money flow. Unlike minecraft, it isn't been sold as a game to millions of people.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rya Nitely said:

What's wrong with just understanding?

Nothing is wrong with it. But when those of us who agree with the increase get slammed with the label "LL cheerleader" then I'm going to respond. That's name calling. Why can't you understand that it's wrong to do so?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Chic Aeon said:

Each of us ALWAYS has a choice to stay or go. We always have. When we signed our first TOS it was made crystal clear that Second Life was Linden Lab's platform. They make the rules. We can accept them or we can leave. Personally $2.50 per hundred dollars isn't much money. I can't really imagine folks exiting the platform because they are losing that little bit. 

 ...plenty of folks that are OK with the small increase and lumping everyone together? It is simply a lie.  The petition should have read something more like "the people signing this petition" etc.  

 

Now should LL decide to boost the Marketplace fee a ton -- I would likely react.  I definitely reacted when something similar happened in Sansar, but there is a big difference between 2.5 percent and 37 percent (varies with how folks did their math).

Chic, do you have sympathy anymore for creatives in all venues of life who need to earn money in order to continue doing what they love? Did it disappear when you didn't have to earn money anymore and could live on retirement income?
There's not a lot of places for most artists to earn money -- primarily the money goes to the top with the artists being squeezed as much as they can be.
I always hoped SL would continue to be a venue for creatives to support themselves at least a bit, but it is increasingly not.
Telling people they have the option to leave if they don't like the rules is not the answer -- we need to fight for artists and not accept that one more place that could have been for us is changing to support corporate profit.

Once again I'll state my position -- I am not against this current 2.5% increase -- it seems fair. What I am against is fees that continue to increase each year, possibly going to 30% or more. And I hope you're right in your speculation that creatives in Sansar weren't too happy with their drop in income and LL might feel reluctant to go to far with fee increases here.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Example scenario:

A group of hairdressers rent booths in a local shop. They pay a monthly rental fee. The shop is older and needs repairs but the owners can't make the repairs unless they raise the rental rates. The company has no choice but to increase fees if they are going to make the repairs. If they don't make the repairs it's likely that the clients who come to that shop are going to want to go elsewhere where the facilities are nicer. So the hairdressers must come to a decision. Do they pay the increased rental fee or find a booth space in another building? Sure they can refuse to see the necessity of the landlord raising the rent and demand that the landlord make the repairs and just eat the costs. But if that landlord can't afford the repairs then the building will go into decline and eventually not be usable and then everyone looses. The land owner has lost his investment and the hairdressers have lost their booth space. In the end, the real looser would be the land owner. The building would cost much more to repair than initially. The hairdressers could easily find booths in another building and most likely their clients will follow them though some will not as they didn't like the drama that unfolded while the owner/hairdressers were fighting over the issue. A smart land owner would say to the hairdressers that they regret having to increase the rental rates but that it is necessary and that they understand if the tenant must move on because the person can't afford the increased rental rate.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mollymews said:

 

I never said all content should be free.  It was a posited answer to a posited question: Where might SL be today in terms of user numbers if nobody was able to cash out. Not stop cashing out now, but had cash outs never been enabled ?  To begin to answer this then by a real world measure look at Minecraft 

 

 

7 hours ago, Mollymews said:

people did join SL in 2003/2004 to put boxes together. And texture them. And chuck them at each other. And chat. That's all there was to do 

Ok, yes, interesting observations, and I remember the time well. Do you wish SL had stayed as it was in the beginning and never become commercial? Sometimes I actually do -- wouldn't it be great if the obsession with money had not been transposed to SL and SL could be a kind of utopia? It would if there could be a utopia. (Lennon's song 'Imagine' is running through my mind right now..lol).
The reality is that people need to eat, so lets support artists of every kind by enabling them to be compensated for their effort.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blush Bravin said:

Putting boxes together was pretty much the ONLY reason I joined. It ended up that meeting people from around the world and broadening my horizons was a big motivation to come back and stay, but the primary reason I have stayed all these years and log in daily is the enjoyment I get putting boxes together. Notice I didn't say taking home a paycheck. That's simply a bonus.

You can afford to do that because you live on retirement income.
Some others don't have the luxury of doing what they love and feeling like income is just a bonus. If they don't make SOME money from their creative endeavors they have to stop creating and go to a less desirable job to support themselves, having little or no energy and free time to create.

It doesn't mean one ceases to be a real artist if they hold creativity and earning money in their mind at the same time. Not easy to do for sure, but if you want to survive as a freelancing artist you have to learn the balance. Not sure why you feel the need to divide the two.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Alyona Su said:
54 minutes ago, Elvina Ewing said:

We will see.

This is your only valid point. The thing about doom-and-gloom predictions are that they never come to pass anywhere near as quickly or direly as predicted. People have been predicting the doom-and-gloom of SL for years. And yet, here we all still are, including yourself.

Oh SL will most likely go on, but it would be a poorer place without creatives.
Do we want it to be a place where residents ONLY change their butts and heads and cyber, while enjoying the loads of stolen content that enhances their daily SL life? I have nothing against the mentioned identity-enhancing activities whatsoever, however I want SL to be multi-dimensional.

I think we DO need to be concerned about how many residents will stay if they can't at least pay their way in SL through their creative efforts. How many hold that dream of having a successful business? Or how many actually need the money they earn to pay their way or pay a RL bill?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

You can afford to do that because you live on retirement income.

You are totally wrong!!! Yes, I'm retired but as I've stated before my pension is tiny. It only covers my monthly apartment rental. I use my SL income for food and utilities. I didn't need the income at all before I retired. So that's a bogus argument. 

4 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

If they don't make SOME money from their creative endeavors they have to stop creating and go to a less desirable job to support themselves, having little or no energy and free time to create.

I haven't been retired long and yet I've been creating in SL for years and years. Having a full time RL job did NOT keep me from creating. But I never imagined that just because I'm an artist and it's hard to make money as an artist that anyone owed me a living so I could pursue my passion. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Rya Nitely said:

 If the majority of creators packed up and left slowly over time, well I think it would be the death nail because SL needs that money flow. Unlike minecraft, it isn't been sold as a game to millions of people.

Yes, SL is very much sold as a place to both be creative AND earn money. Maybe the ads should change to say "come change your butts and mesh heads, and cyber away, while enjoying the stolen 3D content shoveled in from 3D modeling websites".

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

But I never imagined that just because I'm an artist and it's hard to make money as an artist that anyone owed me a living so I could pursue my passion. 

I's not about anyone owing another anything.

It's about how society should be structured so that artists are supported too, so that such a large share of the profits don't go to the top as they do now.

** We are having this problem with the internet in general too --  too much profit goes to those at the top. We need a restructuring so that others can more easily use this platform and be compensated for their efforts.

Edited by Luna Bliss
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

It's about how society should be structured so that artists are supported too, so that such a large share of the profits don't go to the top as they do now.

Ahh the gulf between a socialist and a capitalist. The only thing I think society should do is respect the rights of the individual and provide a safe environment. Personally, I think everyone is an artist in their own way. I think it's appalling that you seem to believe that "creatives" are some how more entitled just because they are artistic. Hogwash!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Chic, do you have sympathy anymore for creatives in all venues of life who need to earn money in order to continue doing what they love? Did it disappear when you didn't have to earn money anymore and could live on retirement income?
There's not a lot of places for most artists to earn money -- primarily the money goes to the top with the artists being squeezed as much as they can be.
I always hoped SL would continue to be a venue for creatives to support themselves at least a bit, but it is increasingly not.
Telling people they have the option to leave if they don't like the rules is not the answer -- we need to fight for artists and not accept that one more place that could have been for us is changing to support corporate profit.

Once again I'll state my position -- I am not against this current 2.5% increase -- it seems fair. What I am against is fees that continue to increase each year, possibly going to 30% or more. And I hope you're right in your speculation that creatives in Sansar weren't too happy with their drop in income and LL might feel reluctant to go to far with fee increases here.

I was a full time real life artist for many many years,  tons of single art exhibits, published in books, "fairly famous". Did I make any money at it?  No, I did not. It was always something that I did because it was an important part of who I am.  Of all the artists I have known only  a couple  actually made a profit at it -- even though most are still very accomplished.   I NEVER made my living doing art. 

 

While there are some actual artists in Second Life many are here to CREATE, most of the folks that are complaining about the 2.5% increase are MERCHANTS. Certainly they have skills, but I would not call their works art per se  -- unless we consider "life as art" which is a viable outlook. No argument there. 

 

Many of the "true artists" in Second Life have moved on. That is one reason so many of the regions dedicated to art are no more. The artists disappeared BEFORE the regions did. It is sad and I do miss "the olden days".  People are still being creative in Second Life, certainly -- and hopefully they are enjoying the process. Sadly many of the greats have left or are quietly working on their own for their own enjoyment. I would welcome a Renaissance, but I don't really see that in SL's future. 

 

You have a perfect right to fight. I have no argument with that. I do not choose to fight as I am perfectly willing to "flow around the rocks" and enjoy my creativity in whatever forms it may take.  And I wasn't TELLING people to leave -- I was REMINDING THEM of what they agreed to when they opted into this platform. 

 

WE ALL MAKE CHOICES --- every day, every minute. They are our personal choices to make and we get to live with them. Linden Lab has made both good and bad decisions over the last few years. Citizens are both reaping the rewards and living with the consequences.

 

Their platform. We agreed when we "signed" that TOS. 

Edited by Chic Aeon
spelling
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:
28 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

If they don't make SOME money from their creative endeavors they have to stop creating and go to a less desirable job to support themselves, having little or no energy and free time to create.

I haven't been retired long and yet I've been creating in SL for years and years. Having a full time RL job did NOT keep me from creating.

You have been fortunate then. I have a RL illness that limits the amount of stress I can handle each day, and so working a full-time RL job would leave me with no energy to create.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:
28 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

It's about how society should be structured so that artists are supported too, so that such a large share of the profits don't go to the top as they do now.

Ahh the gulf between a socialist and a capitalist. The only thing I think society should do is respect the rights of the individual and provide a safe environment. Personally, I think everyone is an artist in their own way. I think it's appalling that you seem to believe that "creatives" are some how more entitled just because they are artistic. Hogwash!

I did not say that -- total projection on your part. And it has nothing to do with the politics you're referencing.

Society tends to overvalue those who only care about making money, and does not fairly compensate those who are trying to contribute to society in far more meaningful & important ways -- artists, teachers, and more. It's pathetic that you were a teacher for so many years and don't have enough money to retire on!  I'm sure the CEO's and Wall Street execs can retire just fine.

Society often perpetuates the attitude that artists should give away their talents for free, and so their situation is even worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Chic Aeon said:

You have a perfect right to fight. I have no argument with that. I do not choose to fight as I am perfectly willing to "flow around the rocks" and enjoy my creativity in whatever forms it may take.

Without activists to confront the powerful in life the self-determination needed to "flow" can easily be taken away.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blush Bravin said:

Ahh the gulf between a socialist and a capitalist. The only thing I think society should do is respect the rights of the individual and provide a safe environment. Personally, I think everyone is an artist in their own way. I think it's appalling that you seem to believe that "creatives" are some how more entitled just because they are artistic. Hogwash!

Now go google "farm subsidies".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

It's pathetic that you were a teacher for so many years and don't have enough money to retire on!  I'm sure the CEO's and Wall Street execs can retire just fine.

The reason my pension is so small is because I took time out to stay home with my child. I went back to work once he was in 5th grade. During that time I home schooled my son and ran a free-lance graphic arts business along with sewing projects for individuals, and making wedding cakes occasionally. All that kept me extremely busy and was a nice outlet for my creative side while enabling me to do what I wanted to do most, which was be the best mom I could possibly be. I didn't realize at the time that the social security I was paying into would be significantly reduced due to also having teacher retirement. My SS is reduce by more than half and because I didn't spend a full 20 years teaching in the public school system, my pension is penalized significantly as well. So, I paid a price in retirement benefits, but I wouldn't trade those years for all the money in the world. 

It was a choice given my circumstances, very much like the same choice we are given here in SL with deciding if we can make it with the fees or not. Sure we may pay a price if we stay, but for some of us the price is worth it.

 

33 minutes ago, CoffeeDujour said:

Now go google "farm subsidies".

Don't get me started on government sponsored GMOs! 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Oh SL will most likely go on, but it would be a poorer place without creatives.

 

More doom-and-gloom? Creative will always be here in one form or another. This is the kind of rhetoric that makes my chuckle. It''s when the entire economy colapses that SL will finally fade away. Until then it's all just shrill-speak. This is my point (and always has been) in this and likewise threads.

Edited by Alyona Su
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blush Bravin said:
3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

It's pathetic that you were a teacher for so many years and don't have enough money to retire on!  I'm sure the CEO's and Wall Street execs can retire just fine.

The reason my pension is so small is because I took time out to stay home with my child. I went back to work once he was in 5th grade. During that time I home schooled my son and ran a free-lance graphic arts business along with sewing projects for individuals, and making wedding cakes occasionally. All that kept me extremely busy and was a nice outlet for my creative side while enabling me to do what I wanted to do most, which was be the best mom I could possibly be. I didn't realize at the time that the social security I was paying into would be significantly reduced due to also having teacher retirement. My SS is reduce by more than half and because I didn't spend a full 20 years teaching in the public school system, my pension is penalized significantly as well. So, I paid a price in retirement benefits, but I wouldn't trade those years for all the money in the world. 

It was a choice given my circumstances, very much like the same choice we are given here in SL with deciding if we can make it with the fees or not. Sure we may pay a price if we stay, but for some of us the price is worth it.

Society should better compensate child care and caregivers in the U.S. They do a better job in some European countries. Even in the U.S. there has been some progress and additional proposals within the Social Security system in an attempt to compensate for the disparities in women's vs men's retirement benefits -- women are unfairly penalized due to their caregiving responsibilities and so more women than men end up in poverty in old age as a consequence.

So many of the benefits in a society come from the way it chooses to favor some people over others. This is accomplished via enacting laws that reflects either societal values in general or, in many cases, the values/preferences of those who hold the most power. This free will and responsibility you're touting only goes so far. I'm big on personal responsibility and doing the best you can in any circumstance, but the system is rigged and makes succeeding far more difficult for some groups, or else causes them to suffer more if they make certain choices (to care for children, for example).

And so I'm glad some Social Workers (some of them have been my personal friends), who fight for the rights of all. Power does not let go of its power without a fight.

Edited by Luna Bliss
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Alyona Su said:
3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Oh SL will most likely go on, but it would be a poorer place without creatives.

 

More doom-and-gloom? Creative will always be here in one form or another. This is the kind of rhetoric that makes my chuckle. It''s when the entire economy colapses that SL will finally fade away. Until then it's all just shrill-speak. This is my point (and always has been) in this and likewise threads.

Yes there's plenty of stolen and laggy un-optimized content shoveled into SL daily, and more by the month, so that you and other 'non-cashing out' creatives can enjoy your continued existence here for quite some time.
Well, unless too many get tired of the lag and find better new, less-laggy virtual worlds to inhabit for play and creativity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

Don't get me started on government sponsored GMOs! 

There is no debate on those, we fail to meet global food production targets by 2050 without them by a staggering margin, and no one sits in their home and quietly watches their family die of malnutrition.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, CoffeeDujour said:

There is no debate on those, we fail to meet global food production targets by 2050 without them by a staggering margin, and no one sits in their home and quietly watches their family die of malnutrition.

There's a raging debate about it. Many feel GMO's are not needed to meet global food production:

http://cdn3.ewg.org/sites/default/files/EWG Feeding the World Without GMOs 2015.pdf?_ga=1.78193172.1609920329.1428230447

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 628 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...