Jump to content

Should the permissions system be revised?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 131 days.

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

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

dealing with 40 support requests because the buyer screwed up the product isn't fun and it's a waste of time

Is that a hypothetical, or are you talking from experience? Never ever in the 13 years that I have sold Mod items have I had a support request from people screwing up their items. I actually even got a lot of praise for leaving my stuff Mod. But the most important reason I sell my stuff Mod is that, through the lens of a customer, I wouldn't want it No Mod myself.

But to all the creators out there who oppose selling their stuff Mod, I say: go ahead! I'm not stopping you! Even better: please do sell your stuff No Mod, if you'll pardon my zero-sum game attitude.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'd be down for a new version of no-mod that lets me delete scripts. 

I'd love just the ability to set "full bright" off on creations that I would then purchase - no idea why people insist on setting things full bright when they are not lights.

There are two areas in which it seems to me that the current system unnecessarily restricts and inconveniences users with no benefit to creators or anyone else. One is my inability to rename no-m

Posted Images

This tends to happen when scripts are used to manipulate primitive parameters on parts of a linkset. Relink may change the order, the script fires and BAMF .. your object is trash with no way back.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Is that a hypothetical, or are you talking from experience? Never ever in the 13 years that I have sold Mod items have I had a support request from people screwing up their items.

Experience. It depends a lot from what type of content you make. If you make say houses with planarly tile able textures is one account, when you make complex uv mapped item that do not use tile able textures it is another bag. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, OptimoMaximo said:

when you make complex uv mapped item that do not use tile able textures it is another bag.

Surely you make them copyable, right? So that when they potentially mess them up, they can rez another one? Especially houses would sell better when Copy/Mod, I imagine.

(I didn't see any houses whatsoever in your store, btw.)

Edited by Arduenn Schwartzman
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Surely you make them copyable, right? So that when they potentially mess them up, they can rez another one? Especially houses would sell better when Copy/Mod, I imagine.

(I didn't see any houses whatsoever in your store, btw.)

I never implied that I make houses. Whoever has read my comments know that I do model for a small brand to avoid having to deal with packaging, MP, HUDs and, most importantly, customers. Even though my things are being set to copy, I get occasional support request for screwed up items bought from the store I make models for although the items are linked to a prim created by the store owner. Somehow these individuals are able to inspect an item and find out who made those things instead of contacting the store owner avatar. The store owner confirms the support requests are many. And we don't sell mod items! Most of the time the screwing up happens in the HUDs... Because they're in no scripts areas and the hud doesn't work.

I have one thing in my personal store that I sell as copy only and as mod copy at different price tags. Guess what? The cheaper one sells better. Useless to say that it is the copy only version. Edit to add: the mod and copy version didn't make me get support requests, no. But then, I sold 3 copies in total of that item version against 478 copies of the no mod version. 

Edited by OptimoMaximo
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, OptimoMaximo said:

How hard is it to understand that the creator doesn't want the final user to fiddle with color, textures, their parameters, etc. 

I would never knowingly buy anything from a creator with such an abusive opinion of their customers.

You get the customers you deserve.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

@OptimoMaximo So your cheaper stuff sells better because it's No Mod. -_- Good reasoning. Also, I'm very glad you sell your stuff No Mod. Bravo!

I'm very glad to know that I would never get a customer such like you. How many times did I read the all-mod fans you belong to state they would pay an higher price for the mod version? Stand by your words then. 

3 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

I would never knowingly buy anything from a creator with such an abusive opinion of their customers.

You get the customers you deserve.

In my store, not the brand I do modeling for, I sell full perms and one product in no mod and mod versions. The other things are plug ins. Indeed I don't personally get any complaints or support requests, the latter of which are limited to installation help of my plug ins only which I promptly provide, as you can read from the reviews. This doesn't mean that I can't see the reasoning behind the nomod creators, it's their call and I can understand why they do so, whether I agree with that or not. If the owner of the brand I model for would ever choose to set the products as mod and avoid HUDs, so be it, it's not my concern. I get the share for my part of the work and I don't get to deal with anything else because, as I said, I don't have the time to manage what a store takes in terms of time and efforts. I prefer to keep developing my tools and plug-ins. 

Please stop putting words in my mouth as if I were the one doing and defending the no mod practices. What I stated are the reasons I can see and respect, the latter of which you both, and all the all-mod fans, apparently don't have. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, OptimoMaximo said:

Please stop putting words in my mouth as if I were the one doing and defending the no mod practices. 

Okay, I've read several times what you've posted to this thread and it's like a Necker cube for me, the sense shifting back and forth every time I look at it, so... I mean, I give up trying to understand.

I will add this: Numerous times I've offered to purchase a "fat pack" at a substantial premium, if the creator will supply it with Modify permission. It's worth it to me to be able to remove or add my own scripts, fix clumsy Materials settings (way too common, even from popular creators), and use the actual build tool instead of some scripted kludge to tint or resize. Sometimes the creators take me up on the offer, but when they refuse, the reasons are a mixture of superstition and customer contempt. I guess it's their one opportunity to exercise control in their lives, so maybe I shouldn't judge them so harshly, akin to diners who abuse their servers. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Okay, I've read several times what you've posted to this thread and it's like a Necker cube for me, the sense shifting back and forth every time I look at it, so... I mean, I give up trying to understand

The meaning is a simple and aseptic reasoning and understanding of others' choices, and ultimately respecting them. My comments have come in in the past, and will keep coming, like that every time I see the all-mod fan crowd chime in with their respect-lacking motivations (nomod decreases the value blah blah type of comment). You don't find value in anything that is nomod? Fine, we all got it, time to move on. I find the continuous and repeated nudging in that direction annoying and obnoxious, with a point stated over and over that, clearly, the recipient(s) of such complaints don't give a shoot about. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, OptimoMaximo said:

I find the continuous and repeated nudging in that direction annoying and obnoxious, with a point stated over and over that, clearly, the recipient(s) of such complaints don't give a shoot about. 

You really cannot begin to imagine how little I care about that.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Qie Niangao said:

You really cannot begin to imagine how little I care about that.

Same here and for all the makers of no mod stuff. You keep pointing your reasons out because you're annoyed by no mod, I'll keep pointing out the legitimate reasons for no mod to exist because I'm annoyed by the pointless attitude against it. And I highlight that I'm annoyed by the attitude, not by the point made. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Qie Niangao said:

Sometimes the creators take me up on the offer, but when they refuse, the reasons are a mixture of superstition and customer contempt.

In the meantime I asked around to some creators I know who make no mod stuff. The vast majority of them use a script set that I won't name here (I will disclose the name in PM if you want to know it) that is apparently "the standard" when it comes to HUDs, providing texture and materials changer, tinting and resizing in one solution. The licensing system works and is enforced by script check that the object has to be set no mod, if not those scripts turn theirselves elves off and won't work, even if properly setup. So probably, if not most likely, you put the blame and the evil on such practices projecting them over to the creator, stupid and evil, when most likely it's not the case. Sure enough there are those matching your description and analysis, but realistically who has to do their research better can be found on both sides of the argument.

Edited by Alekso Minotaur
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the flip side, something that irked me was that people in my friends list I give the permission to edit my objects, are able to take copies of the objects I've created in-world

As a sim owner, it's useful to let other people build and move stuff around as needed, but many of the assets in my sim are made specially for my sim as they're a part of what makes it unique, I don't want people to be able to just take copies of whatever prop I've made (and I make 1,000's of them)

I discovered this by accident, and since then I tend to think twice now about giving permission to edit my objects.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Extrude Ragu said:

On the flip side, something that irked me was that people in my friends list I give the permission to edit my objects, are able to take copies of the objects I've created in-world

As a sim owner, it's useful to let other people build and move stuff around as needed, but many of the assets in my sim are made specially for my sim as they're a part of what makes it unique, I don't want people to be able to just take copies of whatever prop I've made (and I make 1,000's of them)

I discovered this by accident, and since then I tend to think twice now about giving permission to edit my objects.

Off the top of my head and without being able to check inworld, if you set your objects as NO TRANSFER, that should not happen. 

Is there also somewhere on the general tab a setting for what people are able to do with the object? I sort of remember something..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Extrude Ragu said:

discovered this by accident, and since then I tend to think twice now about giving permission to edit my objects.

They can shift opy, take or take copy of an item, but such item will inherit the permissions you set the original to. So perhaps you may want to set them no mod no transfer so that even if someone grabs a copy, it can't be be given away or resold and can't be altered (ruined if not utterly devastated) carrying your name on it. The point of someone being able to "improve" it is marginal, it's less than 0.00001% of probability that would come true. Not to mention your right to keep the envisioning you worked on so hard intact and unaltered. 

Disclaimer: the above statements about no mod content is clearly and openly teasing

Edited by OptimoMaximo
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

if they ever modify or change the permission system in sl, they will have the forums burn in flames for all the creators that think they are so special suddenly learn they are not, and come here rage over how its unfair to them what was done and they wont create any new content until its changed back.

as this thread has allread shown by several creators that oppose the changes suggested or any change being done.

People want to feel special, unique in power in control take away that and they will riot over it.

Edited by Drakonadrgora Darkfold
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Alekso Minotaur said:

In the meantime I asked around to some creators I know who make no mod stuff. The vast majority of them use a script set that I won't name here (I will disclose the name in PM if you want to know it) that is apparently "the standard" when it comes to HUDs, providing texture and materials changer, tinting and resizing in one solution. The licensing system works and is enforced by script check that the object has to be set no mod, if not those scripts turn theirselves elves off and won't work, even if properly setup. So probably, if not most likely, you put the blame and the evil on such practices projecting them over to the creator, stupid and evil, when most likely it's not the case. Sure enough there are those matching your description and analysis, but realistically who has to do their research better can be found on both sides of the argument.

Yes, please send me the name of that product in PM. I thought I knew the market leader in this space, but in their Marketplace (or in-world store) license agreement I'm not seeing any restrictions at all on end product permissions; as far as I can tell from this, as long as I followed the constraints on the scripts themselves I should be able to use them to distribute full-perm creations if I wanted. If such restrictions were imposed (mechanically or in a separate license) after purchase that would violate Marketplace terms, so I'm guessing this must refer to some other "standard" script set.

The real concern here, though, would be if they're trying to use object perms to protect the IP of creator textures, normalmaps, etc -- and that's really not effective, so hopefully that's not what they're doing.

4 hours ago, Extrude Ragu said:

... I don't want people to be able to just take copies of whatever prop I've made (and I make 1,000's of them)

I discovered this by accident, and since then I tend to think twice now about giving permission to edit my objects.

Right. Of course they can still modify the originals -- even if they're set no-mod for next owner, because they're editing your object, not a copy that has transferred to them which will, then, be no-mod. I think that's all as you intend -- you're okay with those special folks with edit permission editing the originals you created, just not taking copies they can edit. But while you're being cautious about giving edit permission, also be cautious about Sharing with Group: it has somewhat similar effect.

3 hours ago, Emma Krokus said:

Off the top of my head and without being able to check inworld, if you set your objects as NO TRANSFER, that should not happen. 

If I understand what you're suggesting, I don't think so, because checking that box only affects what the NEXT owner can do. So a person with edit perms could still take copies of objects set no-transfer for next owner, but wouldn't be able to transfer those copies because they'd be that next owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2020 at 8:05 PM, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Never ever in the 13 years that I have sold Mod items have I had a support request from people screwing up their items.

I've had occasional support requests about people screwing up their items. It does happen. Not often enough to justify making items no mod mind you.

With that said, I think that decision to sell mod or no mod should be left to the store owner, and the decision to purchase or not purchase no-mod items left to the consumer, and simply let demand and supply do its thing

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/2/2020 at 8:04 PM, Chaser Zaks said:

Should the permission system be revised?: No. For these reasons:

  • Massive fights will break out, forums, jira, in-world communities.
  • People will lose trust in LL.
  • There are legitement reasons for permissions to be as they are with some things.

Now, that doesn't mean I will support no-mod stuff. I find that no-mod stifles creativity. If I buy say, a shirt IRL, I have the right to tie-dye it, paint it however I want, etc. If I have a house, I can change the walls as I like. I personally think that no-mod should be left to specific cases like scripts, game huds, etc.

I see people use the lack of mesh being able to be resized a lot, and I find that kinda dumb tbh. Just because it can't be resized, doesn't mean there are not other uses to have modify permissions, for example:

  • Rigged mesh can be linked together, so I can link my shirt with my pants, or gloves with my shirt. Some creators will make gloves/shoes as separate items(left glove, right glove), and that takes up attachment slot space. Worse is when bodies come in left leg, right leg, left arm, right arm, chest, head.
  • Some creators are dumb and make the rigged mesh's bounding box absolutely massive because they can't make proper LODs. This results in awkwardness when entering areas and people see a massive top taking over the building, and personally, I like to not cheat LOD and have a bazillion polygons from 100 meters away.
  • Some creators will explode their meshes before linking them together. When I say explode, I mean all the pieces are separated and all over the place. This makes, again, loading awkward. If the meshes are properly positioned and attached to the right bone, it will simply appear as a t-pose while downloading, which is much more visually appealing to me.
  • Some creators will attach useless meshes to stuff, like a full mesh logo with a stupid amount of polygons, or a brain that no one will ever see. I like to remove those to lower my render weight, and be considerate to others who have to render my avatar.
  • Some creators put retexturing scripts in clothes, which is quite handy, until you end up with 8 scripts using 64 KiB each constantly listening on a channel. I like to remove those scripts if I don't need them.
  • Built in face lights are evil.

Do people have the right to make their items no-modify? Yes, absolutely. Do I have the right to say "nope not buying that"? Absolutely. Have I done so? Yes, I have, I always do.

I try very hard not to buy anything that is no copy.  I don't like losing stuff, period.  I have some exceptions and I always worry when they're rezzed that what happened to a friend (a big sim crash) will happen to me and I will lose stuff from sellers who may not even exist anymore or who might not want to redeliver stuff... assuming I can prove it was mine.  Not everyone has perfect records and even on my parcel, i don't think I could list everything that was in my house if it all went away.

Modify is harder.  I like to have modify b/c resizing matters to me and with stuff like hair, being able to change hair color is also helpful.

I've also modified every house I've ever lived in that allows me to mod.  I like repainting.  Retexturing is a great way to make one's home unique without adding lots of prims.

The idea of being able to join things together in a single outfit has quite a bit of appeal.  I have (especially with costumes of various kinds) run up against the limits of attachments and it is annoying.

I'm not fond of resize menus for this reason: occasionally I will find myself kicked off a sim b/c they have scripts set very low.  Having just a couple of things with resize scripts really messes with life.  Particularly if the item is no copy, so you cannot just delete the script b/c some things have to be resized repeatedly depending on what you're wearing them with.

Edited by DeepBlueJoy
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2020 at 8:24 AM, Alekso Minotaur said:

In the meantime I asked around to some creators I know who make no mod stuff. The vast majority of them use a script set that I won't name here (I will disclose the name in PM if you want to know it) that is apparently "the standard" when it comes to HUDs, providing texture and materials changer, tinting and resizing in one solution. The licensing system works and is enforced by script check that the object has to be set no mod, if not those scripts turn theirselves elves off and won't work, even if properly setup. So probably, if not most likely, you put the blame and the evil on such practices projecting them over to the creator, stupid and evil, when most likely it's not the case. Sure enough there are those matching your description and analysis, but realistically who has to do their research better can be found on both sides of the argument.

@Alekso Minotaur and I have chatted a bit about this in PMs, and indeed we were talking about the same script set. I've asked that scripter for information because it really says nothing about this in their Marketplace nor in-world store information, at least as far as I've been able to find -- but on the other hand, I did get one response from that scripter suggesting I look at the LSL function, llGetObjectPermMask(), that a script would use to check the permissions on the object in which it was contained -- which of course I knew and wasn't what I asked, so I re-asked whether the product actually did this thing of checking and enforcing constraints on the permissions of objects where it runs; I suggested a copy of the internal license agreement* might help clear things up, but have so far gotten no response.

I certainly don't want to risk a "name and shame" here, and I'm kind of at a loss how best to find out more about this. Maybe some creator could add confirmation about this? I kinda hate to buy the product myself, just to get a look at that internal license agreement in case it's what we're discussing here rather than what's stated on Marketplace etc.

Increasingly I'm getting a sense I may end up needing to compile a free open source replacement for these scripts. Not exactly what I'd planned for the next few months of my SL, but if this is really what's going on, it's just gotta change.

___________________
*This is kind of strange: According to Marketplace listing "details" this scripter's products come packaged with a license agreement notecard that is itself No Transfer. I don't know why it would have that permission setting.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You should just embrace the "no-mod means no-buy" gospel.

  

On 6/6/2020 at 12:11 AM, Extrude Ragu said:

I've had occasional support requests about people screwing up their items. It does happen. Not often enough to justify making items no mod mind you.


I get those regularly and gladly provide replacements, it takes seconds, they are happy that they got assistance, and I'm happy that I helped. win win.

Edited by Kyrah Abattoir
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

You should just embrace the "no-mod means no-buy" gospel.

   ℌ𝔞𝔩𝔩𝔢𝔩𝔲𝔧𝔞!

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

You should just embrace the "no-mod means no-buy" gospel.

This would be grand if the Venn Diagram of "no mod clothing" and "clothing that looks good" wasn't such a thin sliver.

It comes down to a personal decision on priorities. For some people, the flexibility of being able to tint, retexture, resize, etc, outweighs the limitations of the options that are actually available. For others - I'd go as far as to say the overwhelming majority of the userbase - none of that matters, and they buy stuff because it looks nice. Neither option is inherently wrong; but you have to accept the limitations that come with your choices, if you wish to take a hard line on this.

The modern clothing market has swung decisively and almost entirely without exception in favour of no-mod clothing. Giving all that up in exchange for the flexibility of mod permissions, in my personal circumstances, would be an unjustifiable act of self-limitation. Your mileage may vary.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 131 days.

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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...