New Gacha Policy Discussion

[Finite]

1 minute ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

Gosh (smh) ... gacha is gambling. Paying money for a result you can't know.

SL Gacha. Paying 50L (21cents) for an item I can clearly see listed on a box. Similar to a gumball machine which actually costs more. Sorry that I disagree with your opinion while acknowledging that you disagree with mine. And I am sorry that you and others seem to have issues with people who disagree with your point of view.

[Mollymews]

3 hours ago, Silas Merlin said:

To me:
-Artificial scarcity = yes
-unique item = no
the reason is that you can never be sure that there is only one of your items out there : There is what is probably wrongly called copybotting (ripping would be a better, more generic term) : your item could be ripped in SL and reuploaded on some private region you will never know of, or reuploaded on opensim.
there are also god powers (a feature, not a hack) that allow such a power user to take a copy of any mesh. (not that they do, but they can)
 

with the scarcity idea.  We can create in SL what is referred to elsewhere as a NFT. (non-fungible token)

when a SL prim is rezzed for the first time, it gets a OBJECT_CREATION_TIME stamp

the identifier combination of: OBJECT_NAME + OBJECT_CREATOR + OBJECT_CREATION_TIME is uniquely constant to that item when the item is No-Modify

this can be validated by an external script. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlGetObjectDetails 

should the item be copybotted then OBJECT_CREATOR and OBJECT_CREATION_TIME will be different to the original, which gives a proof that the copied item is a counterfeit, and would be subject to a DMCA takedown

if the creator were to make a limited set of a work, say 10 for example. Then when we dragcopy to make 10 then they will all have the same identifier

and we could sequentially number the pieces in the Object Description, so that a piece from a limited set is uniquely identifiable to the original buyer, provided that we maintain a record of the sale and the object details

when the pieces are set No-Copy + No-Modify + Transfer then we can allow our customers to participate in the reseller market with our NFT-like works

 

[Silent Mistwalker]

Just now, Kimmi Zehetbauer said:

Waiting for someone in world to make an exploding gatcha machine.  You shoot at it --- Boom!

Ofc the exploding machine would just be a non-operational replica.

I used to go to a certain store that sold "slave" garments that had the toilet lucky chairs. I went for the chairs because BAWOOOSH and you go flying. Ok well not flying but the water shooting up with the avatar sitting on top was hilarious. The outfits were very good quality as well. 

I miss those lucky chairs toilets.

[Da5id Weatherwax]

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Well I would assume the powers that be in the countries that did ban Gacha style games, did so with a moralistic cover....or a way to stop the competition with their own gambling venues. My question would be how many countries haver actually banned such games and is the example of EA with the Netherlands and Belgium laws a foretaste of what will happen with more countries exerting their will over international gaming software where a small minority have the power to dictate the morality allowed.

I am sure some areas that ban or heavily-regulate gambling do so on a moralistic basis, certain US states spring to mind in that regard, but in the majority of jurisdictions around the world gambling - as a potentially addictive behaviour - is regulated as a potential public health issue in the same way as drinking and smoking. Most places do not outright ban gambling but there are rules to be followed and the "games" must be approved and the establishments licensed, to the extent of - for example - setting a minimum overall chance of a payout on a slot machine in order for it to be legal in a particular jurisdiction, setting rules on places licensed as gambling venues to include ensuring they only run "fair" games, also an awareness of "problem gamblers" and mechanisms to restrict their access, in the same way as it is not legal in most places to continue selling alcohol to somebody visibly intoxicated. Gambling is legal but to make money from gambling one must be in compliance with strict licensing requirements and not operate a game in a way that would violate them.

This, then, is the problem LL face. Because they cannot certify the compliance of every resident-created script running a gacha machine, because they cannot comply with the other regulations as a "gambling establishment" - not least because gambling "on the internet" is itself totally banned in many jurisdictions, simply because internet gambling sites usually CANNOT be in compliance with local regulations everywhere - Anything that is ruled to be "gambling" in any jurisdiction where they operate or wish to operate cannot be on the grid. Period. If it is already on the grid and they become aware of it falling under these rules, it has to be gone, as expeditiously as is practical. To do anything else risks significant liability and their legal counsel will advise them accordingly. If they do not heed that advice they are violating their fiduciary responsibilities to the stakeholders in the company and for individual directors that can sometimes rise into the zone of criminal penalties in addition to the civil ones they would also face.

Folks who like gacha, whether as merchants profiting from them or people who like to play them are - predictably - looking at the imposed rules for loopholes to try and get as close as possible to the existing experience and profitability as they can without actually violating the letter of the rules. But LL has real lawyers on the payroll. They are better at "rules-lawyering" than you are. The wider open you crowbar those "loopholes" the closer you get to your new solution being banned too.

Disagreeing with the rules is your right. Non-compliance with them is not. Nor do LL have any obligation to heed your disagreement if it contradicts the advice of their counsel - in fact it is quite the reverse, if they are advised by their legal counsel that a rule must prohibit an activity they are required to ignore any objections from any of us and implement the rule. And that, said the cat in the hat, is THAT.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Da5id Weatherwax
substituted synonym for repeated word for better readability

[JUSTUS Palianta]

@Velcon Ethaniela random bundle giver is just a gacha with another name.

You have to put your breedables into vendor machines or price them individually the old fashioned way.

[Theresa Tennyson]

5 minutes ago, Finite said:

SL Gacha. Paying 50L (21cents) for an item I can clearly see listed on a box. Similar to a gumball machine which actually costs more. Sorry that I disagree with your opinion while acknowledging that you disagree with mine. And I am sorry that you and others seem to have issues with people who disagree with your point of view.

Yeah, someone playing a gacha machine is nothing like, say, someone at a casino shoving coins into a slot machine over and over again waiting for a certain result...

 

Oh, wait...

[Tari Landar]

16 minutes ago, Velcon Ethaniel said:

b. How is this going to affect vendors that give out random breedables. For instance: I have a vendor that sells quail eggs...but the quail eggs are all 100% different. The vendor simply states "Female Quail $1L " and no other details. Is this vendor still going to be allowed since I am simply selling them a quail, and they know this, even though the quails color will be random?

As someone who breeds breedables, there is literally no way I can put out every breedable of every color into their own separate vendor - especially considering there are millions of colors.

Multi-item vendors exist and are not difficult to use. If you need assistance figuring one out, there are a lot of people that can help with that. I have bought, sold and participated in breedables since 2008, so I can fully understand the time it takes to package things for sale. but let's not exaggerate things here, lol. You cannot use a random vendor at all, those are being nixed, end of, can't do it. There is no way around that.

So, what you can do is take your breedables and put them in multi-item vendors that specifically tell the person the exact quail egg they are buying. That can be accomplished through both vendor pictures and/or a vendor that uses hovertext.  You just have to make sure people buying from you know what quail egg they are getting. 

It sounds more complicated than it is, and people have been selling breedables this way forever, so it's very possible. Most people that sell breedables still do, unless, like you, they use a random vendor (which isn't allowed and no amount of wishing otherwise will change that, no way around it). 

 

[Finite]

Just now, Theresa Tennyson said:

Yeah, someone playing a gacha machine is nothing like, say, someone at a casino shoving coins into a slot machine over and over again waiting for a certain result...

 

Oh, wait...

If we are going to literally compare everything to gambling do we ban baseball cards as well? Or other trading card games? There's this street I live near. If I go left I might hit a very long red light. But It's shorter to get where I want to go. If I go right there's a short cut to avoid the light but it's potentially a longer route. This decision is a "gamble". Should this be outlawed too?

[Arielle Popstar]

6 minutes ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Sorry. I was too quick to post and left out the quote. I have edited it. The bolded part is the part you may have missed.

Yes, I read that part and is why I said that:

 "it is complete conjecture as to how stringent other counties will make their laws, if and when they pass them through."

Just an FYI in general, this news tidbit crossed my feed this morning. Can't wait to see where this is going to lead to in general:

https://news.yahoo.com/tencent-says-further-curb-minors-062005825.html

"SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Tencent Holdings on Tuesday said it would introduce new measures to reduce minors' access to and time spent on its "Honor of Kings" game, a move it plans to eventually roll out to its full games line-up. 

  Players under the age of 12 will be prohibited from spending money in the game, and time restrictions on minors will also be tightened from 1.5 hours to 1 hour on non-holidays, and from 3 hours to 2 hours on holidays, Tencent said in a statement posted on one of its official WeChat accounts. 

  The announcement came shortly after Tencent and "Honor of Kings" were criticized in a Chinese state media article that described online gaming as "spiritual opium" and sent the company's shares tumbling."

[Theresa Tennyson]

Just now, Finite said:

If we are going to literally compare everything to gambling do we ban baseball cards as well? Or other trading card games? There's this street I live near. If I go left I might hit a very long red light. But It's shorter to get where I want to go. If I go right there's a short cut to avoid the light but it's potentially a longer route. This decision is a "gamble". Should this be outlawed too?

Do you pay in money to drive along the street in order to take a chance at receiving a randomly-determined return?

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Yes, I read that part and is why I said that:

 "it is complete conjecture as to how stringent other counties will make their laws, if and when they pass them through."

Just an FYI in general, this news tidbit crossed my feed this morning. Can't wait to see where this is going to lead to in general:

https://news.yahoo.com/tencent-says-further-curb-minors-062005825.html

"SHANGHAI (Reuters) - Tencent Holdings on Tuesday said it would introduce new measures to reduce minors' access to and time spent on its "Honor of Kings" game, a move it plans to eventually roll out to its full games line-up. 

  Players under the age of 12 will be prohibited from spending money in the game, and time restrictions on minors will also be tightened from 1.5 hours to 1 hour on non-holidays, and from 3 hours to 2 hours on holidays, Tencent said in a statement posted on one of its official WeChat accounts. 

  The announcement came shortly after Tencent and "Honor of Kings" were criticized in a Chinese state media article that described online gaming as "spiritual opium" and sent the company's shares tumbling."

Considering the countries that have already passed laws are in the process of tightening them up, I'd have to say the chances of any new regulations being even more restrictive are pretty high up there.

 

[Finite]

5 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Do you pay in money to drive along the street in order to take a chance at receiving a randomly-determined return?

I pay money for the gas. Kind of like how I pay money for the lindens. I pay money for gas to do things with my car. I pay money for lindens to do things in SL. Once you buy lindens you already paid. You are not somehow paying more by choosing one thing over another thing to do whatever it is you do with your lindens.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Finite

[Sid Nagy]

1 hour ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

Now see, that is just the kind of seller I avoid because they aren't willing to go the "extra mile" for a customer in the name of retention and profit from repeat customers. It's the repeat customers that keep a business in business, not the "buy one and dones". And in order to retain those repeat customers I will go that extra mile because they are my "gravy train". 

I'm also one of "those people" who don't allow merchants to shove products down my throat. I go where I can get what I am after. And if I can't find it anywhere else, I do without or substitute. 

It boils down to I will remain in control of my shopping and shopping experience. I will never relinquish that control to merchants.

Thank you though (seriously) for opening that door for me to speak up. Regardless of whether we agree on this or not, you're still good people and I won't hold it against you. 🤗

 

I am more likely to buy from merchants I know will go the extra mile than one who I don't know or am uncertain about.

It is certainly not the way I would like to do business either.

But most of the gacha merchants are in it to make maxed out profits on only a few items, mainly by exploiting addictions\thrills and rareness of some items.
And I was thinking along their lines of doing business in an attempt to try and find a solution for their abrupt problem now addictions and thrills are ruled out in the future.

I never even considered to sell through gachas.

My personal concept is totally simple: I make things that I fancy making. If it turns out it could be useful for others too, then it hits the marketplace for what I consider a reasonable price.
That's all. No in world store, no fatpacks, no limited time or number sales, no events, no advertisement other than my sig line here on the forums.
About 90% of what I make or start to make ends up in the dust bin. I have no pressure at all to make something for a fair or an event. I don't care if I make tier or some beer money or nothing at all.
SL is a hobby now and hobbies can cost money at times.
I like this approach far better then when I tried to expand as much as possible in the years 2007-2011.
Now I have always time for another cup of coffee.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Sid Nagy

[Kathlen Onyx]

1 hour ago, Finite said:

I agree with this. I don't agree with the relationship between that and playing SL's version of gacha. Sorry.

It almost identical to gambling addiction in the real world except it's in the virtual world. Have you not heard of people addicted to gambling online?

[Velcon Ethaniel]

23 minutes ago, JUSTUS Palianta said:

@Velcon Ethaniela random bundle giver is just a gacha with another name.

You have to put your breedables into vendor machines or price them individually the old fashioned way.

a. You didn't read my question, at all. b. you aren't LL so your response is not valid.

 

My question pertains to breedables that are color based - like my xS quails, the the hunny bunnies, or alt life turtles.  Not stuff like Amaretto that have a billion known traits.

 

There is literally NO FEASIBLE WAY to put them in a vendor with a display individually like you are asking, especially since there are MILLIONS OF COLORS. This is why it is a concern for me. Is it legal, or illegal, according to LINDEN LABS  TERMS to put them in a vendor that simply sales "Female quail" or "Male Quail " with no other descriptors?

It's not lying to the customer. They know exactly what  they are getting - a female quail, or a male quail, in my example.

How *detailed* do I have to be about my vendors selling breedable-specific offspring?

This is a question for linden labs to answer. I'm not looking for speculation from anyone else.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Velcon Ethaniel

[Finite]

Just now, Sam1 Bellisserian said:

It almost identical to gambling addiction in the real world except it's in the virtual world. Have you not heard of people addicted to gambling online?

Sorry I have already responded to a similar question. Again I do not agree with your pov. Can't you all just agree to disagree? Or am I required to keep repeating myself? That being said I'm kind of loving the SMH responses. So please continue. It reminds me of this three-headed bobblehead doll I once won at a carnival with raffle tickets I paid money for.

[Elizabeth Burleigh]

16 minutes ago, Finite said:

And I am sorry that you and others seem to have issues with people who disagree with your point of view.

But, it's not other peoples' "point of view". It's a legal definition. Your quibble is with the law, not other residents. Your re-framing of it as others' "point of view" does not change the fact that the gacha mechanism has been deemed a form of gambling in legal terms.

[Dorientje Woller]

23 minutes ago, Finite said:

SL Gacha. Paying 50L (21cents) for an item I can clearly see listed on a box. Similar to a gumball machine which actually costs more. Sorry that I disagree with your opinion while acknowledging that you disagree with mine. And I am sorry that you and others seem to have issues with people who disagree with your point of view.

Seems you failed to understand one major aspect of this ban of Gachas: NO still means NO and nuffing else.

[Finite]

1 minute ago, Elizabeth Burleigh said:

But, it's not other peoples' "point of view". It's a legal definition. Your quibble is with the law, not other residents. Your re-framing of it as others' "point of view" does not change the fact that the gacha mechanism has been deemed a form of gambling in legal terms.

Which legal definition? As far as I know the US has no laws and only one state is considering it and most other countries are only regulating it because of children being targeted. Some of these countries gambling is legal... So if it were "legally" gambling then it would be legal in these countries.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Finite

[Arielle Popstar]

2 minutes ago, Sam1 Bellisserian said:

It almost identical to gambling addiction in the real world except it's in the virtual world. Have you not heard of people addicted to gambling online?

If my partner had a gambling addiction I would much rather they drop a few thousand L$ on Gachas then a few thousand real $ at the casino. That's the thing with virtual I notice, one can satisfy an addiction much cheaper here then in R/L.

[Sid Nagy]

2 minutes ago, Finite said:

Which legal definition? As far as I know the US has no laws and only one state is considering it and most other countries are only regulating it because of children be targeted. Some of these countries gambling is legal... So if it were "legally" gambling then it would be legal in these countries.

LL feels (after being advised by legal pro's) it has to comply and ban gachas and its lookalikes.
So that is what will happen, no matter what we as users think about it.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Sid Nagy

[Theresa Tennyson]

5 minutes ago, Finite said:

I pay money for the gas. Kind of like how I pay money for the lindens. I pay money for gas to do things with my car. I pay money for lindens to do things in SL. Once you buy lindens you already paid. You are not somehow paying more by choosing one thing over another thing to do whatever it is you do with your lindens.

I want a black dress. The dress is priced at $L200 from a conventional vendor. I pay $L200.

I want a black dress from a gacha. Let's say it's a common; the pull price is L$50.

I could get it for L$50. However, I could also end up with no black dress, two ugly dresses, five scarves nobody would even pay the pull price for in resale and be out L$350.

[Maryanne Solo]

"Gacha" is short cutting the normal process of selling. Just like the Gig economy. Offering tacky, below standard services, that only the like minded ever use.   

[Da5id Weatherwax]

4 minutes ago, Finite said:

Which legal definition?

The one LL's legal counsel had in mind when they advised that gacha had to be gone.

That's the only definition that matters. Not mine, not yours, not anyone else's.

[Finite]

1 minute ago, Sid Nagy said:

LL feels (after being advised by legal pro's) it has to comply and ban gachas and its lookalikes.
So that is what will happen, no matter what we as users think about it.

I know and I agree they are doing with what they have to do. They're a private business. It's their right. But it's also my right to have an opinion about it. I was just responding to the notion that I somehow have gambling addiction because I like to play gacha in secondlife.