New Gacha Policy Discussion

[Komarimono]

1 minute ago, Nadi Vemo said:

as far as i know, LL didn't say anything about that idea just yet, so how you know it does not bypass the rule, the rule was, people need to know what they buying, and that vendor does just that, telling people what they are paying for, but again, can we just wait for LL FAQ to update on this? instead giving opinions what we think about it?

Simple.  Do you have to pay the vendor, and get something unwanted to progress it?  Yes, yes you do.  Against the rules then.

[LittleMe Jewell]

5 minutes ago, Komarimono said:

Yes, the vendor themselves posted here.  No it does not bypass the rule.  That's a Conveyor setup, meaning you still have to buy to progress it to the next item.  Even if you knew what item was next, or how many purchases you would have to make, still a Gacha.

I wouldn't bet on that just yet.  If you are paying money for a known item, it should be fine ---- unless the vendor becomes locked to the buyer for possibly buying whatever shows up next.  If that is the case, then it might not be legal.

[Maymay Matova]

Just now, Rowan Amore said:

but if you do want that next item, you still have to pay for the one you don't want.  This vendor type system is already being discussed here and with LL.

My idea was to go there at another time and look, if somebody else bought the one I didn´t want. But of course it might take long until I have all the ones I want. Ok, I didn´t read all the posts, we´ll have to wait what LL says anyway.

[Nadi Vemo]

1 minute ago, Komarimono said:

Simple.  Do you have to pay the vendor, and get something unwanted to progress it?  Yes, yes you do.  Against the rules then.

and what rule is that exactly? the rules i was reading was only about paying for random stuff. gain, please just hold with opinions, LL people working on this issue, they will give us the answer, no need to answer for them.

[Alwin Alcott]

5 minutes ago, Komarimono said:

Simple.  Do you have to pay the vendor, and get something unwanted to progress it?  Yes, yes you do.  Against the rules then.

if i have to buy 25  chairs with under par animations before i get the kitchen or home ( as example) ...i'll buy nohting there.
I think sellers have to think twice before being creative in getting their customers pay again.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Alwin Alcott

[Blush Bravin]

1 minute ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I wouldn't bet on that just yet.  If you are paying money for a known item, it should be fine ---- unless the vendor becomes locked to the buyer for possibly buying whatever shows up next.  If that is the case, then it might not be legal.

If there is no way to advance the menu choices other than paying to do so then the customer is paying for a chance at something they want showing up next ... aren't they?

[Komarimono]

2 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I wouldn't bet on that just yet.  If you are paying money for a known item, it should be fine ---- unless the vendor becomes locked to the buyer for possibly buying whatever shows up next.  If that is the case, then it might not be legal.

That's one way to look at it.  I still see it as random, since if you want a particular item from the vendor, you must wait and wait and wait, or make purchases.  I see things like that in SL, I'll just no longer use that creators things, since wasting my time and my money.

[Rosa Hexem]

4 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I wouldn't bet on that just yet.  If you are paying money for a known item, it should be fine ---- unless the vendor becomes locked to the buyer for possibly buying whatever shows up next.  If that is the case, then it might not be legal.

I was a big proponent of this perspective earlier, but if you look at the blogpost it now says "defined by a chance-based outcome as a result of a payment." which is much broader in scope than the statement before that was something to the effect of paying money for a product which you don't have a full understanding of.

Edit: to elaborate: I mean that since the roll of which product is next is technically a "chance based outcome as a result of payment" it is now bannable under the rules as written in the blogpost.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Viche Hexem

[TessaPaige Jupiter]

18 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

I'm a creator and have been in SL for many many years. I've seen many situations like this. Honestly, it's still venting time for many creators who maybe panic before really giving it some considerable thought about how to work out this new twist.

What does concern me is merchants who might buy into some of these less than legal ideas to get around the ban, and then having creators spending valuable time and energy trying to finagle around it rather than just hitting it head on and moving into a new constructive path.

Unfortunately for those who made business out of reselling gatchas the writing is on the wall. I really don't see an alternative for them. Creators can find ways to sell their products. But resellers won't have product now. Maybe time to learn blender.  

YES!!!! I was planning to learn blender before I got hooked on Gachas LOL. I will say this, buying and selling gachas has taught me a lot about sales in world so it has been a great lesson. I have a post graduate certificate in small business so I was able to put it to use in SL. I am a multimedia artist in RL and prior to Gachas I used my arts background to create public interactive spaces in SL. NOW it's time to play around with those awesome programs while my inventory of gachas gets depleted. Woo hoo!

Edited August 4, 2021 by TessaPaige Jupiter
grammar issue

[Komarimono]

7 minutes ago, Nadi Vemo said:

and what rule is that exactly? the rules i was reading was only about paying for random stuff. gain, please just hold with opinions, LL people working on this issue, they will give us the answer, no need to answer for them.

From the Blog post.

"Defined by a chance-based outcome as a result of a payment"

If my item is hidden behind others, what chances do I have to get to that item, as I pay the vendor?

 

And since it changes randomly, you as the creator of said vendor, how do you justify that as Legal, compared to what LL has said?

Edited August 4, 2021 by Komarimono

[So Whimsy]

I have a folder with all blender bender classes untouched. I got bored of making animations for the time being, so perhaps this is the chance to start something new entirely. After all for every creator that stops, a new one pops up.

[Silent Mistwalker]

17 minutes ago, Rathgrith027 said:

As someone who did a small amount of reselling on the side, hear me when I say this - I understand yours, and others concerns when you say you're worried or frustrated - I know I've come off as agitated and annoyed, but I genuinely sympathize with your fears. But this is for the best, so that we can ensure that Second Life doesn't die as a result of legal non-compliance when these laws become enacted in more countries.

This goes for me too. I've been wanting to post the words but I'm still catching up on the thread.

Come to think of it, I have posted the same thing, several times, just not verbatim.

[LittleMe Jewell]

3 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

If there is no way to advance the menu choices other than paying to do so then the customer is paying for a chance at something they want showing up next ... aren't they?

Possibly. 

You are not required to pay to get it to advance to whatever you want.  You can sit there and wait for someone else to buy the stuff you don't want, hoping to get the stuff you do want.

[Nadi Vemo]

1 minute ago, Komarimono said:

From the Blog post.

"Defined by a chance-based outcome as a result of a payment"

If my item is hidden behind others, what chances do I have to get to that item, as I pay the vendor?

result of payment is that you recive the item you paid for, then that item just is being replaced by different one. 'your' item is not hidden anywhere, you are given an offer to buy something, you can decide to buy it or not, knowing there is new one coming later.

Once again, this is going nowhere, we don't need to speculate here, we could just wait for LL to decide if it's ok or not, what we want or not want doesn't really matter, or even what we think is ok or not. 

[Blush Bravin]

2 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Possibly. 

You are not required to pay to get it to advance to whatever you want.  You can sit there and wait for someone else to buy the stuff you don't want, hoping to get the stuff you do want.

I can just see it ... one person steps aside hoping someone else will pay until what they want comes up .. and then what happens when they both want that item? They fight over it? I dunno as a creator I don't want my customers put in a position to have to fight with each other over my products.

[PatrickR Bleac]

To all who debate the reason why LL decided to ban gacha's.

It does not matter. Whether they prayed for divine guidance, used an AI or an Ouija board, had lots of meetings with their legal and/or PR team, tossed a coin or went on a weeklong drug and booze bender: it does not matter. As long as their rules don't break laws regarding illegal discrimination, consumer protection and such there is little they can't put in the rules for their world. They made their decision and if you read between the lines, there is nothing we can do that will change their mind.

To all who think they can work around the ban somehow.

Again reading between the lines makes it clear what LL wants to accomplish here. They only want gacha-style vendors gone. Period. They don't want the  ban to affect other things such as games, subscription boxes or breedables. They just want gacha vendors gone. Now I tend to love playing devil's advocate and find and exploit all those fun loopholes but in this case it's totally counter-productive. No matter what we think of, it's going to take much less time and effort to add extra rules to ban then it will take us to make a loophole exploiting new script. And there is generally a section in the TOS that can be used to bring the hammer done on someone who really starts to annoy them.

So focus your time and energy on something more useful: how are you going to support the creators you claim to value so much.

Edited August 4, 2021 by PatrickR Bleac

[Silas Merlin]

1 hour ago, Finite said:

What's preventing GACHA creators from using a 3rd party to continue making their GACHA? The site could be based where GACHA is legal or unregulated. Someone could purchase a bunch of tickets or "turns" from the site and use those turns on in-world vendor that only excepts these tickets. There's already a lot of 3rd party mesh in SL from sites like Turbosquid and CGtrader. I've used these a few times for personal items if I don't like what's available in SL if looking for something very specific or just don't like the quality and feel I could render it better with better textures. Seems it would be a lot more worrisome than playing in-world with Lindens. But it would be off the grid and SL's hands would be clean of anything.

AFAIK We are not allowed under any circumstances to upload anything bought or downloaded from Turbosquid and the like, unless the items are distributed under CC0 (public domain), because you have to own all the rights to content you upload to Second Life.

[Komarimono]

10 minutes ago, Nadi Vemo said:

result of payment is that you recive the item you paid for, then that item just is being replaced by different one. 'your' item is not hidden anywhere, you are given an offer to buy something, you can decide to buy it or not, knowing there is new one coming later.

Once again, this is going nowhere, we don't need to speculate here, we could just wait for LL to decide if it's ok or not, what we want or not want doesn't really matter, or even what we think is ok or not. 

Except in your own words, as the vendor creator, you will never know what you can get after you make your first purchase.  It's randomized. 

Seriously.  Quit trying to skirt rules that will soon be enforced.  This will hurt everyone, not just you as a creator.  This is a Legal matter, that could have heavy repercussions for everyone in Second Life.

Edit:  How about a better idea.  You look like you make well done sculptures.  Why undersell yourself and rely on people spending money for what they don't want, when you can instead set a decent base price for them one by one, or sell them by a two or threepack for a bit more?

You even offer the UV's etc, to make them more custom.  Do you prefer a customer who gets frustrated trying to get the item they want, then tells their friends "good luck" or "don't bother"?  Or would you not prefer a customer base, where they pay a decent price for your items, then suggests them to others?

Why not 150L for one?  250L for 2? 400L for 3?  Make sense?  Giving customers options, equals happy customers.  Wasting their time and money, generally results in not wanting to buy from that vendor ever again.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Komarimono

[Rosa Hexem]

5 minutes ago, Nadi Vemo said:

Once again, this is going nowhere, we don't need to speculate here, we could just wait for LL to decide if it's ok or not, what we want or not want doesn't really matter, or even what we think is ok or not. 

 

2 minutes ago, Komarimono said:

Seriously.  Quit trying to skirt rules that will soon be enforced.  This will hurt everyone, not just you as a creator.  This is a Legal matter, that could have heavy repercussions for everyone in Second Life.

What Nadi said here I think is right, granted I'm more in favour of the "it's a random outcome: it's not permissable" but this is evidently a point where people can't seem to come to a conclusion among themselves. Reiterating how much you disagree with one another won't solve the debate,  maybe move onto other avenues of discussion.

[Rowan Amore]

8 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Possibly. 

You are not required to pay to get it to advance to whatever you want.  You can sit there and wait for someone else to buy the stuff you don't want, hoping to get the stuff you do want.

So sort of like a lucky chair but with someone else paying for the items you don't want.  As I mentioned when it first came up, why?  Why would I stand around on the off chance someone wanders by and buys what I don't want?  Locking it to a certain avatar?  Wonderful, that item finally comes up and it's locked to the person who just purchased the last item?   It's ludicrous.  IMHO

[CelestineDemetria]

41 minutes ago, Tari Landar said:

I think I already made it clear about LE starter items and why there can be no randomness to exactly what you see, what you get when you buy.

 You must know the actual product you are getting when you buy. - Also what you said "No, all LEs do not all hold the exact same genetics, they are, by design, a bit different," - Tari Landar Both statements by you are conflicting.

Time of sales random then. (if they are all a bit diff as you said.)

Get what you are getting at, said it on page 28, 30 & 53 . - we are on the same page about that- never the issue.- you just made it seem that way.

So besides genders being random. Hidden things in Items being sold to different people would count the same way. - only thing I was getting at- in that initial purchase. Like ya said if all items are the same, the same le's at time of purchase should not hold items that others don't. (your Genetics)( Each product then is not the same- same on outside not on inside-  but varying at time of purchase- if some boxes animals hold hidden items and some boxes animals don't)

Edited August 4, 2021 by CelestineDemetria

[Tari Landar]

There are ways, sell your items as we always did before gachas came to be a big thing in sl, and as many, many merchants still do and always have. Countless people are, right this very minute, adjusting their own products so they can continue to sell them outside of gacha machines. People are putting items in vendors, taking and uploading vendor pics, changing perms on items if they want to, and going about their business.

This policy change does NOT need to (nor does it inherently) remove their ability to make money in sl. It may change how they have to do it, especially for those who don't know how to sell items from regular vendors, or don't sell on mp, or whatever other issue they might encounter. It's still not the end of the road for creation, selling, or anything like that. It's not going to kill off anyone's livelihood unless they let it, no matter how bleak it might look. Those struggling to figure it out should ask for help, there are plenty I am certain that can and will help. It's a big change and people understand that, whether or not they agree with it. Sl life isn't going to cease to exist or something, though. 

The longer people spend looking for a workaround, the more time you waste that you could be better spending on existing means to not only continue making a profit but perhaps even increase it.  Put the items in a regular vendor, sell on MP, and move on. There's no need for any other kind of schemes or replacements or any of the other ways people are trying to find to skirt the line, and potentially cross it. 

What consumers have to say about it holds very little water, for me. It's important to listen to them, of course, but some of these ideas are simply a means for people to keep their weird (to me, not overall) addiction to gachas going. It's really clear that's what people are shooting for, rather than aiming to help out actual creators.  The better option, instead of trying to come up with weird workarounds, is to encourage creators to start putting their wares into vendors like we did, successfully, FOR YEARS. Tell creators the way you'd like them to present their wares. For example, you love that living room set gacha, but don't need or want the decor just the furniture, tell the creator "I'd love to buy the furniture as a set here, but I don't need all this other stuff", I bet they just might listen! 

I'm helping someone work on their vendor pics now (she's not very good at them, lol), well, taking a lunch break,. but that's what I'm doing today. She's not bothered and almost her entire sl income for the four years (much of which covers some really important rl bills for her) came from gachas. She's adjusting, there's no reason why anyone else can't, other than just not wanting to put a little work into it. We may not finish in time, but we'll get enough of it done that she'll be just fine and we can work on the rest as she goes. She's not looking for ways around it, she's just changing her methods. Will she make a little less initially? Maybe. But once no one is allowed to use gacha, it'll even things out. As she said "it was a good run while it lasted", and she's grateful for the run, but now the road is changing and if she doesn't, she'll flounder too. She needs her sl income, those who also need their sl income should stop looking for workarounds and start making changes now so they have ample time to do so. I really don't understand why so many people are making this as difficult as they are, it makes no sense to me whatsoever.

That might sound snarky, it shouldn't, but it might. This whole thread has been fascinating, but more of a total train wreck and I can't look away, at times, lol. Human nature, we may be a complicated species, but even when we're maddening, we're interesting, right? 

 

 

[Kathlen Onyx]

12 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

I can just see it ... one person steps aside hoping someone else will pay until what they want comes up .. and then what happens when they both want that item? They fight over it? I dunno as a creator I don't want my customers put in a position to have to fight with each other over my products.

Yes! I brought that up in the first 10 pages of the thread. and do store owners really want people just hanging out at their store buying nothing all day clogging it up so others can't get in to buy bringing their dogs and kids and any other attachments that contribute to lag. If I were a store owner I'd think very carefully about that.

Edited August 4, 2021 by Sam1 Bellisserian

[Silent Mistwalker]

4 minutes ago, Viche Hexem said:

 

What Nadi said here I think is right, granted I'm more in favour of the "it's a random outcome: it's not permissable" but this is evidently a point where people can't seem to come to a conclusion among themselves. Reiterating how much you disagree with one another won't solve the debate,  maybe move onto other avenues of discussion.

 

That is also a good way to stifle constructive conversation which is what the thread is for. New Gacha Policy Discussion.

If someone needs to hush, let the mods do their job.

[Tari Landar]

2 hours ago, maddisonave said:

Agree, and how are the breedables not a gamble as well again?  Aren't we paying for something and not knowing exactly what we are getting, luck of the draw?  Is it the physical gacha machine itself?

Check my posts for why and how this actually affects breedables. I've already been chastised for writing novels again today, lol  But, really, there is a reason why they are not related except in certain circumstances