So they banned Gacha but...

[Persephone Emerald]

8 minutes ago, Skyler Pancake said:

You do pay though. You pay via your monthly subscription fee.

Also, there is the potential to "sell" your Linden Home now. Premium Plus members can actually request which parcel they want directly. So if there was an already owned parcel you really wanted, you could message the owner, offer them a payment to abandon the parcel, and then immediately call up concierges and request it for yourself.

The potential buyer would have to trust that the potential seller would actually deliver, or visa versa. There is no protection in this kind of transaction. The "seller" could just keep the money and not abandon their house, or they might abandon their house, but the "buyer" would never give them any money. This would be a foolish way to do try to obtain or sell a specific home location.

[EliseAnne85]

2 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

I read (somehow) in EliseAnne's blinding quote that LL specifically said, (paraphrasing) "whatever you do, don't call it a gacha!!".

Sneaky.

The main point in the article is that a product for sale or maybe even FREE cannot have an unknown product in it.  I think what the article is saying about not calling it Gacha, is if you come up with another game - don't call it Gacha.  And, btw, the convenyor belt thingy below sounds fun!  

Here I will copy/paste in plain text, from the SL article; and, in plain text, the link:

Additional FAQ’s for August 5, 2021:

Q:  Should any newly developed sales mechanism or newly created items be called “gacha” going forward?

A:  No, as we would like to eliminate any confusion with the usage of the term going forward.

Q:  Is a game that requires skill to win the prize you want permitted going forward?  For example, you throw a dart and you must hit a certain number to get the prize corresponding to that number.

A:  This would need to go through the Skilled Game review process and be presented in a Skilled Gaming region, if approved.

Q:  I am selling an item that is known, paid for and delivered to a purchaser, and for each purchaser they are entered into a prize drawing where randomly selected people who bought the item may receive a rare item as a result of the drawing, is this permitted?

A:  You must also provide a free, concise and easy way for anyone to enter into the random drawing with an equal chance to win.

Q:  Can I sell an item, and also then include an unknown random item attached as a bonus? For example, Like a buy one, get one free (BOGO), but the free item is the random/unknown item.

A:  No

Q:  Could a “conveyor belt” system work?  

Example:  The vendor board selects an item at random and displays it for purchase.  That item remains on display and available for purchase until a buyer touches the vendor which locks it to them for purchase.  This allowed the buyer to purchase the item and deliver it.  The vendor unlocks and then selects another item at random and displays it for purchase and the cycle repeats.

Example image here and credit to Nadi Vemo for the approved vendor design.

A:  Yes, as long as the item currently being purchased is known. Note however that you should discontinue the use of the “gacha” term for these sales. 

Q:  But what about breedables (again)?

A:  If you buy a brown cat, and a blue cat (as examples), as long as you knew you were getting a brown cat and a blue cat at the time of sale, this is acceptable at the present including the various unknown traits they may come with or develop.  Secondarily, when those cats make little kittens with unknown outcomes, this is also acceptable.  Lastly, the resale of any breedables will require at the time of purchase that the purchaser knows what they are purchasing at the root level (for example, it is a blue cat).  

Q:  What about my specific idea, you didn’t cover it here?

A:  We wish we could cover all the great ideas we’ve seen proposed to date. Sadly we can’t address them all and if there are any questions or proposed ideas that would suggest any other permutations on the policy, we recommend a simple and thoughtful approach to stay within the boundaries of the policy.  Failing that, please feel free to contact customer support.

https://community.secondlife.com/blogs/entry/8586-policy-change-regarding-gacha/

 

Edited May 16, 2023 by EliseAnne85

[Ayashe Ninetails]

20 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Yes, but the very fact this social casino thing exists in SL suggests to me that Oberwager is hunting for something that will create a huge market for Tilia and it's now pretty clear that thing won't be a Tilia-shaped slice of the grand metaverse. Will those owners sustain an interest in an aging virtual world platform if the social gaming thing takes off?

Maybe, especially if something about the SL avatars and "land" encourages emerging gambling addicts to allow themselves to play the social slots, where those same individuals wouldn't feel permitted to just play a simple mobile app.

If this is the direction ahead, hair shopping will be an available Second Life activity exactly to the extent it gets gamblers to buy and wager tokens.

If it turns out you're right on this and we wind up seeing a second or third one of these things pop up and/or a shift in focus to promoting this kind of thing, that'd be me out instantly. I'm absolutely not the target audience for that. I recently dropped one of my favorite games for adopting an extremely predatory premium shop (insane prices, FOMO, you name it they did it) against the community's wishes, and I'm not opposed to doing that again.

[Love Zhaoying]

11 minutes ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

If it turns out you're right on this and we wind up seeing a second or third one of these things pop up and/or a shift in focus to promoting this kind of thing, that'd be me out instantly. I'm absolutely not the target audience for that. I recently dropped one of my favorite games for adopting an extremely predatory premium shop (insane prices, FOMO, you name it they did it) against the community's wishes, and I'm not opposed to doing that again.

If you had to choose between this and, say, "Official Pop-up Ads" (even though you are Premium), which would you choose?

Assume the "Official Pop-up Ads" would not occur "randomly", only on Login / Login / teleport, etc. (Not while you are in the middle of "stuff".)

[Persephone Emerald]

20 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

If you had to choose between this and, say, "Official Pop-up Ads" (even though you are Premium), which would you choose?

Assume the "Official Pop-up Ads" would not occur "randomly", only on Login / Login / teleport, etc. (Not while you are in the middle of "stuff".)

If the people running LL have so lost their moral compass that they now think targeting people with addictions is a good business model, then I certainly wouldn't put it past them to start dumping targeted ads on us too.

The pause while logging on or teleporting would be a perfect time to introduce pop-up adds. We're already accepting pop-up notices from our groups and subscriptions. Maybe LL will figure out a way to target ads to us based on the names and types of groups we belong to inworld? Or based on the frequency or duration of our visits to different kinds of sims? If we go to these social casino and skill gaming regions too much, we could see more ads for online gambling too.

I wonder what Philip Linden thinks of this project?

Edited May 16, 2023 by Persephone Emerald

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Persephone Emerald said:

If the people running LL have so lost their moral compass that they now think targeting people with addictions is a good business model, then I certainly wouldn't put it past them to start dumping targeted ads on us too.

The pause while logging on or teleporting would be a perfect time to introduce pop-up adds. We're already accepting pop-up notices from our groups and subscriptions. Maybe LL will figure out a way to target ads to us based on the names and types of groups we belong to inworld? Or based on the frequency or duration of our visits to different kinds of sims? If we go to these social casino and skill gaming regions too much, we could see more ads for online gambling too.

Retracting what I wrote earlier a bit..it would be NICE if such a "nightmare scenario" occurs as ads, if the ads were only shown to "Free Accounts".  Gotta give us Preemies sumpin'!

*BONUS* If you made users click to make the ads go away, it may help with the..you know..B_TS!

[Ayashe Ninetails]

22 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

If you had to choose between this and, say, "Official Pop-up Ads" (even though you are Premium), which would you choose?

Assume the "Official Pop-up Ads" would not occur "randomly", only on Login / Login / teleport, etc. (Not while you are in the middle of "stuff".)

I don't do ads. *snuggles her adblocks*

I also wouldn't have to choose between those two. There are plenty of games/places to hang out that aren't keen on pushing advertising and faux gambling on users.

[Persephone Emerald]

Just now, Love Zhaoying said:

Retracting what I wrote earlier a bit..it would be NICE if such a "nightmare scenario" occurs as ads, if the ads were only shown to "Free Accounts".  Gotta give us Preemies sumpin'!

*BONUS* If you made users click to make the ads go away, it may help with the..you know..B_TS!

I expect most SL whales are Premium and Premium Plus users though. If LL wants to target big spenders to try to squeeze even more money out of them, they will likely want targeted ads to go to them as well as to Basic account users.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

I don't do ads. *snuggles her adblocks*

I also wouldn't have to choose between those two. There are plenty of games/places to hang out that aren't keen on pushing advertising and faux gambling on users.

Yesh! Luckily, LL is a tiny bit smarter than that.

Hopefully as it is, we won't see viwere startup / login screens with "featured" info, "VISIT THE SOCIAL CASINO NOW FOR FREE TOKENS!" and such.

 

[EliseAnne85]

5 hours ago, Jaylinbridges said:

8 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Remind me, what does ANY of this have to do with the Social Casino, which is not "gambling" because you don't "get anything", and not like "gachas" because you don't "get anything"?

There is no relation between the two.  Just the pro and anti gacha crowd wanting to bring up gacha again.

Social Casinos claim it is not gambling since there are no payouts for the coins/chips/tokens you buy with real money. 

Gacha was a fair comparison because (some) in the SL community saw Gacha as gambling since one could not see the prize they were getting plus it was considered addictive.  Others, considered it much like loot boxes, except the loot box problem, as written up in several news articles, was it was all unseen junk which couldn't even be used by the avatar one was in the game nor did the items help the player advance in the game as per the gimmick of loot boxes.  Many articles cited also kids were addicted to the sound and light spectacle loot boxes would make when they purchased one (or parents would actually purchase).  The sounds of the loot boxes were cited as being like the sounds a slot machine would make.  So, here we go 'round the maypole again'.

According to the official blog released by LL, Gachas became against their gaming policy but there is no actual USA nor otherwise law stated as to why Gachas were banned.  The blog talks mostly about it's against policy now to have "unseen" or "unknown" items for sale.  Everyone must know what they are buying.  With fishing the blog stated one knows they are buying bait.  With this casino one knows they are buying tokens.  With Gacha, the prize was unknown.  So, I posted all that so we could all see what was the actual problem with Gacha.  It wasn't really gambling although it was considered addictive.  

LL made the decision here, but no actual "law" against Gachas exists:

______________________________________________________________________________________

LL:  "We did not make this decision lightly and we understand that it will impact creators as well as event organizers and certainly the shoppers! We look forward to fun creative ways of engagement that will come instead.  

We realize that this announcement may leave the community with questions." 

https://community.secondlife.com/blogs/entry/8586-policy-change-regarding-gacha/

 

[Silent Mistwalker]

From out of left field comes the weirdo with the strange ideas.

What if (lol) this is nothing more than a test for something LL is selling to/developing for Sansar. Or even a separate grid/continent for such things. 🤔

I did say left field, weird and strange.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

From out of left field comes the weirdo with the strange ideas.

What if (lol) this is nothing more than a test for something LL is selling to/developing for Sansar. Or even a separate grid/continent for such things. 🤔

I did say left field, weird and strange.

That would be nice, if as a result it doesn't stink up OUR SL / Grid!

[Qie Niangao]

2 hours ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

If it turns out you're right on this and we wind up seeing a second or third one of these things pop up and/or a shift in focus to promoting this kind of thing, that'd be me out instantly. I'm absolutely not the target audience for that. I recently dropped one of my favorite games for adopting an extremely predatory premium shop (insane prices, FOMO, you name it they did it) against the community's wishes, and I'm not opposed to doing that again.

Yeah. I'm not sure how far the focus would have to shift before I bailed, but for the first time maybe ever this social casino stuff has me thinking SL could become a platform with which I'm unwilling to be associated. That's how I've felt about Facebook and all things under the Meta banner for a while now, and I've pretty much abandoned Twitter since Elmo shoved the red pill down its throat. That may sound prudish and maybe it is but I built a bunch of SL casinos (the real, "asocial" kind) back in the day and never thought it irredeemably tainted the enterprise. This seems different.

Generally, I consider stuff like this the appropriate realm for RL legislation but this one is looking particularly odious, like they found a loophole to sell financial fentanyl

[Scylla Rhiadra]

3 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Yeah. I'm not sure how far the focus would have to shift before I bailed, but for the first time maybe ever this social casino stuff has me thinking SL could become a platform with which I'm unwilling to be associated.

SL permits sooooo much "content" that I find toxic, destructive, or just plain embarrassing, that it sometimes feels as though I've developed sort of permanent moral callouses rendering me insensible to a new bit of "ick."

The difference, of course, is that while LL permits such content, it doesn't itself produce it. Until now.

7 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Generally, I consider stuff like this the appropriate realm for RL legislation but this one is looking particularly odious, like they found a loophole to sell financial fentanyl

Exactly. They have consciously and deliberately latched on to a kind of "gaming" that they must know causes real harm, and is certainly predatory.

You're right. This feels different.

[Persephone Emerald]

14 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Generally, I consider stuff like this the appropriate realm for RL legislation but this one is looking particularly odious, like they found a loophole to sell financial fentanyl

I love your use of the term "financial fentanyl", though it's perhaps more closely related to the vicaden epidemic. Agents who know full well how addictive these types of games can be are pushing them by pretending they're harmless. There's no payoff, so they can't be addictive, right? *Except* there wouldn't be high limit games and ATMs if they didn't expect them to be additive.

Edited May 16, 2023 by Persephone Emerald

[Ayashe Ninetails]

5 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

Yeah. I'm not sure how far the focus would have to shift before I bailed, but for the first time maybe ever this social casino stuff has me thinking SL could become a platform with which I'm unwilling to be associated. That's how I've felt about Facebook and all things under the Meta banner for a while now, and I've pretty much abandoned Twitter since Elmo shoved the red pill down its throat. That may sound prudish and maybe it is but I built a bunch of SL casinos (the real, "asocial" kind) back in the day and never thought it irredeemably tainted the enterprise. This seems different.

Generally, I consider stuff like this the appropriate realm for RL legislation but this one is looking particularly odious, like they found a loophole to sell financial fentanyl

Million times agree with everything you said here. Real casinos and online/offline gambling don't really bother me much as long as regulations are followed and people are given resources to get help if needed. I've personally known someone who won lotto (actually two someones...forgot about the second one), I've won a few hundred myself in casinos, etc. That's all fine for me if you're giving players a real, fair chance. This kind of thing, though...I definitely don't like it. If it was a player-run thing, I might be able to shrug and go on about my business - just the same as I ignore other things in SL that I have no interest in. Being endorsed by the platform itself, though...nah. 

I really do hope we're wrong, though, and we'll hear something official soon.

[EliseAnne85]

3 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

SL permits sooooo much "content" that I find toxic, destructive, or just plain embarrassing, that it sometimes feels as though I've developed sort of permanent moral callouses rendering me insensible to a new bit of "ick."

The difference, of course, is that while LL permits such content, it doesn't itself produce it. Until now.

Yeah this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 100%

I've learned to cope as best I can with "the ick" that exists is SL, not built by SL nor LL.   I deal with the ick here because there is ick in real life too, and we cannot control it all.  So, I still want to enjoy what isn't ick in SL.  

As far as this Casino, I mentioned that with the loot boxes for children anyhow it was how the loot boxes would make all these sounds and particles would go off, and articles have cited it was like a slot machine going off.  The dopamine rush for the kids came with the sounds and particles going off like it was their birthday or something.  It made them happy. But, there was most times nothing in the loot box that was useable for their character nor anything that could help them advance in the game.  But, even adults in the Casino want to hear all those bells and whistles go off when they win.  And, then they want to jump up and down and say "I won!  I won!" while the slot machine is going crazy with all kinds of sounds.  That's the goal basically and for money to come out.  

Half of me, though, still feels Qie might have hit the nail on the head - that this is some kind of way to burn the extra lindens.  I'm still waiting to see if that reveals itself.  

Something is very strange here... no grand opening, no advertising on the front page of the website.  Something is just not adding up here.  

 

[Rowan Amore]

Honestly, I'm finding it rather odd, if not somewhat telling, that not one single peep have we heard from any Mole or Linden in either of these threads relating to this topic.  Not a slap or a warning or even a gentle poke.  It's been a week now and nothing...anywhere...at all.  🤔

[Love Zhaoying]

6 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

Honestly, I'm finding it rather odd, if not somewhat telling, that not one single peep have we heard from any Mole or Linden in either of these threads relating to this topic.  Not a slap or a warning or even a gentle poke.  It's been a week now and nothing...anywhere...at all.  🤔

I assume they are softly sobbing, or backing away slowly from those responsible, or quietly watching since our opinions and discussions in this case..actually..matter.

[Kimmi Zehetbauer]

Here's another theory: Wonder if the Lindens put the casino up to give us something to talk about on the boards? 

[Love Zhaoying]

7 minutes ago, Kimmi Zehetbauer said:

Here's another theory: Wonder if the Lindens put the casino up to give us something to talk about on the boards? 

Good one! We mostly seem to stay on topic, except for some arguments about Gachas, and whether the Casino is "gambling" or not.  IMHO, whether the Casino is "ethical" is on topic because, the OP is comparing Gachas (supposebly unethical) to the Casino (supposebly ethical).

[Rowan Amore]

[Skyler Pancake]

10 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Don't you suppose this is against some TOS?  At the very least, if the "buyer" complained, there is nothing LL could (or would) do about it.

Find somewhere in the TOS that it even mentions Linden Homes and I'll pay you 5000L$.

I'm one of the strange people who've actually read the TOS in it's entirety. A few times actually. As well as the community guidelines and community standards. I'm sure if people actually started doing this LL would change the policies to ban it, but currently there's nothing preventing someone from doing it. The TOS actually protects the buyer in this situation if they were to rip off the seller, which is why I'd suggest doing half up front.

So, there is a potential profit driver for Linden Homes and the current setup for acquiring a Linden Home could be seen as gambling. It's definitely a stretch and I doubt any courts would humor the case, but it's a legit argument.

[Love Zhaoying]

4 minutes ago, Skyler Pancake said:

Find somewhere in the TOS that it even mentions Linden Homes and I'll pay you 5000L$.

Cheapskate! 

I believe you, I am just surprised.

[Skyler Pancake]

10 hours ago, Ayashe Ninetails said:

If it turns out you're right on this and we wind up seeing a second or third one of these things pop up and/or a shift in focus to promoting this kind of thing, that'd be me out instantly. I'm absolutely not the target audience for that. I recently dropped one of my favorite games for adopting an extremely predatory premium shop (insane prices, FOMO, you name it they did it) against the community's wishes, and I'm not opposed to doing that again.

Myself and a few friends are talking about leaving SL over this and a few other recent decisions. I wouldn't be making such a large issue of this and gotten myself banned for seven days though if I didn't care about Second Life though. I'm sincerely hoping LL acknowledges this was a horrible idea and refocuses themselves. It'd be a shame to have to leave SL.. But SL only exists because of the residents and if LL doesn't care about the residents anymore, then there's no reason for us to be here.

 

7 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

From out of left field comes the weirdo with the strange ideas.

What if (lol) this is nothing more than a test for something LL is selling to/developing for Sansar. Or even a separate grid/continent for such things. 🤔

I did say left field, weird and strange.

It's not that strange of an idea. Second Life is a stable profit margin for LL, but Tillia is where the real money is going to be at for them. There's a very, very good chance that they're trying to use this to show they can handle processing payments for "gambling simulation" platforms.

 

1 hour ago, Rowan Amore said:

Honestly, I'm finding it rather odd, if not somewhat telling, that not one single peep have we heard from any Mole or Linden in either of these threads relating to this topic.  Not a slap or a warning or even a gentle poke.  It's been a week now and nothing...anywhere...at all.  🤔

I tried to get them to chime in. The only response I got was to be banned for 7 days for "harassment" as apparently being "annoying" is considered harassment now. It's humorous, as they explicitly stated in their reply to my request for further details that there "were more appropriate means of engagement, such as the forums" while also stating my tagging the Lindens and Moles involved on the forums was part of the reason for the ban. 🤷‍♀️