Codex Alpha

Right, so I don't know why the discussion and the claims made as to the intent of the creators of said products continues... It's all so simple. What is the goal for those that post further? What do they seek to accomplish or what changes would they like to see?

Can we have a discussion and allow disagreement (or different views on this subject) - that I am open to discussing as all I want to do is hear different opinions, and offer my own - without framing creators as bilkers, egotistical or any other means of labeling their attitude? I operate out of good faith, and I believe most long term creators here do, so can we keep it friendly and without implication of bad faith? Thanks. Sure, you and others have made valid points for pro-mod items and I appreciate it. Conversely though, on other platforms that I have provided assets for building and many options to customize, I have found I have overestimated the newer 'builder' for the amount of customization or even work to build from base assets... They preferred the purchase and plop - so yes I believe there is a difference between age groups, player groups, gaming communities, etc. It's like that in RL too many times. Too many choices, too many options and the majority of consumers will not understand what's available, may not care anyway, or confuses them. We have all types of customers in SL, and I believe that most of the posters here are old-timers and value this stuff, but I think they care too much about this - when the average user probably does not. Again, nice to have, nice to provide, but not necessary.

Good response, thanks.

Exactly, and that's where it should begin and end. People can say "I like mod permissions, I encourage mod permissions" and stop short of "Any creator who doesn't do this is 1, 2, 3, and 4". It just creates bad blood imo. Well that's your opinion, and your preference, but may not reflect the buying decisions and usage of the average consumer, not only on SL, but on any platform that supplies assets to use in personal worlds. Well then, with your 'talents' then no-mod should not be an issue for you. As far as being anti-consumer, how so? It's these claims that go on past an opinion on no-mod that becomes offensive. Now read these two statements, and not think that it is somehow not aggressive or accusatory or entitled. The competition arguably has millions of more users than SL, and many of them have NO permissions, NO marketplace, no customization past tinting and scaling.. yet millions happily purchase and build entire worlds on those platforms... Mod is nice to have, but not necessary. 3) I only want you to have ONE instance of the item Yes, somehow I'm getting no copy mixed up in the convo. That one instance item would apply to the argument that I only want you to have one of the item (like a car, machine, scene, etc) 5) The product is intended to be used as a composition, and not a building set It may not be obvious to some, but I think the intended end use would probably affect the price that the product is sold for: A single home constructed and sold as one piece, vs someone with modify permissions unlinking the build and possibly using it as a building piece set - at a bargain price. I'm just asking these questions and posing these arguments to try to understand other people's thinking on all of this - and offer some of the reasons that I and other creators MAY decide to not include mod on a product. I'm sure there are ways I can do things to mitigate this possibility, but I would hope people would understand the difference, and why even things would get priced differently and permissions differently depending on the product and intended end use. I'm also not applying my logic to ALL situations and ALL products and how some users might use them, so give me a break.

I don't really think no-mod is that much of an issue for the majority of asset purchasers, be it on SL or any other platform. I don't believe people go shopping online, or in stores in RL buying things that are not in the color they like, the fabric they like, the configuration they like, or w/e - with the plans to purchase it anyway and take it home and 'make it their own'. It doesn't hurt to have mod, I just don't agree it is necessary. I'm not against mod permissions, nor am I ignorant of the benefits of allowing mod - I just don't understand the almost rude entitlement some demonstrate here in 1) straight up demanding it 2) claiming creators lose sales (got any stats on that) and 3) constantly reminding us that they and their cronies 'won't buy anything from that creator'. Good for you, then don't buy it, what do you want creators who mod or no mod to say to you? Yes, mod permissions is nice. It's nice to be able to change something later if you want. I just don't agree that it is necessary, nor should people be trying to frame creators who don't as anything less than anyone else. So I'm not sure about the motivation of those who promote this so much. Like why do you care so much? Looking in my inventory I have a few pieces that are no-mod and I've never even thought twice about them. In fact, I can't remember the last time I felt I needed to retexture a product I purchased. Even all my clothes I bought as is, for good reason (I liked them) and never changed them in 10 years. Everything I buy, I buy because I like how it was made, textured, the aesthetic, the craftsmanship. Very rarely if ever would I say "Oh I like this, but I want it in blue, so I hope it's mod!", though I'm sure some do - but not the majority of consumers out there. This seems to just be a thing a select few SL-forumers bring up from time to time, but with no real argument other than claims "They won't get sales" or "I won't buy" Ok. good we all hear you. Long ago when this came up, a creator mentioned something about texturing, UV'ing and how he and other creatures may texture their work and that mod permissions won't help you at all - if your intent is just to change a texture on a product you bought.. Unless the texture is a tiling one, and not an advanced one (that expert textures use to have high quality results, UDIMs, trims, atlases, baked) - having mod just to change textures won't help you. These products don't need to be modded, and even if allowed - wouldn't have the results MOST consumers would need anyway. What is also not addressed is a creator's time to texture an asset. A good texturer 'tells a story' with the texture and uses texture-making tools, layers, PBR to communicate this. Time is taken to create textures (especially the old school albedo, normal, gls/nrm(tga), spc/env(tga) ) but I'm to believe someone will buy a product and want ability to change it later? SL is not the only platform where people create, sell and use assets in their scenes or for their games. The same for the majority of buyers holds true: They buy what they like as the product was presented, and plop it down in their scene or game level and enjoy it. Developers may have a need to further customize your work, or adjust colors and textures - but you sell that to them with those enabled - and they also have the skill to deal with custom textures as mentioned. If users on SL or anywhere else truly purchased things based on 'changing it' later, then how do they decide to purchase something? Its shape? It's use? Will they buy something with an ugly texture, but because it has mod, they'll buy it anyway (Doubt it). SUMMARY OF MY POSITION: I'm not advocating against mod, I just don't think it's necessary, nor should creators be seen less because they haven't enabled it on some products (I have given numerous reasons as to why they would want to exclude mod).

Much like in review sections in RL, on Yelp, Google or even a department store site, reviews don't really help anymore as they are mostly polarized. You'll have reviews with 5 stars heralding the product as the most amazing thing out there, and then there will be 1-star ratings claiming they are the worst thing ever, scam, ripoff, etc. This is why with reviews, it seems only the most happiest and the most angriest people leave a review. In SL, in general, people will buy your product and not leave a review because they are satisfied. It is very RARE to get any review nowadays - I notice that products from 10+ years ago have much more participation, but nowadays people don't bother for the most part. The reviews I get are of course polarized as well. Most, if not all of the 'negative' reviews I've gotten have mainly been user error, misunderstanding, or even now with PBR and even FULL SL Texture sets - get angry complaints because those users do not have ALM or ability to see PBR. The problem is, I and other creators will bend over backwards to make these customers happy, or to educate them... and our $40 cents of profit long out the window... will solve their issue, yet their INACCURATE review remains on your product. You can report it, and LL comes and sees and thinks "Well that's a legit review with concerns, why is he flagging this 1 star review?" Why? Because there is no option for us to have a 'customer problem resolved' on the product, even if the issues were legit and were fixed (with a product update). I've had several listings have low ratings due to ALM in the past that kept their low ratings even though I responded inworld and on the listing, AND YES THEIR SALES WENT DOWN - on perfectly good products! Reviews without context, reviews without ability to 'resolve' them if they are negative, and reviews that don't actually help improve the product, are no help at all - and could actually damage the listing and potential sales... "I would have given this 5 stars, but it didn't come in blue, the textures don't look inworld as do in pictures (Even though I take pictures in HIGH NOON ugliest light because if it looks good there, it will look good anywhere!), and it is nomod/copy, etc - so I gave it 1-3 stars..." The flag mechanism needs a "I believe this review is outdated/irrelevant/problem solved" or yes, some creators may be tempted to relist - and for LEGITIMATE (even if illegal to do). The result on some listings is I just remove them, and the experience(s) have a longer lasting impact that I am now discouraged from putting up more stuff (especially PBR) as I don't want to waste my time until it's guaranteed the product will be represented properly - OR having an option to remove 'reviews' that are just bug reports and complaints.

Well, after all the assumptions of bad faith and negative portrayals of creators who decide to use no-mod on some of their products, it's not like I or any other creators would want to really enter this convo. I've probably already stated my position this, but nothing ever changes in attitudes around here, and this topic pops up every 6 months or so. Here are some reasons I or others MAY decide to no-mod our products: 1) Because we reserve the right to set any permissions we want, and don't really owe anyone any explanation. I don't think it is very courteous or fair to demand things from creators, or shame them or portray them in a negative fashion, in some bid to influence how creators will behave or list items here. You are free to ignore the product and leave it at that, if it does not suit your needs. Now going one step further and saying "I will never buy anything from this creator because this product(s) are no-mod!" is in your power, but then you might miss out on other products you might actually like, and fit with your needs. This number one reason really is where any discussion can end, but I can give more reasons. 2) It protects the creation from getting broken The product might be a specialized machine, vehicle or composition that relies on all its parts working along with the scripts. This action might include the creator having a vision and usage and presentation for the product, and does not desire the product to be represented or used in any other way. Even if one made a 'creator has an ego/pride' argument, then so what? I take pride in things that I make, and I do them to the best of my ability. Yes, sometimes I don't want my baby bastardized, destroyed and meddled with - see #1. It may cut down on complaints and helping people figure out what they did to mess up the product, as a creator can carefully create an interface with the product to change anything that a user might need to, such as textures, colors, lights, etc 3) I only want you to have ONE instance of the item As relating to number 2, it may be a specialized product, robot, machine, vehicle or other that was not meant to be instanced 100 times, on perhaps multiple lands and on multiple users lands, and only to be used one time, in one instance with one user - the customer. I also have felt the same myself, when buying a no-mod product. I've never had such complaints, and of course I wished I could have multiples at times, but I worked with it. Like a certain inworld LSL book on programming with LSL, that you pulled out inworld and flipped through the pages. I can see that creator not wanting you to buy one book, then copying it to all your 33 friends for free. I also held that no-mod piece in high regard, yes due to the fear I would lose it, or leave it behind LOL, and in some people's minds, that creates a feeling of HIGH VALUE to this piece. This is a magical orb object, and must be looked after carefully :-D. No mod, countless copies has the opposite result: a possible perceived 'less value' of sorts, as it is not so precious and unique. 4) To protect IP or to discourage reverse engineering a product Yes, there are individuals out there who have a sole purpose to deconstruct your object for whatever nefarious purpose. This is not as much of a recent concern, but HAS been concerns by creators in the past. That being said, I do deconstruct things myself to learn from, in good faith and do not seek to reverse-engineer or 'copy' someone's product - and can learn a lot from and admire that person because I was able to do so. However, I don't complain if a creator doesn't want to share. Even if some here would like to portray creators as 'paranoid', see #1. They can be paranoid or not, they don't need a reason. That reason is their own. 5) The product is intended to be used as a composition, and not a building set. This is an interesting challenge for me, as I progress (on other 3d platforms) into more of a modular builder and tackling more architectural targets (finally). I must create, texture and optimize each piece, and build final products out of them from the same pieces. These pieces allow me to build several products in the same style and look, and could be sold as their composite products. Sometimes in SL, it is more efficient for Land Impact and LODS for pieces to be uploaded and the product built within SL (the LI impacts can be huge depending on the size of your uploaded piece). So here's the challenge. Do you sell a modular built house with mod or no-mod? If mod, the end user can deconstruct your house and use the pieces to build whatever they want. If it is a full modular set, they could do QUITE A LOT with that. With no-mod, they buy the house as is. Modifications to interior walls, window shades, door passwords, etc can all be provided with a creator made custom menu (like SL homes), so customization wouldn't be a problem. So then, we would need to price our products BY INTENDED END USE. An intact house would be one price. A house BUILDING SET would definitely be a different price, and most likely priced much higher - due to the options available. Also a creator could argue that the home itself is an advanced product, well-oiled crafted product that the creator doesn't want tampered with, relating to previous points... 6) No matter what, the customer is protected anyway, as the product can be redelivered at any time No-mod creations put no undue risk of loss to the customer, and if lost can always be redelivered at any time. EXPERIENCE: Oddly enough, as I am FOR giving the end user as much choice, re-usability and customization, in experience - it doesn't mean that the customer understands they can, want to , or even care. I've had just as many complaints for no-mod as mod items, and amazingly on the items that I spent EXTRA time to have features, customizations, etc - so quite odd. Other 3d asset platforms don't have all the choice that SL'ers too. The vast MAJORITY of users of 3d assets out there (if not game devs, etc) just take the item and plop it in their world and move on. Most are not looking at a dress and saying "I like that blue floral dress, but I'm going to buy it and make it green".

Yet the keyword spam remains: doe,deer,buck,cervine,fur,furry,creature,satyr,baby,ungulate,carrier,pot,potty,pacifier,brood,half,mixed,monster,humanoid,brood,child,kid,fawn,mutant,composite being,composite,being,onesie,family,cute Most of these keywords are mostly redundant, not terms the average person would search for (eg. cervine, ungulate, 'composite being'), or not accurate at all. Many keywords would get hit from people looking for specific things, and your listing coming up would stop them from doing that. NOT A satyr: "A satyr is a mythological creature with the upper body of a man and the lower body of a horse or goat." NOT A furry (SL): "The furry fandom is a subculture interested in anthropomorphic animal characters." NOT A onesie: One piece garment for babies. What you are representing is a swaddle/swaddling NOT A doe (female deer), buck (male deer WITH antlers), fawn (actual baby deer). Hybrid, human, deer, baby is what you're representing. Most products can be described in 3-5 keywords, no more. You have already described it succinctly in the product title "Half Deer Baby", so why do you feel the need to add the rest? NOT A carrier, pot, potty, pacifier, family as relating to you listing a "Half Deer Baby" as the actual product. Use the description to further describe any accessories, bonuses and props that come along with it, and showcase THOSE as well in your images. That being said, almost every listing on Second Life MP would qualify for 'keyword spam' and in past days I'd report those myself, in the misguided effort to 'help clean up the MP', but if I were to do that for every listing I found, my finger would have broken off, and it would be an unpaid full-time job. So hopefully we can change your mind and others here to see the value of using less and more accurate keywords, if only to make your workload creating a listing even easier for you, more accurate, and gets you more customers who are ACTUALLY interested in your product.

It's sad that OP has to put big long disclaimers on his listings still at this point and time, but I feel for the same situation. Once I figured out SL's classic SPC/GLS system, and made the appropriate maps in all the right places and alpha channels, etc, all I got were complaints from those products and low ratings - because people still didn't have their Advanced Lighting Model on, so the textures will appear flat and dead to them. When you explain to them they need ALM, they might go fix it, but their 1 star rating remains, and you no longer sell a single item of that product ever again. This is when I realized most creators were baking lights and environments into their products and many times even foregoing using Normal maps too (from inworld research of many products). If it is done right, baked lighting can certainly trick the eye into thinking the product has more detail and may help to minimize texture load impact. I do like the PBR ease of upload, and not having to create a whole new workflow to get PBR projects into SPC/GLS format as of old, but I suspect the same result can happen "This doesn't look as good inworld as it does in the photos! Looks terrible! 1-star!" can still happen, or even from users who don't know how to set up PBR environment on their own land, etc.

The first answer to why they can continue to list and sell on SL, even though they may clearly represent a brand and design from RL, and sometime obviously - is because unless the copyright holder files a complaint to SL management - they can get away with it. It is very risky for all parties involved, as a copyright holder can simply do an investigation taking a year or more - and calculate damages from that and sue for that amount. It rarely happens though, since SL is not really big enough or even considered at all by a corporation. However, some corporations are more nasty than others about this, and will aggressively pursue any creator (or SL as the platform) they become aware of. The second answer is more related to ethics and what kind of creator do you want to be? An ethical creator who uses RL designs as 'inspiration' for your own designs, and build your brand that way? Or just be another unethical creator who wants to 'replicate the designs of a RL designer/company, and slap my own logo on it and call it my own work AND sell the resulting items for my own profit'. That's the decision many creators have to make at some point. Believe me, copycat stuff sells more than original stuff, and always does no matter what platform the 'replicated designs' are sold on. It DOES pay to upload copyrighted content, or 'replicated designs', as long as the creator can get away with it. It's more of an ethical choice than a legal one. Most likely you can get away with the legal issues (mostly), but it's your integrity and character (and the satisfaction you get) from your activities that you alone can decide.

Yes, I will.

Just to be clear, and publicly, I do not read into your intent in doing so, but I'm glad it happened to demonstrate my position in this thread, and any personal reference to that is not intended

And conversely this thread is all the evidence needed as to why it would be a good idea to allow posters with good intent (my default view of others) to be able to edit their posts. Except I supported my statement with reasons, while you did not. An unqualified and unsupported view means nothing without you expanding on it as to why you hold that position... and not to be vague about it.

And such a prime example given in this very thread of how a post 'quoting' can be manipulative..

Instead of the person I responded to expanding on their statement they decided to laugh at it instead. Therefore being able to edit this post after the fact, and to discourage further commenting by others for whom it was never intended is attained.

Post unneeded as the person who it was made to decided to laugh at it instead of making a coherent response. Therefore removing this post eliminates anyone else other than the person this was intended to, to comment on it.

This post is no longer needed, as other forum members have 'documented' it on my behalf, and they feel that once I hit enter, I should not be able to edit it, as I may be 'doing it for nefarious reasons' which is a common accusation of others who try to participate in the forums here, and always the basis to call for greater restrictions against SL users.

I might be able to even sum it up thusly; Just by being active anywhere you risk a ban. Welcome to 2022.

Anytime I've been 'pinged', I know exactly why. Sometimes it's my fault, sometimes I react to someone pushing buttons, or posting controversial responses myself that are hot buttons, and the moderators don't want the discussion to get worse after that. It's okay to say "Yeah my bad, shouldn't have posted that" or "Thanks, that post got taken the wrong way and it all went to hell after" or "Yeah I went over the line, thanks for the heads up". People 'not knowing' what they did, come on. People know when they push the line, or skirt so near the rules that others pick up on it too, especially if it's in a string of posts with the same intent. Usually if one sticks to debating the argument/position someone made, and refrain from personal attacks, or casting aspersions as to their intent, their thoughts, w/e you can have some spirited discussions that everyone can learn from. However if people want to 'win' and not understand the other side, there are more chances of everyone involved to get more militant or lose their temper. When dog piling occurs, the fight can get pretty real and the drama intensifies. Hence best to remove hot topics from the forums, that should be dedicated to Second Life themes anyway. Plenty of websites, forums and social media to wage a social or political war already - which in the end is a waste of time as both sides eventually create their own bubbles (eg Gab and Twitter) and the minority opinion on both sides get cancelled (which defeats the purpose of trying come to solutions). In general, it is safest to respond to what the OP posted, and perhaps come back later and add new thoughts as others offer theirs, and it's not hard to stay on topic. I've also ran and been a member of many forums over the years, and going off-topic can become quite an issue if not moderated strongly. Some topics would go off topic by 3 responses in at the earliest and many times at the next page.

There's a meowing cat nearby, and cats are cute but zomg... I keep hearing the cat meowing. How do I find it lol and derender/mute gahhhhh Update: Figured it out. Unfortunately the developers decided to put cat meowing, bird chirping and 100 sounds of the jungle into the "Sound Effects" panel, instead of a more appropriate "Ambient" Channel. Would be nice if sounds were alloted where they belonged; eg. "Wind, Rain, Gentle Breeze, Distant Traffic, Dungeon Sound" etc are in "Ambient" Sound effects reserved for inworld event sounds like footsteps, door openings, object sounds, etc. Now I can't hear any effects in Belissaria because the meowing and repeated chirping drove me nuts.

Discrimination will always happen, because all of us are discriminating. It's all discrimination, but depending on the popular culture's opinion of the day, one thing is discrimination, but another is not. Best to take it in stride and welcome the day where you can find a group with like-minded individuals and friends.

Rather than cast aspersions or make accusations to an individual's behaviour just be informed that the post applies not only to SL but every other online platform, virtual or not - where this is now my personal policy trying to survive in a changed world of 2022. And yes, I'm sure I'll offend someone again, and that's okay ::wink:: That's the risk of conversing and discussing ideas with other people - to accept that you will offend people, and that you will be offended.

It has been Meta's aim and goal from the beginning to be THE Metaverse, and in their own words "to discourage competition and if possible make sure they don't even get started", and their words back up their actions so far, so not a surprise. Meta is not our friend, nor anyone's friend. What Zuckerberg wants is everyone on his version 'working, living, and playing' there. Yuck. Also, they are drawing attention from the FTC now.

A whole lot of typing and words displayed, but it really is quite simple. This is no different than many forums that only exist because they're meant to serve the discussion and promotion of the game/software/platform. . General Discussion areas are usually set for grab bag or garage sale or topics that people don't know where to post them, and some leeway is given in those areas. Having run forum of my own on a variety of game-related topics when hosting game servers and running resultant 'clans' and 'guilds', that was all the General was supposed to be. The thing here on SL was that the General Discussion wasn't really being used like that, and too many way non-SL related topics were appearing - and many of them political or social or real world issues that don't really belong here - nor is it LL's responsibility to give them a platform to their myriad numbers of users - especially if the internet is available and many other forums out there to express themselves already. For others, it's not why we come to Second Life forums, nor is it our goal to bring RL issues into SL, as it is meant to be something else. Whether or not I agree or understand to the issues people may post from time to time, it's not why I'm here, and I and others appreciate the move to keep it a bit more SL-centric. It also keeps a lot of divisive topics down, and subsequent AR's and discipline and possible bans for people who feel passionate one way or another and 'go too far' - which is an expected result from hot-button topics. So best to keep it to other places like Gab vs Twitter, etc - people can argue and debate and point fingers and make aspersions against one another all they want there. Here's too more on-topic and unifying discussions regarding SL and related virtual world discussions in the future, I for one welcome the new changes.

People can't get offended, get frustrated or angry or tattletale if they can't see or read or hear anything you say. It's the best policy moving forward