Codex Alpha

Pamela Galli wrote: Hopeless. It is, because intellect and well-supported conversations are not to be had here.

WIth all due respect, this isn't about me, this is about discussing what anti-competitive behaviour actually is, and why I don't believe the OP (or many top sellers who do it daily) are in contravention of this. Also any definition of 'inflating prices" does not describe what the OP (or many top sellers do daily) either, or how/why it is anti-competitive in any way and with whom? themselves? Perhaps we will now need Dakota Linden to clarify what this means and give examples, and/or improve the wording in the listing to clearly describe what they mean, since both definitions provided do not cover this action in SL at all.

Rolig Loon wrote: Tone and style do make a difference, and messengers do tend to get shot in the crossfire. :smileywink: Only to you, and here we are.. off topic. Good job.

Callum Meriman wrote: Zoxin wrote: Personally, I still think demo items should be pulled from search entirely as it clutters my storefront I like demos. Why should I lose the ability to shop for them so you can have a clean shop? As for your "not" word, doesn't work anyway. Try it with other things "bento not gatcha" or "bento not box" and you will get gatchas and bento boxes. Gatchas are clearly a much larger issue. The amount of them wrongly returned in search is making the MP unusable If he/she literally means 'the storefront' and not the search results page, it would be because when customers visit your store page, all your latest selling stuff gets listed first under 'Relevance". Hence if you had a lot of demo, freebie or promo stuff, that stuff tends to go to the top of the list and therefore gets more visibility than the actual products. Putting the demo option on the actual product listing would not only clean up the Marketplace searches, but would also clean up storefronts as well. I would also extend this to color options, perhaps with a new interface that had color option buttons as well. Anything to cut down on duplicate images, listings, and titles would always be good. That would take some coding and database query prowess though.

Sassy Romano wrote: You've been directed to the MP listing rules, I don't see what's so hard about understanding them, they're pretty clear and unambiguous. You don't have to agree to them if you choose NOT to list, that's the simplicity of it, you can argue all you like here, your disagreement is with LL. Now you're falling back to generalist statements, now including in your statement the ENTIRETY of the listing rules, because you have no real support for a counterargument, opinion, or examples. Instead of regurgitating lines that many of us have already read, explain how many of the top sellers in SL get away with having higher prices on the SLMP, and offer discounts for those who buy the same products should they purchase them from their inworld stores. You'd also have to address why 'sales' would be valid, as someone could also claim that they are being abusive in their pricing, and 'inflating' prices on SLMP. You probably don't even understand the concept about what "inflating prices" means, especially when it comes to being competitive. Or just be your lazy self and just post without any supporting statements, as usual. Some of you are such experts at this TOS thing, but you can never actually supply an example or 'what if' so others here can learn and understand better, and avoid any of the mistakes made and consequences as stated by the OP.

Linden Labs has not provided an example of what you quote. Do you have examples that can be verified? Once again, just because I converse about a topic, doesn' t mean I do it myself, agree or disagree with it. I just find it ambiguous and in my opinon IS NOT, and SHOULD not be against TOS to do so, as we see it commonly in RL marketing practice. We also see this widespread through the Inworld markets, BY TOP AND ESTABLISHED SELLERS, and advertised on their store pages that there are discounts on items should customers buy the same product in-world. If you make a statement, support it with WHY and give examples. Quoting an ambiguous string from a TOS does not clarify anything, and I seem to be the only one providing context as to what it means. If you disagree, then reply, if you just want to copy and paste, I personally don't need that as I am very familiar with policies and TOS's because I actually read them.

Gadget Portal wrote: What's absurd is expecting programmers to add an "Are you sure?" confirmation to every stupid button. For one, if you're dumb, you're gonna find a way to break it no matter what the designer does. Gadget Portal wrote: I'm not exaggerating anything. The post I replied to added land renewals, freebies, and more to the list. Pretty soon we'd have to have confirmations on everything. As for gifting a blank name, the scripter there should have at least had it check to make sure it could actually find said name before proceeding, no confirmation needed. I believe what I said was.. "With every sensitive transaction, you check (for errors in submission "You have not entered a name/amount/etc") and double-check ("Are you sure you want to pay [Name] $100L?)" This is not EVERY button. This is on the important buttons. This is just a silly convo anyway, as you probably have never taken a UI/UX course, or a programming course, or even a course that had you coding concerning sensitive systems, where ERROR CHECKING IS THE NORM AND THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WHEN DEALING WITH SENSITIVE DATA. Because then you wouldn't even be arguing this point, as it is best practice. Rolig Loon wrote: Whether the OP's post was prompted by an interaction with a specific merchant's vendor or whether it is a distillation of experiences with vendors in general, my basic point still stands. As our grandmothers would have said, "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." The tone and style of the OP's post was confrontational, rather than informational and constructive. Several of the responses here have also been a bit over the top, reacting as much to the OP's similar style in previous threads as to this one. It just seems to me that there are better way to discuss a legitimate concern than to use charged language and innuendo that serve no purpose but to divide people into factions. Although I agree with your perspective, you don't shoot the messenger because you don't like the tone of his voice, nor can you negate the content of the message for the same. Instead of reacting to someone's percieved (because that is what it is) tone or intent, learn to read things on the internet do to the content, and reply to that instead. Or not. That will keep the conversations on point, and not just spiraling into off-topic convos of someone's posting style, tone, use of words, etc.

arton Rotaru wrote: It's because of that listing items on the MP is totally free. There is only the 5 % commission fee on sales. Operating the MP costs money though. You could just set prices on the MP a thousand times higher than in-world, with a slurl to the item in-world costing 1000 times less. The MP would be just an advertising platform for free then, because nobody would pay 1000 times more. No MP sales, no money for LL. 1000 times more sounds like an exaggerated example? Indeed, but I'm sure that's what would happen if the inflated price rule wouldn't be in place. The alternatives would be LL charges commission fees on in-world sales as well, or charging a fee for MP listings. Inflating prices and 'price gouging' is more commonly associated with things like water, medicine and food. In a disaster situation, it is looked down upon to do so on necessary items. They are 'exploiting' people for their own benefit, and is either fair or unfair, depending on how you look at it, your country of origin, and the kind of economy you have. Yet here we are in allegedly a free market system, where the price is set by competition (if products are similar) and the price is set by what the market can bare. Maybe you are from a Communist country where this wouldn't apply and WOULD be considered unethical. LL Listings being free is irrelevant. They're not free. We pay for them with blood, sweat, tears and hard work, and upload OUR CONTENT at pennies on the dollar that SL and fellow users get to use. Some older SL'ers create sims that create CONTENT that LL did not create, and contribute also to SL's success at literal pennies on the dollar. And yes, your example is respectfully quite ridiculous - the most observed things I have seen have been 10% discounts on purchases inworld, not 1000% markups. Even then , who would care? Isn't it about what the market can bear? Yes there would be examples of ripoffs, so quote an example. All I read here is rhetoric, and arguments made without any supporting examples or statements. I also believe there is enough safeguards and policing in place, that if there was an extreme ripoff going down, the account(s) involved would surely get dealt with. mikka Luik wrote: Its at the bottom of the page : 'Anti-Competitive or Abusive Behavior. Examples include, but are not limited to: inflating prices on the SL Marketplace, in comparison to in-world or other e-commerce sites,' Back in the real world we got around having 'totes legit lowest price anywhere' for certain 'chains' by making sure there was enough of a tiny difference on what they stocked compared to any one else. And some of those differences were microscopic. Thanks for reposting what I have already read myself and understand, but the phrase is ambiguous, especially since you have not supplied any context or examples. How can I inflate my own prices against myself? How is offering a discount for my own products (which only competes with itself anyway) be abusive? to who? Is it abusive for one store in RL offer a product for $10 less than the store you bought the same product from? Is it abusive or inflating prices if you bought a product from a store, then the next day it went on sale for $10 less? Who are you to dictate what the market price can bear, and how? Perhaps instead of regurgitating and copying/pasting a phrase from a TOS page, that you provide examples to support your argument.

Yet, having lower prices for products when you come into the store is a frequently used tactic in real life. It is incentive for people to visit your RL/Inworld store to get savings, and to check out other products you might have. It's not illegal in RL , so why should it be in SL. Just like someone might save money on Amazon (the reverse), instead of buying it at a brick and mortar store, why would it matter in SL? Who's going to police this anyway, or report you, other than a disgruntled customer or competitor? Who else would even care? If it was a concern, they could contact you inworld or in IM and you could rectify the situation. Delisting something without context or even warning assumes you are doing something criminal, rather than a 'mistake'. Also who's to judge that the product inworld is the same as the MP? Perhaps for safety, you need to make a separate product for inworld purchases, and another listing for MP. "Cube: Instore Edition : $95L" "Cube: (on SLMP) $100L" That being said, I see people giving and advertising discounts for buying the product inworld at their store, and as far as I knew was a legal practice. I haven't done that myself inworld, but I don't see a problem saving money by buying inworld. Hell, I'd almost prefer paying more on the MP anyway, for the guarantee of updates and redeliver options. SL can be a weird place, with both sides going outside the ethical lines whenever it suits them, and without much common sense applied to their practices or regulations. Chic Aeon wrote: That not cheaper inworld has been part of the marketplace terms from the beginning. I haven't checked the rules lately but suspect it still is the same. ACTUALLY looking at the listing guidelines just now, I can't find a reference to that long-standing "rule". BUT if they took your product off, then I guess it is still in effect. Here is the listing practices page I looked at: https://marketplace.secondlife.com/listing_guidelines#listing-guidelines You would think that 'technically' that a product sold inworld is not a 'listing' nor a 'marketplace listing' and therefore should be treated quite differently. Its a product sitting on land inworld, and therefore should not be subject to MP listing guidelines. In fact, I would like it to be 2 separate entities, and treated as such.

Suki Hirano wrote: Earlier I went to a store and bought something via right click -> pay. It ate my money and didn't deliver. Fine I went to the redelivery terminal, guess what? Nothing. Then I went on SL website to check transaction history, yup there it is, my payment. How this happened? Because I accidentally clicked "gift" before clicking "pay", then didn't type in a name to gift to (obviously since I wasn't going to gift it). I cancelled the gifting dialogue thinking that would be fine right? Nope, it still thinks you're trying to gift someone, so when I right click -> pay, it literally sent my item to "empty name" which doesn't exist. Is this for real? We're over 10 years in LSL scripting and they can't script a proper vendor script? I mean I'm not a computer programming major but this is just common sense, like when you go to an ATM and input something wrong, it's not supposed to eat your money and say "haha sorry try again but we're gonna just eat your money". They don't know that when you cancel a gift name input dialogue the user means she doesn't want to gift to anyone? Even if that's the case, why not refund the money if the avatar name is empty or not found? I've seen vendors refund money in sales, so yes this can be done. If try to buy a group-only product without group tag, it will refund your money. I guess whoever scripted this vendor, likely CasperVend, didn't bother scripting a refund option if something invalid happens. So basically now I'm at the mercy of the shop creator, should she "feel like" delilvering the item I paid for. And you know how it is with a lot of creators in SL... log on maybe once in a blue moon to check money then log off, customer service? Never heard of it. Just a warning for people shopping in places where they use vendor scripts instead of the simple right click -> buy. Don't use the stupid "buy as gift" option, if you accidentally make a typo, type wrong name, or simply leave it blank, you're screwed and won't even register on redelivery terminal. Just pay your friend the money and let her buy it herself. YOu are correct, the following statements are directed to the respondents to your post; Once again, the trend is to always 'blame the user', 'blame the player' because of some lack of safety features on a UI/UX system. No, you don't blame the user, or call them stupid. You observe what the user does when interacting with your system, and if any mistakes are found, you work to correct them immediately. Thats your job as a programmer, UI/UX designer. Test your product, your interface, fresh eyes or even get Mom to do it. For insight. Am I stupid because I clicked "Will Not Renew" on a recent land rental, when I meant "Buy Another Month", then get an IM from the land owner wondering why I'm leaving? A distractin in RL, a finger spasm or accidental click happens.. and I was like 'oh crap, thats not what is supposed to happen". No confirm, no warning.. just click.. How about adding a failsafe, or confirm button? This is common practice in UI/UX/user form creation in programming and other courses. "Are you sure you want to renew, NOT renew?" "Are you sure you want to send $100 to [bLANK]? " Or "Sorry I cannot send money to [bLANK], please enter a name". Listen to yourselves, how absurd. With any sensitive transaction, you check and doublecheck. When you don't have these safeguards in on your vending box, it is YOU that looks suspicious, it is YOU that looks stupid because you don't care about protecting the customer (or guiding them safely through the process). You're only hurting yourselves when you do this. I posted long ago in my early days clicking around in a FREEBIE store with $0L items, after about 30 or so items later, realized that some $100+L products were embedded throughout, and I had blindly paid by accident. This goes back to trust. Stop blaming the user, and work towards protecting them (and yourself from getting a bad reputation) by confirming sensitive or large amount purchases. Caveat: For customers, we have to be careful too, do not assume every merchant in SL has your interests in mind. I had fun a few times in SL, paying a vending box to rent land... that I never got.

I still use the classic avatar shape at least, mostly classic textures as clothing. Firstly, I don't like the freakish proportions the mesh bodies are at, secondly would have to rely on products made specifically for them (I want standards in SL, not monopolies) and thirdly the appearance of my avatar is least important to me. The few mesh clothings I have purchased always were a bit off, making me look frumpy or out of proportion as well. I'm pretty much at the standard height as well, which is still a bit bigger than I would like, but if I go to 6 feet or under, the avatars look like children compared to their entire surroundings and other Minotaur-sized avatars inworld.

Good tip to remind us about, Drongle. I'd prefer myself probably to calculate the offset through scripting instead, rather than 'hard-modelling' (made up word ) it into the mesh itself. Is there any reason why scripting wouldn't be preferrable over this method?

Seems like one big advertisement for Christmas products masquerading as a 'story'.

Chic Aeon wrote: The only gap between those than can make mesh and those who do not is EFFORT. Anyone that wants to can learn to make mesh. It literally took me THREE tries over time -- finally I gave myself a month of 40 plus hour weeks to learn Blender. Good for you. Many others do the same thing. Depending on their budget and career needs and goals, a variety of 3D software is available to them. It's a no brainer that with today's access to information on the internet, one can learn anything they want, as long as they apply the effort. So what is your point by saying this? For me or the audience? Chic Aeon wrote: Nowdays there are many more resources for SL mesh makers, my hundred or so tutorials, tips and tricks are part of that. If I was worried about being a mesh superstar, why on earth would I be explaining ways to do things and sharing knowledge? Never seen any of your tutorials, where can people find them? What does the rest have to do with saying there is a wide gap now, and such a gap ensures less competition for those who do make mesh? Chic Aeon wrote: Blender is FREE. There is no cost involved except time and dedication. It was NOT fun for the first six month. It got easier after that. Then I decided that I wanted to learn Cycles which is as someone in Opensim put it is like "leveling up" in an adventure game. Now after a year and a half I feel competent in Cycles. This was a CHOICE and each creator that is making mesh OR is trying to LEARN mesh is making that choice. Good for you. I admire your initiative and hard work. As I stated before, there are many others doing the same thing, so.... what's your point in stating any of this? Chic Aeon wrote: Both Pamela and I made more money in the prim days and for me anyway with much less effort. I'm sure you did. Members and customers didn't expect the detail and Low LI they expect now I've seen some products made in those days with hundreds of positive reviews, etc, and by today's standards, they're not very good at all.(or at least need to be updated) Chic Aeon wrote: You are making suppositions that have no evidence behind them. That's because it's my opinion, based on my experience and observations in SL thus far. People's experiences can vary in SL, you do understand that right? This is why forums exist, to present different views and takes on things that expose one to other views they can consider I'm reading, comprehending and respecting other people's views, keep them coming. I'm all for discussion and learning, and I realize I'm not always right. So how about giving other people a bit of leeway too. Chic Aeon wrote: If you choose not to learn new skills that doesn't make it easier for US, it just makes it "easier" for you. Avoidance is not a skill. Pretending that there can be no improvements, no new methods, no new beauty? Not in my book. Get over it! Although this is returning to a previous point made, as you are kind of repeating the same sentiment of "There is no gap if you want to learn!", you're still missing the point. Because there EXISTS that barrier of mesh creation for most newcomers to SL, and also the obsoleting of prim builds in some capacity, with the dwindling numbers of audiences for those builds, the gap widens because most are not up to, nor have the desire to invest time and hours.

Pamela Galli wrote: No you don't get it -- I (and everyone else in my situation) succeeded IN SPITE OF mesh, not because of it. When mesh was announced I could barely make the simplest sculpts. Everything else was prim work. The advantage I had was my reputation and brand. And interestingly, my old stuff is marked way down on the marketplace and still sells like hotcakes. If I don't understand your perspective, it's because I come from a different context, as I stated. To me I was happily building stuff with prims, but being both discouraged and dismayed at the high land prices for me to build on, as well as the seemingly superior stuff made from mesh. I had no advantage with money. All I had is a desire to learn (and work for it). Not sure why I triggered a personal defense on your part, it's not required. Let's return to the point made that although there may be some sense of community lost with not building inworld - there wasn't much of it anyway.. Limited audiences coming to the land, and the high expense of prim use both contributed to mesh's rise, and people leaving because it takes a lot of work to learn mesh. We really are on the same page. Yet, this DOES in fact widen the gap, and ensures that the top mesh makers will now be fewer, and less people entering the arena creatively or in a business manner. Also notice some of the phrases you and others use... it's what doctors might say to warrant the high prices they charge and/OR (please pay attention to the OR) to secure their positions. The environment itself was bound to fail eventually, as it is predicated on other people making money in order for one to express themselves creatively. SL is expensive to most, or at least the ROI may not be there. THere are now 19 of 21 people I know that do not frequent SL because of this. But who cares, right? We should care because they are OUR AUDIENCE, OUR TRAFFIC, and in many cases OUR CUSTOMERS. So this is not about your skills or hard work; MANY of us do the same thing. LIke I said, I appreciate your history and hard work, but you are not alone - stating so makes you appear elitist. I'm on my way, and am your junior in this experience, yes... My SL experience has been dealing with elitists and people who hoard their knowledge - so I post with that perspective. I'm anti-elitist and pro-newbie support. But I cannot stand idly by and watch some people post as they do and not respond with the 'other guy' in mind. Because I AM that 'other guy'. So take my statements with a grain of salt, and that I am (trying to) consider where you are coming from at the same time. Pamela Galli wrote: Yes, while mesh has been good for me as an artist, as a business owner it has cost me. I had to work twice as hard for five years to continue having a full time job in SL. In that "widening gap between builders and those who can mesh" you and I, and many others, were the builders, not "those who can mesh". As you say, we became those who can mesh, as a result of our choice to rise to the challenge. Certainly I never wanted to be a 3-D modeler, such a thing never entered my mind until Second Life announced that I was going to have to do that. For me, losing my job was not an option -- I had two disabled family members depending on me for support. I still do. Whatever it takes, within my power, I am going to keep my job. This is precisely why this kind of gap and barrier to entry actually benefits you, whether you want to recognize it or not. Your hard work, though admired and appreciated (because I know what it takes myself), is beside the point, because many people have to do that, not only you ChinRey wrote: entity0x wrote: I appreciate your skill and hard work that got you there, but that's besides the point. What was 'lost' has actually helped you succeed by widening the gap between builders and those who can mesh. Yes, mesh did exclude a lot of old builders and if we want to be cynical about it, that in itself was an advantage for those who persisted and were willing and able to adapt. There's nothing cynical about it, it's realistic. Just address the real effects, deal with it, and move on. Glad you can see there is a gap though, and many benefit from it.

Good for you, because there are just as many people looking at the alleged 'top knotch' avatars and laughing at their Minotaur sized stature, 8 foot legs and balloon boobs and butts and just are agape at how freakish they look.

I appreciate your skill and hard work that got you there, but that's besides the point. What was 'lost' has actually helped you succeed by widening the gap between builders and those who can mesh. There is no envy in me. I either have contempt or admiration for someone. Stop playing the victim, I'm not attacking you, but if the shoe fits, wear it. I have my own abilities as well, and simply stating things as they are, coming from humble prim building origins myself, and fully aware that if I was going to participate fully in building things for SL, I would have to embrace mesh. Those who didn't or couldn't have moved on. There's no glossing over that REAL and sad fact.

Pamela Galli wrote: When the barrier to entry was raised so far beyond the skill level of most people, Second Life lost something very valuable. Yet, you and many others benefit greatly financially from it. It's the dream for most company owners to have a steep barrier to entry in order to secure their place - and therefore livelihood (usually with high prices). Higher barriers to entry are great for the established. Keeps everyone else out. But as a prior post stated "Progress is a mixed bag"

I'm glad you guys are having fun reminescing about the old ways. The old ways weren't always the best. I built quite a bit myself with prims when I first came to 2nd Life, but all around me were these amazing and detailed builds by designers using Mesh from Maya, Blender and etc. My prim creations paled in comparison, and I thought to myself "These guys are making such nice stuff, it must be nice to be able to do that, have money for education, and the money for the software, but hey back to my <ahem> wood blocks". Still it was something I did, mainly creating sets and scenes for machinima and photography. Then I discovered Gai Clary's tutorial on YouTube about making a mesh hat in Blender. Blender was quite ugly back then (2.5+?), I tried it out a few times but couldnt get past the ugly UI. At around 2.69, I picked it up again and started fiddling with it and following some basic tutorials. Here I am at 2.78 on my way to making some of the great builds I admired from early in my SL experience. The magic of mesh for me was creating more detail in the same 'prim count'. If it took me 8 prims to make a throne now, Making it in 3-4 Li now is very acceptable (regardless of the low LI craze). People forgot that on many items it would take more prims (so they should actualy be happy with a 3-4LI chair now really). However, building in SL did have its perks and fun. Frequently I would build in public sandboxes, mainly the now missing Hobo Sandbox, where I would construct, test, and show stuff I was making on , and more than a few convos would start for sure. Many times, I would simply do an "on-the-fly" unplanned build, maybe a small dance club, or grove or scene that not only lured other sandboxers over to hang out, but also functioned as prototypes (that I haven't replicated yet in Blender ) for building ideas of the future. Nowadays, I spend most of my time in Blender, testing in a localhost standalone installation of OpenSim, testing in Premium (and desolate) SL sandboxes, and in my Linden home for final uploads, testing, and texturing and release. Unlike the old prim-based, sandboxing days, I don't get to see how people use my stuff, and I've never been able to start a conversation through the marketplace (or even in the intermittent inworld stores I put up). SL keeps changing. Some things will be better, and other things will be lost. It's <ahem>, "progress". Want more alienation? Here comes Sansar!

You'd be better off joining some club in RL that features topics you are interested in, be it swimming, basketweaving, chess, painting, scrapbooking, arts n crafts, choir, etc It will make it a lot easier for you to come out of your shell when you can start off a conversation with people that already have the same interest as you. It might be that older lady who can teach you some sewing or cooking tricks, or a fellow ager who can share some ideas on scrapbooking, etc. Although I wish you luck with this in SL, putting yourself out there in chat hubs (which I consider feature some of the most extremist people out there on the internet, griefers, and downright hostiles) may be a lot riskier to your psyche than you might think. There have been various studies over the last 20 years that say relying on internet relationships, or even using the internet over extended periods of times, causes social anxiety, depression and a feeling of separate-ness, or loneliness. In either case, SL or RL, find those with common interests to facilitate conversation. Good luck PS. Oh and fire your therapist. Any therapist that suggests exposure to the internet as a way of beefing one's self-esteem and confidence is bad advice.

Conifer Dada wrote: What I'd like to see is an improved standard 'system' avatar mesh, with more subdivisions to give a smoother shape and better joint articulation. Then we could still wear the same skins, keep the same shapes and make all the same adjustments without being tempted to go for a 'mesh' body, at least if we have human shaped avatars, that is. Also the clothes'fit' adjustments could be refined so that system clothes could look more realistic. 'System' can't compete with 'mesh' when it comes to dresses, skirts, coats or loose-fitting clothes, but for clothes that are skin-tight or even just fairly tight, it can compete, and more so if it's tweaked a bit. Yes, standards are always good, some default we can all work with. The default avatar SL gives the new player (at least which is humanoid) should at least be consistent, so we can make stuff for them. Phil Deakins wrote: entity0x wrote: If anything that separates one user of SL from another is those who are stuck with nicknames or first names only followed by 'resident', while others have the privilege, status and now clearly elitist ability to have first names "Jadewyn Wildfire", "Johnny Shotwater", "Alyssa Philborne". Do I detect a note of envy there? Tari Landar wrote: This, to me, sounds just as snobbish, and ridiculous, as judging all avatars by their looks alone, or rather stating that we all *must* or *have to* judge avatars by their looks alone, as previously stated by folks in this thread I think it's beyond ridiculous to assume that most, or even all, of us with legacy names, feel a particular way about those with the resident last name. Actually, I find that insulting. I, personally, look at avatars as more than their last name, more than their physical appearance(s), more than meets the eye...the same way I look at folks in rl. Making assumptions about how people see other people, or what they think of other people, based on asinine judgements, is as bad as the asnine judgments themselves. You do realize that one can discuss an issue, without having to be in agreement with it, right? My experience and observations in SL may be quite different than someone else's, so my opinions are formed through those. It doesn't mean I am correct about it, and my musings on some matters doesn't always mean thats what I actually believe. As much as people can and will be judged for so-called inferior avatars, they can also be deemed inferior by their "Joe Resident" name, and given less status in the community because of it. For example, when I have discussed some things on these forums in the past, I have been 'called out' specifically because of my "<Nick> Resident" name as having some kind of inferiority to the status of others, or experience. It doesn't matter that I had a SL account long ago which I don't have access to - (why should I even have to say that anyway ), the fact that someone thinks you haven't been around as long as they have, they think it gives them more authority on a subject than facts do. I've been dealing with "I've been here since Beta" type of folks for a long time, they're always on forums and in communities thinking they have more authority due to their join date, rather than their actual experience and skill and insight. So yes, whether people want to recognize this or not, it DOES exist, much as being judged for your alleged crappy avatar does. Do either of these things matter to me? No. It never has. Thats why I jump into the conversation and give my 2 cents anyway. I report what I see and experience.

Benson Gravois wrote: I have a four year old son in real life that likes to sit on my lap and "play" second life with me. He likes to go to amusement parks and go on the rides. I am wondering if anyone has any ideas or LMs for amusement parks or even other places he might enjoy? Get off the computer and take him to some real life parks and amusement parks. Then he won't have to climb up onto your lap all the time just to get some attention.

I wear a classic avatar from the very first day I started SL. I guess I'm a second class citizen, but I neither feel that way, nor would I care if others thought that way. My Canada Jeans I wear I found in a freebie shop, and I wear them to this day. Although I have bought some and sometimes wear mesh clothing, imo it never looks quite right, a bit too frumpy compared to the lean and clean designs offered to classic avatars. In my opinion, when I travel about SL, I laugh at the so-called 'first class' avatars, who look like freakishly inhuman specimens with 10 inch lashes, 20 lb boobs and 8 foot legs. The male avatars are equally as laughable, as they even would make Superman appear to be a weakling with how some are built. If I could find a reasonable designed male avatar that was of normal, average and scaled proportions then I might switch. Until then, I have no desire walking around as a 9 foot Minotaur fake version of myself. The scale is screwed up enough already in SL. I wear, design and play and buy things with the default avatar and its scale (approx 5'8 - 6ft which is still tall enough for a male) in mind. If anything that separates one user of SL from another is those who are stuck with nicknames or first names only followed by 'resident', while others have the privilege, status and now clearly elitist ability to have first names "Jadewyn Wildfire", "Johnny Shotwater", "Alyssa Philborne". Conall DeCuir wrote: For me it is simply a fact that who doesn't pays attention to his/her looks, doesn't pays attention really to anything. And its not about a mesh avie! It is actually only about it to pay SOME effort into the appearance of the avie. When there is just nothing appealing, neither in the approach nor in the looks, then why should i pay attention ? Interesting. Hmm, I paid enough attention to my avatar to please myself - that's all that matters. Second of all, we all have different interests in SL. Perhaps you like to spend more time detailing your avatar and your Barbie house. I spend more time paying attention to other things that interest me. My matches in SL will be from those with stimulating intellectual insights, and other creative types. I couldn't care less what their avatar looked like - beauty (even simulated beauty) in SL is just as skin deep as in RL. It's okay, you can do what you like, I suppose - it's good to know why SL seems very antisocial at times.. perhaps it's my avatar that simply isn't 'up to standard and is second - class". Never mind the person behind the avatar - they're as worthless as you judge from their avatar alone.

Yes, it's interesting that some 'don't have time' to resolve the issue, just like they 'didn't have time' to contact you inworld with any questions before purchase, or if there are any problems with set up. What probably happened is that she realized the error of her ways, figured out how to do it, but sure as hell was never going to admit she was wrong.. Hell no... just no response instead.

Maybe you should read the conversation in it's entirety before responding, then you would understand that has never been, nor will ever be, my position.