Codex Alpha

Since Theresa and ChinRey mentioned names, and it is apparently okay to advertise stores, products and sims by name, as long as it's not yours, I'd like to recommend; Joey Thornhill, he makes amazing modern sports cars like the Maserati and Lambo. His detailed and superior work is an amazement to look at, you should check out his store, his products and head to his sim as well. My second recommendation, a creator who is definitely not related to me in any way, nor is it an alt account of mine, or alternate store is Freddy Firebird. He is an amazing vehicle creator too. Can't forget Porche Pete (pronounce Porsh-A Pete, by the way) and Kenny Kamaro, both icons in their own right, and definitely not affiliated with me in any way. So good all of them, highly recommended, search for them on the marketplace and buy from them too.

It is only you and a few others that make conversations about the poster, and not about the topic, and as usual, here you are doing it again. With always the condescending manner. This is not about me, I just supplied examples, and how I think through it. And yes, unlike you, I read every word of the blog I cited, and fully understand Penny's position, and so I offered mine. This is how forums work. Notice, I am criticising Penny's opinion, not Penny. You would do well to learn from that example. Sassy Romano wrote: At this point, I propose that everyone counts to 10 and someone rezzes a no copy/no mod campfire and we can all have a group hug and sit around singing while roasting copy/mod marshmallows, while simultaneously hoping that everyone else turns up in the same dress as me such that I can snag the other 500 texture variations in one go! *beams, ducks and runs* We should, because this should go under 'shop talk'. We are all colleagues here, all supposedly in SL to have fun and create, so discussing ideas doesn't need to be a person vs person affair... People can change their views and opinions with new information, but attacking them personally does nothing, especially if the reply does not even address the points made, in agreement or otherwise by the original poster.

Penny Patton wrote: Agreed. If someone wishes to sell no-mod that is their business. That said, if that is how they choose to run their business, I'll be taking my business elsewhere. However, it is my belief that many people choose to release no-mod due to some fundamental misunderstandings with regards to how SL works (see anyone who claims they only release no-mod to protect their content) or due to a belief that it will somehow negatively affect their salesand that's why I think this is a topic worth having a discussion about. Did you even comprehend my post that I typed out (even being more self-deprecating then I needed to be, but wanted to supply honesty for the sake of discussion), then you say it's about a 'fundamental misunderstanding of how SL works". Lady, you're only 1 out of 33000+ SL users - and that is your opinion. According to your blog, you state; "The best policy of course, is to avoid no-copy/no-mod content altogether and to encourage your favourite content creators to abandon bad, anti-consumer business practices which prevent you from getting the full value out of your virtual land". Huh? I build meshes and content so you can get the full value out of your land? Am I not doing that already by making an optimized mesh, optimized LOds, and optimized textures? Do I work for you now? Churning out meshes for pennies on the dollar so that you can use them to make money on your own sims? When did that license happen? I don't remember that anywhere! I thought I was making content for the average SL'ers to enjoy - products I wish were available to me when I started SL. How evil of me to only let the customer own 1 Copy of a specialized, supposed-to-be precious item! How dare I make a product(s) in appearance and function to only be a desktop/mantletop/tabletop ornament, but no! Penny thinks I should make it copy/mod so users can make it 20 stories tall if they want to!! Why not just use the product as intended? As a paperweight? On many products there is little to no point to HAVE mod permissions, it's unneeded, especially if the product is made to work with classic avatars, and already includes scripts for size adjustment, color and texture changes, and sitting or animation positions. How about if you don't like the existing sit animations (even though I see the same ones over and over), then don't buy the product? Don't call other marketers 'bad' or 'anti-consumerist" because you don't agree with how they like to license their products. And yes, it is a license to use a product. The price of a product is determinate on the end use of it. If I design a logo for a local band, knowing they are broke, I may only charge them $50 to help them out. However if it is a huge worldwide band, with plans and ability to sell millions around the globe I'm going to charge a much higher market rate. If logo is only on 100 t-shirts at a one-weekend event, the charge for the license is going to be much lower than licensing/selling a logo to a worldwide company who plans to sell 1000's of shirts monthly world wide. This is the condescension that is spoken of, the elitist mentality in SL that I rail most against. Top names and big sellers basically trashing others because they don't agree with their practices. Thats almost 'anti-competitive' by default. If you said that on these forums, noone would see the post because it would be removed. Stick it on a blog, out of LL's reach, and you're allowed to call creators 'bad' and 'anti-consumerist' The fact is, you have it in your opinion that nocopy/nomod content is undesirable - but that opinion only applies to YOU. If there is a concern of losing the item, that is EASILY solved by contacting the creator, or have LL put a REDELIVER button on the product page that could deal with that. No mod has reasons, both prideful,practically, creatively, commercially, and cleverly.. Both no copy and no mod can be used or not used to increase the percieved value and preciousness of a product. Therefore in itself is a marketing strategy, and A VALID ONE. I plan to make more 'collectible' products, in limited edition, similar to gacha.. some are going to have unique traits (once I can ramp up my production again once RL issues get out of the way). I have wonderful awesome plans, and many of them are going to include no copy, no mod content. And those plans don't include, nor need to, the ability to make the product 20 stories tall, or replaced with a crappy texture, and 'renaming' the item. It won't be because I am practicing 'bad' , 'anti-consumerist' actions in SL. I just don't serve the tastes that you prefer. I appreciate your opinion, and take it into consideration, as I always do, I just think you're missing a lot of potential in this, and denying valid reasons. Maybe I don't want your item rezzed on your land the way you like to use it. So what. Work around it. You're not entitled to nocopy/nomod just because you say so. I still have the no mod/ no copy amazing octopus table by the way, it's great (though loooking dated cuz its years later). I treat it carefully, and never had a problem. If I could it rez it any where I liked, with multiple copies, then retexture, and rename it how I see fit - IT WOULD NOT BE THE SAME PRODUCT. AT ALL. Note: I have products of varying permissions - I just don't want someone to be preaching that I am using 'bad practices' or 'anti consumerist' practices, so just like she may be 'educating' consumers about this, I'll 'educate' them of the other side of matters.

It's actually very easy, and skirts around the forum policies about advertising your product or store... 1) Create an alternate (known as a 'sock' as in puppet) account. 2) Create a post in the fashion forum or otherwise claiming you need help 'finding' an item you saw somewhere, used somewhere 3) Log into your main account (perhaps even another alt/sock account) and be very helpful by posting direct links to product listings on the Marketplace, or name-dropping others you would like to advertise (maybe even if it is your own) 4) Don't forget to do this daily. 5) Sarcasm. Understand what it is, and what makes this post so on-point, and great PS. Also, I found this wonderful jacket worn by this guy (include picture) that I saw at some club in SL, could anyone tell me what jacket it is, or who designed it, or what store I can go to and buy it? Thanks a bunch! :-D

Yikes, make sure you are logged into secondlife.com, and not another site that may have phished you. On a brand new install of Opera, secondlife.com and the marketplace are working fine with no errors, on my end. (installed it today to test for you). Have a nice day. arabellajones wrote: On what I have seen over the years, LL feels uncreative and stagnant. Maybe it's a sustained communications failure, but it keeps happening. Sure, some people will be working on Project Sansar, but it's feeling a bit late for people to still not be talking about it. If the Lindens can't cope with testing different web browsers, is Project Sansar going to be worth bothering with? They're not really doing anything to excite me. I'm concerned about Sansar's success. The trend is that VR will flop once again, for the usual reasons. Plenty of articles about it showing perhaps a spike in sales this Christmas, and then abandonment because of the typical issues that Killed VR, more of a gimmick like 3D tvs. Meanwhile, what works (SEcond Life) may be being left to the wayside, which would be a huge mistake. Plenty of things to do to improve SL and get users in long before Sansar will replace it. Good VR or as a poster stated "When they have holodecks like Star Trek, then maybe I might care" is still years away.

Sassy Romano wrote: VaIentine wrote: If a content creator works for days to fine tune a dress texture for a pice of mesh, and the sell it mod, the customer could then tint the dress to be matte black with no detail at all, or change it to a horrible color shade that would ruin the creators texture work. Or look at it the other way, the texturising person wasted time making textures that weren't met by the customer need. What a waste of time! This is my concern, or any other design decisions being made, like adding sit positions, animations, scripting or otherwise. I understand why a customer would love that freedom, but on my end, why bother doing all sorts of stuff, and doesn't this defeat the purpose in the end? If a creator isn't thinking "I'm making cool things" and instead shifts to "make things for ultimate user end use.." when did this change? When I started SL, it certainly wasn't the concern of creators back then. They made what they made, I modded what I wanted to mod - I didnt try to fix their out of scale furniture for example, I just didn't buy it. So now I'm faced with a challenge when considering releasing some new stuff. I had 5 designs in mind (texture-wise) for a product, and though none of them may appeal to the end user (how will I know what styles they want), I have to decide "do i bother making the custom/handpainted textures, or just unwrap the model, slap basic textures as a starting point and present it as-is?" Why spend time doing the cool flaming effect on a product, if it's just going to be replaced by some random texture? What happened to 'if it's not on the menu, it's not for dinner' and suddenly SL is an opensource project? Seems counter-intuitive to a creative person to do that, I guess it all depends what your end goals is, and what market you want to pander to. Bitsy Buccaneer wrote; Modding prim & sculpt builds, retexturing them, playing with prims and sculpts, and then texturing purchased full perm mesh were all vital steps on my road to creating original mesh. They got me thinking about creating. The person who wants to mod your no-mod table might be on a similar path. Is your artistic vision so precious you won't allow them that? No, it's not that precious, it just seems counter-intuitive. I guess we could all start releasing mesh only with no texturing, and start selling 'silhouettes' of things instead. Why put so much work on something that will likely change.. assuming most users of SL are mod hounds... It's just a shift in my thinking about end use in SL may be needed apparently. Or not

I agree with the practical aspects of modification and copy. I just think it very strange that someone would want to go to great lengths to change, hobble or rebuild a product they purchased because thats why they got it in the first place. It all depends on the goal of the creator I guess, and what the buyer feels entitled to. This is a virtual space, so the same logic applied to what is pretty much unlimited copies available of an item isn't the same. I'll have to self-assess a bit more to see what I really feel about this, and perhaps adjust my goals and expectations as far as sharing future creative pieces, and stick to more generic fare that people can customize themselves until the cows come home, and save the unique designs for other sites. Thanks for your reply though, some points I'll have to think about.

My response is in the context of non-clothing, non-avatar meshes, but I can offer reasons for no-mod, and be quite upfront about it. 1) Pride. I don't want my product torn apart and used as lego pieces. That was not the intent of creating the item, and I hoped people purchased the item because they liked it as is, and not as spare parts. 2) Design. It was designed as such, so why need mod? A nice octopus table I bought had no copy/ no mod on it, and I was fine with it.. How would I make it any prettier than it already was? Though copy would be nice for safety issues, I've owned several no-mod items and was fine with it. But that's why I bought them. cuz I liked how they looked, no need to change. 3) Integrity. Some products rely on scripting to operate properly, and really there is no reason to mod it. If its for resizing, a resize script can be added. Also, modding breaks animations and sit positions that are added that may not be adjustable after the fact. 4) My intent isnt to sell builders parts. Kind of the same as the above 3, but there is a lot of work that goes into mesh design, UVing, texturing, custom bakes perhaps, LOD creations which all seem moot if we put it up to be changed. As someone else stated, why go through all the work of concepting, meshing and texturing if the end use is to be changed (and defiled! ) anyway. 5) Percieved Value I don't like this trend for customers demanding no copy/ no mod. IN some ways, it cheapens the product that it can be replicated 100's of times across 100s of sims - like buying that beautiful Maserati in world, then cheapening it because you can replicate it 100 times at all your friends houses - rather than be parked in its single state at your inworld home. That octopus table, architects chair/table, club chair, etc that I bought in the past with no copy/no mod were special items to me and I looked after them likewise. Noone got to sit in that chair, that was MINE! It wouldnt be the same if I could just rez 10 of them for all to sit in. 6) Common sense Why does anyone expect to go buy a Maserati, then go home and copy mod it anyway? Does copy permissions exist in RL? Of course, the caveat is that these could be psychological weaknesses in myself, but I hoped to clarify why some creators may not like to do this - valid reasons or not. In the end, if I'm not happy and take pride in my products, and feel they are appreciated, I won't make anymore. So let's not get too demandy of them (demandy isnt a word, but who cares, it works )

In our false-scarcity, money-based, living-expenses system, I need copyright to protect my IP and income against others who would take it away from me, along with possible income that I need to survive. I've had IP stolen from me in the past from sounds, images and files, and though I may have the pride that they had to steal, and I still have a vast fountain to create new works regardless, it is little to no consolation to me when I live in a world where I rely on my IP, or work ethic in order to feed myself. In a world where I had a dedicated income, and no living expenses, perhaps I could and would be a little more lax with what I share with the world, as status would now be associated with craftsmanship and originality, and one's fame or success would be from the admiration of others who recognize it. It wouldn't matter if my living expenses were met, then I could dedicate my life full-time to making this world better for all involved. I'm very much an advocate for 'facilitating' others and removing barriers they may have from entry into things, be it education, software and livelihoods. Opensource applications, free education, even 'warez' is a public service imo, empowering those who may not have opportunity as others do. A system based on aptitude and attitude, rather than financial ability. However as long as greed and money run our system, the same system we hate we must contend with by protecting and sometimes hoarding our ideas, creative pursuits and IP - BECAUSE IF WE DON'T WE ARE HOMELESS.

My argument is not actually with you, and never is. I'm arguing about the meaning and application and understanding of this line in the guidelines, and I why I believe it doesn't cover what the OP states. We can agree and disagree, but this is not personal.

Nutria2016 wrote: What if you have legit criticism, and the vendor chooses to respond with "message me before you review" to a 4/5 stars review? Hold your ground, leave the review up, and if the seller attempts to harass, belittle, threaten or abuse you in IMs, just block them. I did say the same thing to a customer once "You should contact me before you review", but only because the beefs were about features that were not included in the product, and not about the product, it's usage or functionality. Only you know if your review is fair and ethical. If it is, don't be intimidated. Noone should expect a 5 star, since there is probably always something that could be improved. This is probably why the majority of customers don't leave reviews, as it opens up the possibility of conflict or drama, which most of us could live without. Personally, I always try to do my best, but since I'm a perfectionist, I have to force myself to release something, so I will probably be more aware of shortcomings (real or imagined), so no review is going to surprise me.

By your logic, then an inworld 'discount' or 'sale' is anti-competitive (against noone), and is now 'inflating' a price on the SLMP. This means LL would need to automatically delist thousands of products today who are doing this now. If anything this needs to be looked at, as I simply don't see the harm to anyone to do this, as this is a regular practice in RL, and done without any malicious intent, but as incentives for people to shop inworld. So either LL needs to change the guidelines, clarify the guidelines, or ban a whole swath of products instead of picking on tiny little stores (that probably did it by accident or ignorance) yet ignoring the top (and huge sellers) who are doing it today. If you didn't want to converse about this, then you didnt need to reply at all.

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'.