Rick Nightingale

mental gymnastics

This is the simplest solution. Log into your website account from a web browser and OK it there. Simple.

Dungeons in Venice are SOGGY.

Tuesday afternoon (The Moody Blues)

That reminds me of something I wanted to do with an expensive formal dinner jacket and trousers I was thinking of buying, but didn't (for reasons that will become clear). It was from a well-known maker who's been recommended on this forum before. The jacket had open and buttoned options. If you ('you' as in anyone reading this) know etiquette, you'll get that it should be opened when seated and buttoned when standing; if I recall correctly it even had the correct button fastened. The jacket had a HUD to switch between the alpha states. Perfect, and exactly what I was looking for, except for the usual issue... It was no-mod and the only way to switch states was to use the HUD. I wanted to script it (like I have other items) so that when I sat, it automatically unbuttoned and vice versa. I contacted the maker's CS (the maker was clear they did not want to be contacted by customers directly), said how much I liked the jacket, and explained what I wanted to achieve. I asked if I could either have a mod version of the fatpack (which was hugely expensive - I only wanted one colour but that would counter the fear of the dreaded tinting to save buying another tint), or at least be told the channel and command to change the state so I could add the commands to a script in my own utility HUD that I wear. I even offered to give them the script I wrote for inclusion with the item, free of charge. The response was not very polite and certainly made sure I never even visited the store again, let alone bought the item. An unfortunately common response I've had over the years from those who knee-jerk to no-mod perms.

Self preservation

Romantic partner

Oh... that brings back memories. Not saying anything more than that!

My wife (and I) really miss Elven Elder. Not as prolific a maker as some of the bigger clothing brands, but he made top-quality, Italian inspired (I believe) fashion. Everything was well made with obvious care and attention, and Elven Elder was a very approachable and helpful creator. My wife was really sad the day he announced he was leaving, a year or so ago. (I think she had a bit of a soft spot for him 😍) Edit to add: EE's jeans are in one of the few remaining outfits of my wife's that keep her using the original Lara. Wish we could have them for LX.

...while imitating nightingales' genteel SONGS.

Nonsense. I'm not in conflict with the TOS - be careful what you accuse. The terms refer to ownership of the assets; it even says IPR. You are confusing ownership of a real-world digital asset (and the 'rights' that accompany that ownership) with 'owning' something within the SL 'world'. I feel it's an attempt to throw off the argument because you cannot satisfactorily justify no-mod perms; your arguments for it almost entirely boil down to "because I want to and I can". I'm not in a battle; I'm discussing something on a forum, as are you. To answer your point though, while LL has chosen to allow the ability to set mod perms, it is those users in SL setting them on products they sell that cause the problem. LL in no way forces or even encourages you to set no-mod on a product. Only sellers choose to do that (or not), taking advantage of an imperfect system to impose their will on others; to have their cake and eat it while the consumers are firmly limited as nothing more than that... consumers of your product. I would say that LL should have made a better system (for both sides of the argument), and still should look at it especially with all the changes being made. They won't; we both know that. Just because you can, doesn't make it right. ------- Why do I even bother having this discussion...? My hope is that others reading it, who might become content creators, will get a clue and make their stuff modifiable for the benefit of us all; themselves included. I've never for a moment thought it would convince anyone already set in their ways to change. And with that... unless anyone says anything particularly interesting or new, I'm out. Again 🤣

You do exactly that, simply by setting no-mod on the product. So, you will only allow the customer to do what you want. They own the product, they bought it, why should you have the right to still behave as if you own it and limit what they can do with it? It comes down to your selfish desires to maintain your ownership of something, while still being able to sell it to others for money. It's a 'have your cake and eat it' situation and in the current system, you get to do exactly that. You keep using that sort of phrase. No-one here has once 'demanded' 'full access' - phrasing it that way is trying to paint those wanting mod perms in a bad light, by making out they are 'demanding' something unacceptable. Mod perms is not 'full access'. It's both. I believe in empowering people and freedom. I find that incompatible with no-mod and being controlled and limited by someone else's views on what I can and cannot do* with things I own, just because they want to and have been given the ability by an imperfect system. *Within limits of reason, like not illegal copying etc., just to forestall that diversionary argument.

Earlier in the thread I mentioned trouble in a group when someone suggested modding their clothing. Just for reference, the two people mostly saying it did not even realise that it was possible to have mod permissions on clothing. They believed what they had been told; that fitted mesh simply could not be modified. They were merely saying how nice it would be if things could be slightly tinted to match other items they had. The whole furore that ensued took them completely by surprise, as did being told by some that is was indeed possible, just was being refused by the maker. I find that sad, and frankly unacceptable, that the no-mod culture amongst many sellers is so strong that there are SL users that are not even aware there is an alternative because of the sellers' propaganda. I've had related experiences in another store group, where on two occasions that I can recall I've helped people mod something, when they did not even know it was possible to do so. That was a store that has always sold their things (clothing, rigged avatar accessories, all sorts of stuff) with mod permissions. Even in that group there were people totally unaware that it was possible to modify their items to their liking without being limited by a HUD.

I first tried to do it when I had only been in SL a couple of years, had just got my first patch of mainland, had never made anything beyond a few prims and I don't think Blender even existed, but already understood how important mod perms were. Not sure there is an average SL user, but I certainly wasn't in any way exceptional.

Class action

Well, redistributing (Transfer perms) is a different kettle of cod altogether to mod perms. Regardless of that... Your use is a perfect example of an appropriate use of No-Mod in my view: You're giving it away, not selling a product to customers. I do the same with occasional Christmas gifts and the like. It's your thing; your photo album with your pictures that you are providing; not an album for others to use as theirs.

Tigers also consume oryx STEAK

Yes... all of which takes money! Whether it's sourced inside SL or outside, it's money to buy what you want to do what you want to do. Same as everyone here.

Gold rings are so precious JEWEL

Fantastic! So... I can add PBR metals to the old-fashioned baked metal effects, which even by simply dropping on a basic metal PBR texture to that face gives a much improved visual and matches the rest of the furniture in my room. OH, no, I can't, because your script didn't account for a new rendering scheme and additional options. Or the hair that still suffers alpha glitching when all I need to do is make the centre prim in it transparent to work with the recently introduced alpha sorting in the viewers to mitigate glitching. Nope. No-mod, because why would I ever need to, and the script in it didn't account for that??? But of course, nothing else will ever change that a script can't account for now, will it??? And yeah... as to AV Sitter... that's just nonsense. I modify it all the time both with the built in and available utilities and manually; after all, it's open source - the epitome of modifiable. I've even modified the scripts to integrate better with Experiences so I can use the furniture better, after replacing the older AVS scripts in that modifiable furniture with more modern scripts. I've frequently moved animations to fit with adjusted furniture, just by using AV sitters' own menus, which anyone can do with trivial ease. Thus I can continue to use and enjoy what I bought to the best advantage. Kudos to you for trying to make things easier for some purchasers to modify by scripting it (I do the same with rezzing&relinking HUDs to automatically reconfigure mesh options, colour tinting HUDs and texture changers... on my modifiable items)... but that in no way can ever mitigate applying no-modify permissions. We do not live in a locked down, No-Mod Second Life world. SL itself is in continual flux, so making your stuff No-Mod goes against SL itself by preventing it from being adjusted to suit those SL changes. (Oops, I said I was staying out of this thread. Better run before someone cleverly calls me out on that.)

One of the best input devices ever for camming around; also Blender.

Soap on a pole... SLIPS

How clever you are - and it shows the exact sort of attitude that I'm leaving the thread for before I'm tempted to stoop that low myself 🙄 Now I'll stop wasting my breath typing fingers ☠️

I'm not asking for 'unlimited access' - please don't broaden the point to things I haven't said. If I want unlimited access I'll buy the .blend file when available. We're talking about the simple ability to modify what we buy within the abilities provided by the platform and allowed by LL. Just because LL has given the ability for makers to set no-mod permissions does not make it blanket-acceptable to do so and we should just shut up and accept it. Anyway... as always, these discussions just end up feeling like banging one's head against an unmoving 'we have the right to restrict your rights because we can and you are just being unreasonable wanting to modify my perfect creation and how dare you criticise me for it' wall. I'm out.

Your own statement in the previous post: flies in opposition to Sounds like you are a fan of things like buying a license to use a product only in accordance with the sellers wishes, rather than actually owning the product you bought. In that, we certainly do disagree, and I disagree strongly, and have every right to say so here.