Styxx Starchild

I for one will not be allowing these vendors to operate in Sims I manage nor in events I operate. I will also cheer my heart out when we get another "Hey y'all gotta take down your predatory gambling machines again, and once more you have 30 days to do it! Good luck finding another loophole!" Let alone, watch all the same entitled creators scramble find another new cash cow.

Thanks for your money then, I guess.

Ironically this is also deemed and poor for people's mental health and also adds nothing to the argument against Gachas or the Conveyer System. The bottom line is we're talking about RNG (Randomly generated Numbers) and transactions that involve a monetary value.

So, are you paying L$100 every time you post, like, comment? No? Are we all randomly getting a chance at posting/commenting/liking anything in this thread or elsewhere? Nope! There is the difference, we are freely engaging without limits and without a cost. Playing Second Life, being on the internet and engaging with others is not the bad thing and it's inept of you to compare the two. The topic at hand is creators grasping vigoursly at straws to continue to exploit a broken system, stop trying to defend it if you do not have conclusive evidence. I think I may just start compiling a spreadsheet of my sales from the last seven or so years for some infographics from a "small" creator.

Additionally, those who spend a majority of their free time on internet are highly likely to have mental illness. This is not a negative thing, I have ADHD/Anxiety/Depression and am medicated for these ailments. I would argue a majority of Second Life’s player base is struggling mental illness, especially since the Pandemic. The pandemic has brought so many people to Second Life, both returning and new. To have any system that continues to predate upon individual mental illness is morally and ethically bankrupt. Designers who insist upon selling Items in a predatory way should be transparent with their earnings. I am aware of several individuals who bragged to have made $10,000 USD in a span of 30 days off of Gachas. No, I will not name names for privacy reasons and I do not see any reason for these individuals to fabricate these numbers. It appears those creators who are advocating for the conveyer system are more than happy to predate on their customers.

I had excluded this information because it may easily identify the customer and I am not going to share their personal information. There are 18 items in total: 1-10 being common at 7 Caspervend Tickets Common Chance: 7.07% (10 Items) 11-15 being uncommon at 4 Caspervend tickets and Uncommon Chance: 4.04% (5 items) 16-18 being rare at 3 Caspervend Tickets. Rare: 3.03% (3 Items) In turn the customer got every item with the exception of item 16 and 17 which are classified as Rare. My rarity chances were based on the Caspertech Calculations: https://wiki.casperdns.com/index.php/CasperVend_2/Gacha I've attached my formula calculation sheet below and included the formula I use. X = Percent Chance | Y = Item Amount | Z = Caspervend Ticket Settings Z = (X / Y)*100 Also, I assume they were exasperated and caved in and just purchased the fatpack, I don't think it was by accident as there are two buttons on the "PAY OBJECT" menu, and it's on the far right. They would've had to have quite the stretch and I likely would have had a very angry instant message.

The issue is there are plenty of opportunities to make sales without being predatory. Bottom line is Gachas/Conveyer Systems or any system that is designed to directly create a dopamine response to addictive levels should be regulated. There is also a vast difference to being addicted to gambling and being addicted to playing a game versus a game/system that is directly designed to predate on people. Second Life wasn't created to continuously produce dopamine based on random factors to squeeze the most money out of people. Second Life was designed as a creative and open world experience to meet and develop relationships. Second Life first and foremost will always be place of social hijinks and creativity. In Summary: The design/structure of the environment or influencing factor is the mindset behind it. Gachas and the conveyer belt system and/or any other systems that are designed to recreate a gambling are predatory. They are predator because their intent is to maximize profits and user spending, they are not made with any other intent aside from producing a cashflow and taking advantage of those who may have an addiction or are more compulsive than others.

They probably should be updated to a rarity of 20%, but overall that's what we have now. As for adapting the rules to the conveyer belt, the other big issue with this "new" process is that it is likely to be banned too. Creators pushing for this system are just trying to put a Band-Aid on their income-hit. We'll be right back at square one, with people attempting to find work-arounds only for them to be highly likely to be considered illegal later. The biggest issue is that creators need to go back to their old ways and let this die with dignity and be thankful gachas were allowed for far longer than they should have been.

If they ever mess something up I'm usually willing to help out, accidents happen.

I am well aware but that doesn't take the predatory nature out of it. I'm honestly not sure why you're arguing if you want to by Gachas do so, but for others that have a dependency on them - they need to be regulated or removed. In my most recent Gachas I set them to fair play so duplicated purchases are less likely and I have strict standards for how I set their rarity. Please see below my following requirements, I wrote these for an event I own and operate named [Mod]ify. I created these rules in the spirit of fairness and created any new gacha with them in mind so I would be compliant with our own rules for the event. Clearly we will no longer needs these rules since gachas are banned, but the point stands. Advertisements & Display Images 1.) All machines must be clearly marked - meaning they must show all items on their advertisement image. 2.) Vendors must number or utilize an identification system on their advertisements to properly portray what can be won. Vendors must put a "total number" of items on the advertisement. Ex: "This machine contains # items!!" 3.) Vendors must properly display their rarity chances. Customers must be able to see and access percentage chances. In Caspervend uncheck the "Disable "Prizes" button on the touch menu. If you are not using Caspervend, you must use a system that properly displays accurate percentage chances. General Standards All gacha machines, both new and old must abide by the following rules: 1.) All items in every gacha machine must be sold with modify permissions enabled. *Excluding scripts. 2.) Each gacha machine may contain no more than 50 items. 3.) All machines must be no more than L$100 PER play. 4.) All machines must be original content - prefabricated content will not be allowed. 5.) Rarities levels are limited to: Common, Uncommon, and Rare. 6.) Fatpacks must be sold for each gacha machine at the event. 7.) All items should work and be functional as stand-alone products. Fatpack Guidelines All fatpacks for gacha machines must abide by the following: 1.) Include all items advertised in the gacha, all rarities should be contained within the fatpack. 2.) Fatpack permissions on gachas must be Modify / Copy / No Transfer. 3.) Use a provided formula to calculate their final price fatpack. A(B*2)=X, formula as explained below. Fatpack Pricing Formula *Note: Fatpack pricing is allowed to be lower than the calculated price of the machine. Formula Base: A ( B * 2 ) = X X = Fat Pack Value. A = Items in Machine. B = Price Per Play. C = (Y*2) Example: X= ? || A = 50 || B = 100 ( 100 * 2 ) = 200 50 * 200 = L$10,000 Rarity Levels Gacha machines can have up to three rarity levels. Drop Chance || Level 1.) Common || 60% 2.) Uncommon || 30% 3.) Rare || 10%

Those fatpacks are worth the price and I for one have bought a couple of their fatpacks. In the end it's still more affordable than continuously gambling on the chance to get the item you want as illustrated in my example a few pages back. I'll attach the below again. This customer played my gacha 47 times in the span of 5 minutes before purchasing the fatpack. So they essentially spent 50% more than the amount they could have just purchased the fatpack for - which they still purchased in the end. Some people do struggle with gambling it is an addiction/disease and the amount of pushback from creators endorsing predatory systems clearly shows us they have a vested interest in taking advantage of that.

All of my products are Copy and Modify unless they are a Gacha. If the items are a Gacha they are Modify/Transfer unless I have used a voucher system for redemption. Redeemable Gachas are transferable but once you collect the item they become no copy/modify/no transfer. For some items HUDs are available, for most it all just comes in a bundle and you can click through it, it really depends on the nature of the item.

I didn't miss the part where you can sell or trade the copies, however you may have missed the part where I stated I include fatpack versions for L$3,000 - so all content is accessible without the need to trade or gamble. Though I may be the only one of several creators that do this it is still an option. I personally do not see a lot of return value on reselling Gachas, a majority of users resell them anywhere from 50%-90% off their original values just to get cash back. That is of course unless they got a rare, which they then markup to usually L$1000 or more. Additionally using my redacted customer for example - this would mean they must attempt to sell all 47 copies of my gacha that they purchased for the same amount. Other customers will be doing this as well and resellers tend to undercut each other by a significant amount. So why buy from the reseller if they don't have a rare unless its an item you really wanted, they will likely come directly to my stall/store and take a risk themselves OR they'll see that I have a fatpack and skip playing the gacha completely.

@Patch Linden My apologies for @ing you but I feel like this new Gacha System needs to be re-reviewed, please review my text above and I will elaborate further below. Creators have a vested interested in retaining predative ways to generate profits, I am guilty of this as well, but I am also a strong advocate against predatory practices. Since gachas have been deemed illegal, our customers are not stupid and can clearly see this is yet another crash grab, leaving a horrible impression not only of those advocating for it - but Linden Labs as well for allowing/approving this new predatory tactic. My confusion with this whole ordeal comes from this idea that randomization has been "removed" from the conveyer system - when it hasn't. Instead, our userbase will be not buying a product that they want or ever intended to purchase, but instead a chance to pay for the item they wanted, via a system that is randomly generated to work against the buyer. For regular residents/non-creators I am going to include a brief example of my most recent Gacha. This infographic attached below is a single user, but there were several others who paid over L$3,000 Linden Dollars - roughly $15.00 USD for a chance to pull one of the items they were hoping to win. With my most recent gachas I generally include a version that's 15$-25% off the price you'd pay if you got "lucky" enough to pull all of the items in the machine just once (which is very rare and will also be just as rare in the "new" conveyer system). In summary the image below, setting a USD - L$ Ratio of $1.00 per L$250, one customer spent $4,700 to play my gacha a total of Forty-Seven (47); a little under $20.00 USD. The fatpack for this gacha was L$3,000, or about $15.00 USD. The average number of duplicates being around 3 for this customer. With the conveyer system, this would be the same apart from a customer knows what they are getting. Even so, customers will STILL try to get the item when they know what they can/could get. There have been plenty of studies on gambling mechanics and consumers continuously choose the most easily perceived route to their goal - in this case another chance at winning the big one. Additionally, please note that it took five (5) minutes for this customer to spend $30.00 USD; for non-creators these points should illustrate just why some creators are trying to fight this ban so hard. It's not about the fun, it's not about creating better experiences - it's about generating a cash flow. Creators are aware of how profitable these machines are, but I don't think the public knows just how much. *EDIT For clarity, this customer ended up purchasing the fatpack after 47 attempts, thus they spent $4,700 + L$3,000 for the fatpack - a grand total of L$7,700 ($30.00 USD).

I can assure you from the circles I am in, this is most defiantly not the case. I feel for the creators that need gachas to pay their bills, but employing an addictive practice unto their customers is not the Hill to die on.

Exactly, it's disturbing it is even being considered as allowable. The only difference is what you're gambling for, you're still not getting what you want either which way. Though they understand the law/regulations at the moment, they should also look into the future. Gachas have always been gambling but they skirted the rules because you didn't lose - you always win, just not what you want. So to avoid another situation like this Gacha ban, it'd be much easier to do a blanket ban, elsewise we'll be having this same conversation a few months/years later down the line - because these two systems are same process. It's all gambling, in one you're gambling for the item, in another your gambling for the chance to pay for the item. Doesn't seem all that appealing does it? Precisely, which leaves a very bad taste in my mouth; both as a creator and a customer. The whole idea is gross/predatory and will likely come to a head as just as Gachas are now. People need to boycott these systems if/when they come out - otherwise its just a rebranded Gacha Epidemic.

Thank you, this is literally why my blood has been boiling. From what I have noticed those that create gachas tend not to create store releases or stand-alone items. Their stock is likely entirely based off of using gachas to predate on their customers as some sort of cash cow. This new "conveyer system" is just the same as Gacha but reversed. Even though a customer may know what they are getting - they do not know what they might be getting next. This does not take the gambling out of the machine, instead it just retroactively reversed the process and created extra steps and increased the potential for abuse and customer infighting. TLDR: Customers may KNOW what they are getting, but they do NOT KNOW what they are getting NEXT - still gambling. In other words, instead of gambling for a chance at random item, they are gambling for a chance to have a chance to buy the intended item. Eventually I am sure there will be a law against this as well so I have no idea why Linden Labs would clear this.