Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About ShelbyBeu

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In my OP I mentioned, kind of in a small aside, gachas in a way that was meant to show I recognized they were an exception. Many people enjoy them, and they don't really work with Copy, so there's a good reason for them to be No Copy. I even pretty clearly conceded that I saw a decent reason for things like furniture and radios to be No Copy, though I'll go for a Copy version if I can-- but I understand the logic in making those No Copy. It's clothes/skins/animations, things that even if Copy can't be used multiple times as long as No Trans, and that also aren't Gachas, that were the topic of my OP-- really clothes set it off, but I see some of those on the others as well.
  2. Then make the animation non-transferable, which I prefer a whole lot more. I can't tell people what they can or cannot buy. I can try to persuade people not to buy No Copy, both so they don't lose their item with no way to get it back and to, in my opinion, improve what is offered. I understand your point. I was more interested when I wrote the rant in getting potential customers to listen. If enough won't buy No Copy, nearly everything would at the least have a Copy version, especially items only worthwhile on oneself. I was also angry at seeing No Copy clothes, because I don't see a good reason for them, so I was less than purely rational in what I wrote. I then think I wrote calmer posts after that, and I also don't think I was the only one who in this thread wrote an overheated post. At bottom, I want to improve the market, and while my methods may not have been the most effective, and some might believe (though I really don't get the point of view) that if I got what I wanted it would not improve the market; but the anger directed by some was, I think, uncalled for-- even toward my initial rant. But if a creator goes No Copy just because they didn't like the tone of my rant, that person is behaving the worst of anyone. If someone complains about a practice, they may not convince you so you may ignore the complaint; but you don't decide to mess up your business if you make Copy items by stopping the practice because you don't like that someone ranted against No Copy-- after all, I'm encouraging people to buy from that creator, whose items are Copy-- or if you do, you really deserve unkind feedback, worse than any even in my first rant.
  3. In order: Correct. What set me off was having to pass up some otherwise good clothing due to perms I consider ridiculous in clothing. Agreed that if you don't check the perms that isn't the creator's fault, but a lot of people don't even realize perms are important so lose items because they bought no copy. I want then for them to realize the perms are more at fault than they are for "mishandling" the item, so maybe instead of thinking they'd better be more careful with the item itself they just will buy Copy in the future. One of my goals was to increase the number who shared my ideas, whether or not that was the actual effect. I'd like to win over those who can change it, who foremost are the buyers. If enough stopped buying No Copy, at least for must-be-in-inventory items, sellers will stop setting those perms. I also want to win over the creators as well, let them know they do lose some sales to being No Copy.
  4. And is it wrong for me to try to improve the market by pointing out that a I strongly believe a business practice is bad and should not be supported, and also to point out that any No Copy item can very easily be lost, and you have to hope the creator has the good will to replace it, and that even if they do there's a good chance there will be significant inconvenience finding them, since they do have real lives and you likely do as well, and you may not even always be sure they're still part of SL? I still wouldn't say it's that awful of a business practice if it's something that can, if copied, be used in many places, so I limited to items on the person. Due to the loss risk I'd rather avoid No Copy entirely, but there's more reason for it in things like furniture. I think people should avoid things like No Copy furniture due to the risk of loss, but only that. I think people should avoid No Copy clothing and the like not only due to the risk of loss but also to possibly try to make the SL market better. The more sales that can be lost by denying Copy permissions, especially on items that only one person can use at once, the better I think the market will be. I think on items like that the creator often hasn't even thought it through, maybe doesn't know anyone is out there who avoids items due to those permissions, and maybe don't realize extra copies of things that must be in the user's inventory don't hurt them, not having thought it through. Maybe some buyers have lost items due to No Copy and think it's their own fault, where even if they screwed up to lose it, a lot of the fault is the creator's setting No Copy. If anyone in those situations changes their minds in what I consider a positive way, I'm glad I posted. If instead, as someone posted, it causes an opposite reaction and someone is so scummy as to think just to spite me they'll start going No Copy, I hope they lose a lot of business for it, but maybe then I should have just stayed away from No Copy myself and told people in game, but not posted.
  5. I'd rather be able to modify everything, and I'm not happy that some creators to ban it, but most furniture can be modified and most non-mod clothes have huds or a number of color choices. So that isn't what I decided to post about. Can anyone give me any reasonable reason though why someone would make clothes, animations, or skins no copy instead of no transfer? I'm not even talking so much about household items, which at least the case can be made that they're stopping an estate owner from giving use of them to all who rent or something. Not that I like it then, but at least I see the other side. But those that only work if they're in my inventory, no excuse, period. The only excuse I can imagine is that they think I want to resell them and would rather have transfer. Uh...no. If it's a gift I'll buy it as a gift. If I plan to wear it myself, I can't imagine a time I'll want to resell it. And if I did want to, it's only worth anything if I undersell what they charge, so they should prefer to give me copy instead. So no reasonable reason.
  6. BUT, when people create with No Copy that limits the selection for those who want copy, and with clothes/skins/animations there's no excuse for it. I don't even like it with other items, but those that could be used other placed at least I understand why. So I'm doing all I can, trying to convince people not to buy items like that, which will lead creators to feel they must give Copy perms.
  7. I dislike No Copy anything, and generally won't buy No Copy given a decent Copy alternative. It's very, very easy to lose them and you have to rely on the good will of the seller to replace them. The seller also has a real life and may not be on when you want it replaced, so even if that person had good will, it may be hard to find the seller. But with most items at least I understand why they might be No Copy. Nearly all (maybe absolutely all) SL radios are No Copy, and I decided I'd buy one rather than keep trying to get the music stream on my little parcel that I wanted, despite having to buy No Copy. As the maker explained to me, there's a reason for it, which is that estate owners could buy one Copyable radio and put it in dozens of apartments or something. I still will buy Copy if I can, and I think everyone should. But with items like that, at least there is some logic. I was in a clothing store today, with decent clothing. I might have purchased something, except it was all No Copy, and they were not gachas. There is zero excuse for that, and I wouldn't buy No Copy clothing if it were 99% of SL clothing. I'd buy from the 1% then that was Copy. The only argument for No Copy, besides gachas which some have fun with, is that multiple copies might be in use at a time if it's something an estate owner could put in multiple estates. But as long as it's No Transfer, I can't do that with clothing I buy anyway. I could have 50 copies but could only wear one, or wear all 50 and look stupid. No Transfer is enough to make sure I don't give away or sell 50 copies. That goes also for skins, animations, and many other things that must be on the person to be useful. All you do when you make something like that No Copy is to introduce the risk of losing it, which easily can happen and if you replace it inconvenience yourself to do that, and if you don't then have an upset customer who bought the product but can't use it. Most makers of things that must be on the person realize this and make their items Copy, thankfully. But if you don't, you will lose sales, you should lose sales, and in fact for clothing and the like you should get zero sales because there's no reason for No Copy at all. I also dislike No Mod unless there's a hud with many textures available, but that's a different issue. I'm a lot less likely to buy something I can only get in one color that can't be changed, but it's not as extreme as with No Copy absolutely meaning No Sale with on-person items. I also with most things like furniture and decor can find Copy items, most of which can be modified as well, and will prefer them also, and I encourage others to buy Copy/Mod there if they can, but again it's not as extremely simple. I realize there are two sides there. But there is no reason for any on-person items, that one must have on herself to work, to be No Copy, and all I can do is post to let sellers know they lose sales if they do that and to help buyers see that buying those items encourages a ridiculous restriction and, like all No Copy, takes a significant risk of loss of what you bought.
  • Create New...