JadusBatmanglij

I don't think LL ever make an argument for common good here. If they go that way, it could be on shaky grounds as the amount of people participate in gacha is very large, money going into it and into reselling market is also very large, and the common good here is for people to continue to have fun and decide how and when to spend their own money. (True also for those who decide this to be addictive and decide not to spend the money) Also, I do never want to give LL the power to decide what is 'good' for me. (Gov't is another case but off topic), nor I think LL is approaching it that way. I do see that they are responsible business trying to operate lawfully while making a profit for providing service to customers. I think the issue is which specific gov't law from which countries that we must be complied with and what exactly the law said.

I don't buy the argument of taking advantage of human nature of many! TV, FB, all my snacks in the kitchen are taking advantage of human nature too. I will just walk away myself, but I have no place to tell what others what to do, and I will not stop it for others, cos one day, they will stop something I really like too.

Can't agree more, and it will be most helpful if the lab can provide more transparency on its legal challenges so that perhaps community together can find a solution by making adjustments? I don't like to gamble, but in real life there are a lot of serious and legal transactions much much larger than 75L where chances are involved and that adults just have to assess risks and decide to participate or not and be responsible for their own decisions. I am not suggesting gambling is the issue here, as I am not clear what it means by 'change of regulatory climate...'. My other opinion is that I do not want my decision on what I buy/participate to be taken away because some people get addicted to something. I shiver when I see many comments like that here. LL is a private company providing such wonderful platform to us and, have their rights to decide what services to offer to their customers. However, I do not want people to decide for me based on what they think is good or bad for ME. Those are the job of the parents and love ones who are there to protect people who cannot control themselves, or intellectually or emotionally weaker than normal adults. IMHO, we should not overload LL on moral responsibilities, those should be left alone for adult players to decide. I will be very sad if someone decided to take away my jar of peanut butter or stop me from using my physics at strip clubs because feeling good itself is addictive and therefore not good for me. Most civilized countries put warning labels to alert people about harm and side effects, or require 18+ to access but not to ban, because they know people will be sad and angry if you take away their fun suddenly. Finally, I don't play gacha a lot, but I had fun with it. The scheme motivates creators to make many beautiful and fun things. If Ebbe is still around, I think he would agree too. Now I realize much was done in the background, just to let us have fun. Miss him and feeling sad...

"Due to a changing regulatory climate, we’ve had to make the difficult decision to sunset a very popular sales mechanism for content in Second Life" Anyone know what regulation is being referred to here? Or this is a matter of LL internal policy change ? Are they planning to shut down California State Lottery ?