Phil Deakins

Any circumventing of the perms system that's against the ToS is concerned with bypassing or changing the perms of another person's items. It's nothing to do with setting perms on your own items. Setting perms to no-copy, no-mod and no-trans is perfectly in keeping with the ToS. It's not for any user to say that, "if LL had wanted... etc.". Imo, LL made the perms in the Edit box the way they did simply because they thought that would be how they were wanted and, on the whole, they were right. I'd still like to know exactly what the item is but I suppose, unless the OP says what it is, I'm not going to know. A general point: Selling traffic-gaming systems, and owning them, is not against the ToS. It's the gaming of traffic (actually doing it) that's against the ToS.

I don't doubt your experience for a second, but I'm puzzled as to how you not having anything visible caused you to be what sounded like lag-free. Your viewer still has to download all the other avs, their movements, etc. etc., just like it has to when you're clothed.

Rosemaery Lorefield wrote: I haven't read ahead, but in case no one else explained what the product is, it's a sploder ball. It's against TOS, maker had a work around, but got called out, changed his product and now users of the (against TOS) product are pissed. Are you sure it's a sploder? I'd just read all the OP's posts before I saw you'd posted, and there's no indication as to what the item is. There's a clue for anyone who knows the item well enough. He said that the creator had stopped the original version that he bought from working, and had forced users to either upgrade or call it a day with the product. Anyone who is familiar with the product, or has read about it, would probably recognise that history.

Hippie Bowman wrote: 1919 – Edward George Honey first proposes the idea of a moment of silence to commemorate The Armistice of World War I, which later results in the creation of Remembrance Day. In the United States it was called Armistice Day and is now Veterans Day. When I was young, the whole country (UK) stopped for a 2 minutes silence each year at the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month (the time and date when the armistice was signed). Cars/transport/pedestrians stopped in the streets - everything stopped. I've often thought it a shame that that tradition ended.

16 wrote: this one i think http://tracker.vudu.sl/ if you go to the places on the list and click the device then can get free money off them Is that the thing you described earlier in the thread? Where you do your "shift" in a place and you get paid at the end of it?

But what does it do exactly? A question for everyone: Is that cones system still operating? I've forgotten exactly what it did but we did have an excellent thread aboiut it some years ago.

It hasn't been clear what the product is that the OP was talking about. Apparently some people know what it, or assume they do, is but I don't. The actual subject of this thread is permissions. My 'camping' post wasn't about that either. I am interested to know exactly what the product is. Perhaps you, or someone, will describe it. It isn't necessary to name it. I'm only interested in what it does.

Penny Patton wrote: Seriously? You're not familiar with Amazon.com or how it changed retail? It's kind of a big deal. I know Amazon, of course. I buy from them. But I read your "post-Amazon.com world" as meaning that Amazon was in the past. It could have meant either. I'm not aware that Amazon changed retail though. I don't think it did. It may have helped towards the increase in online shopping but it didn't cause it. Also, you're just plain wrong about there not being growing amount of business occuring on xStreet and OnRez. I know personally from first setting up my accounts on those sites in 2005-2006 until LL bought them out, more and more of my business came from them. Before LL bought them out, having a presence in in-world malls was becoming unnecessarily redundant. Like a lot of merchants, I'd drawn down my in-world presence to a single main store and one or two strategically placed satellite shops in popular club/RP sims well before LL bought out OnRez and xStreet for exactly that reason. I don't think I'm wrong about there not being an "in-progress transition" towards Xstreet and OnRez. Perhaps it existed for some sellers but not for others. For instance, a small store that also sold on them, and that couldn't get seen very well in SL, could easily find that it's are selling more and more on them than in the store, but that would be a skewed perspective. Similarly, a large store that also sold on them, and that could get seen in SL, could easily find that sales on them were tiny compared to the store, which may also be a skewed perspective. The judgement would have been very subjective. I didn't see any trend towrds them, so I don't think there was one. You think there was, but neither of us can show anything one way or the other. We only have opinions based on what we personally saw. I saw no trend, whereas you apparently did. I had a very big store. I don't know what you had back then - small enough for external sales to be significant? As far as I'm concerned, there was no trend towards external shopping that was noteworthy enough for LL to see it and decide to get on it. LL's decision was solely about skimming a cut of the massive sales in SL, imo.

Couldbe Yue wrote: Considering the sheer frustration of inworld compared to the easy money of the marketplace, anyone who thinks of setting up inworld as anything but a ego boost these days is borderline mad. It just isn't cost effective for most. Even at 30% commission, the marketplace will offer better returns for most people than tier. Sad but true. You may have a point but, personally, I've never found any frustrations with my inworld store. Perhaps you mean the tiny stores that are trying to grow bigger. It makes perfect sense for them to open up in the marketplace and not in SL. But the thing about the marketplace is that it's never been anything but broken and frustrating for sellers, (I'm going by the threads in the Merchants sub-forum because I've never used it), and right now it's broken worse than ever. The frustrations with it are enormous. I sometimes read in that sub-forum and think that all the sellers who went to the marketplace are suffering the frustrations because they followed LL like sheep, allowing LL to take their money. Yes I know that, once LL started unscrupulously plugging the marketplace everywhere they could, they felt they had to get on board, because others would and did. But they still look like sheep who were led to the slaughter, and they've been getting the huge frustrations ever since. More now than ever, but it's always had frustrations. On the other hand, the only frustration that an SL store comes with is making tier but that's only for tiny stories. The frustrations associated with the marketplace are for all sellers there. I'd rather have the single store frustration than the myriad of marketplace frustrations.

Penny Patton wrote: You misunderstood a statement I made and argued against what you thought I said. Any misunderstanding on my part is justifiable because it was clear what I said so there was no reason for me to believe you meant something entirely different. All this spinning and jabbing are just digging your hole deeper. I'm only digging deeper because I'm trying to catch you up. I'm too gentlemanly to leave a lady on her own down there in the dark where you are I already said I misunderstood what you wrote and you wrote it only once. Any misunderstanding on your part is definitely not justifiable, or understandable, because you misunderstood *every* post of mine - every single one. The thing you misunderstood was written in plain sight in *every* post of mine. How do you justify misunderstanding so many times when it was in front of your eyes every time? I can understand anyone missing it the first time, but every time? Naa... that's intentional.

Penny Patton wrote: SecondLife didn't even come into being until we were in a post-Amazon.com world. Anyone who had been paying attention knew how this was going to play out, and content creators were placing more emphasis on the Marketplace's precursors before LL nabbed them up. You could even say LL nabbed up xStreet and OnRez in response to that already in-progress transition towards web based shopping. What? What post-Amazon.com world? Xstreet and, to a lesser extent, OnRez had been around for quite a while before LL bought them. The were being used by some people but there was no "in-progress transition" towards them. LL didn't respond to that non-existant transition. They decided they wanted a cut of the large amounts of money that was being made by users selling stuff in SL. It was only a response to someone's idea that "we" can get a cut of it. Actually, I didn't mind that. Xstreet and OnRez weren't as problem for stores, and showed no likelihood of ever being one. What I minded was the unscrupulous way that LL went about promoting their website mall, specifically at the expense of their own paying customers.

Penny Patton wrote: When I say "Ice cream cones are great" and you state you disagree, then we argue for several posts over the tastiness of "cones" and you turn around and go "ah-hah! I wasn't talking about ice cream cones! I never mentioned them! All i said was "cones", not ice cream!" no one in their right mind is going to read that exchange and think "Gee, Penny should have known Phil wasn't talking about ice cream even tho he was replying to a statement about ice cream!" Don't be silly, Penny. I said immediately what I meant - stores. And I said the same word time and again in all of my posts. My first post to you was just one sentence - about stores, and it said stores. I do recommend SpecSavers for you

I don't disagree with her on the part you quoted. I found fault when she said such businesses were built on sand. I misunderstood, and thought she meant stores but even malls were built on bedrock back then. LL later turned the bedrock into sand by pushing the marketplace so intensively. Judging by the many threads and discussion on the subject, it has to be assumed that stores, which I think you mean by "individual sellers", have been closing because of the marketplace. Many of the closed store businesses have transfered to the marketplace but the stores have closed.

Oh dear. The last "unscheduled maintenance" was about a week ago and it lasted almost a whole day, I think.

It makes a change, but you are right about your post that I first replied to. It was about malls. But you were wrong from there on in. Everything I've written has been about stores - mentioned every time I posted. If you'd gone to SpecSavers you might have noticed that and said that you were only talking about malls, instead of all the silly posts, trying to make out that I was talking about malls when it was blatantly ovbious that I wasn't. My frequent use of the word "stores" was a really good clue Since you ask, I've been arguing because you've been saying such wrong things in your replies to my posts. Any more wrong things for me?

It hasn't crashed. I still have 2 avs logged in.

Rosemaery Lorefield wrote: I agree with Prokofy- this kind of traffic gimmick is doing absolutely nothing for your business. People who want to use camp chairs are people who do not want to purchase things. Why do you want them coming to your store? Just to artificially inflate traffic? I'd rather have a traffic score of 5 and a sale or two than traffic in the thousands and no sales. I completely disagree with Prok about that. She is no doubt right about many places that have camping but she is definitely not right about all of them. Some camping is there just for the sake of giving something away. Some people are like that, y'know. Such places put the camping on its own parcel that isn't in search, so its traffic is irrelevant.

Penny Patton wrote: When I tried to clarify with you, you were very specific in that it was not content creator run businesses where content creators are selling products, you were talking about, then you brought up "stores" again. You're the one that seems to have a hard time with words here. So you're not talking about content creators who sell things, and you're not talking about landowners who rent shop space out to them. If it's neither of these entities is there any way you could maybe explain just who these mysterious "stores" are then? I don't know where you got that from, but it wasn't from anything I wrote. Imagination? Perhaps you are refering to my second post on page 2, which was a reply to you. I started it by saying, "I didn't say that businesses have folded due to the marketplace." and went on talk about stores. Read it again. If you were refering to that part, I'll explain why I said that "I didn't say that businesses have folded due to the marketplace." It's because businesses that had stores can continue in the marketplace and, if the stores don't produce enough to make them worthwhile keeping open because of tier, they can close, but the business can continue - in the marketplace. If you didn't understand it, you could have asked. It would have been much better than putting words, such as "malls", in my mouth. You know that doesn't make sense. Incidentally, I don't believe I ever mentioned "content creator run businesses" or any similar phrase. If you imagine that I did, please quote it. To the best of my knowledge, you're the only one who's used that phrase in this thread.

Qie Niangao wrote: The Lab's strategy seems to be to let in-world business wane in favor of Marketplace. That may be what they are knowingly doing but I don't believe it is, or ever was, their strategy. It's my belief that someone at LL realised that a lot of money is being made in SL by selling stuff, and they thought that it would be good get of a cut of it for LL. I believe that's all it ever was, and still is. Then, with that view in mind, they unscrupulously plugged their marketplace, even to the extent of putting "Welcome Markeplace User" on the login page for all users, regardless of whether or not the user ever used the marketplace. It may be that they've realised the effect on land and tier income since then, and they may have decided that it's worth it to LL. But I believe that the only reason for the marketplace's creation and continuation is to get a cut of the money that was, and is, being made from selling stuff. I don't believe they ever thought that inword stores would wane, but I do think that they are now delighted that are getting a cut from most purchases, and therefore don't care that inworld stores are waning. It's totally in keeping with their attitude to paying customers.

Penny Patton wrote: This thread and the arguments I've been addressing, on the other hand, are about the complaint that the marketplace has driven out mall owners. It's become clear that you only want to talk about malls, to the extent of assuming that other people (me, for instance) are only talking malls when they are obviously talking something quite different. But this thread isn't about malls. It's about stores, malls, clubs, and no doubt the author meant other things too. Read the first post again You may have a thing about malls, but this isn't about them. It's about a number of things, including them.

Penny Patton wrote: Also, I would suggest using better terminology. "Malls" are not "stores". A mall is a collection of stores. The stores themselves are run by the content creators. The malls are simply landlords renting out space to the stores run by content creators. And I would suggest that you go to SpecSavers. I never talked about malls. You only need to read my posts that you quoted to see that I've only ever mentioned stores. You're the one who keeps trying to change it - perhaps because you know that that you have no argument against what I said about stores. ETA: Perhaps it will help you if I quote what I said that you're arguing against:- "Your "building on sand" comment is nonsense. The stores that have folded because of the marketplace didn't build on sand. They built on bedrock. Some time later, LL turned the bedrock into sand." That 's it - in total - on the second page of this thread. Notice my cunning use of the word "stores", and the complete absence of the word "malls"

Penny Patton wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: But you are free to think that the marketplace hasn't had a negative impact on stores if you wish. Are you still talking about malls, or are you talking about content creator's stores now? If the former, you've got a memory problem because this statement contradicts even the first paragraph of your post here. Phil Deakins wrote: I was just pointing out that your "sand" was in fact bedrock when the stores were built, and LL turned it into sand later, when they unscrupulously started and pushed the marketplace. . Clearly, I was never talking about malls, regardless of you wishing that I'm "still talking about malls". The clue was in my use of the word "stores", which you quoted more than once. Perhaps it was too hard to spot, eh? And you've failed to make a pursuasive argument. If that "bedrock" were so solid, the existance of an online shopping venue wouldn't be an issue. The purpose of in-world malls only served to provide content creators with more visibility. That's it. An online store achieves that much more easily. In addition, it makes shopping easier for the consumer. Browsing a content creator's selection of products is much more easily done in the online store format than camming around an in-world shop (or multiple in-world shops spread across multiple sims). The existance of a web-based shopping venues was never a problem. On-Rez and Xstreet were around for a long time before LL produced the marketplace, and stores were still built on bedrock, not the sand you stated. Perhaps you don't go back that far. Stores, Penny, stores. Not malls. It may be easier to shop in a web-based system, but that isn't anything to do with what I said, which was that the stores that failed because of the marketplace, were built on bedrock and not on sand. You'd said they were built on sand. Sorry, but there's no point in you continuing to argue about it, because you're wrong. That is unless you want to continue only discussing malls - something which I neither mentioned nor meant, as is clearly seen in the parts of my posts that you've quoted.

Penny Patton wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Penny Patton wrote: The only people hurt are those who rent out shop space for stores and malls. But that simply wasn't a sustainable business model so long as LL's goal is to draw in more users. The domino effect described only applies to those whose business model can only be described as "building on sand". Your "building on sand" comment is nonsense. The stores that have folded because of the marketplace didn't build on sand. They built on bedrock. Some time later, LL turned the bedrock into sand. Care to back that statement up? First off, what shops have folded due to the marketplace? Why did they fold? Again, the marketplace isn't driving content creators out of business. The marketplace is a venue from which content creators sell. Second of all, I've pointed out why an online shopping site makes more sense (It's provides indisputable benefits to both the seller and the consumer above and beyond in-world shops), from an end user standpoint, than in-world stores. You've yet to back up why you believe the opposite is true. When your rebuttlel consists entirely of "nuh-uh":, maybe you should reevaluate your position. I didn't say that businesses have folded due to the marketplace. If you care read again what you quoted, you'll see that I said "stores", which makes the rest of your post redundant. Pre-marketplace stores did build on bedrock, as I said. Later, LL changed the bedrock to sand when they started the marketplace and plugged it for all was worth. They did not build on sand as you suggested. However, judging by the many many threads on the subject, it has to be assumed that the marketplace has been the cause of many stores closing, simply because the marketplace has become the 'standard' place to buy things, and stores manage to pay for less and less of the required tier to support them. But you are free to think that the marketplace hasn't had a negative impact on stores if you wish. I was just pointing out that your "sand" was in fact bedrock when the stores were built, and LL turned it into sand later, when they unscrupulously started and pushed the marketplace.

Calamari wrote: So how do you tell the difference between a bot and a registered scripted agent, if some one is using a registered scripted agent and it's effecting search placement then you need to file a jira not an AR. How to tell the difference is a good question, I just visited a very advance greeter bot/scripted agent that I know of and other then it's profile stating it's a bot there's no way to tell if it's registered. I even just tried changing my scripted agent status for a few minutes to see if any thing in my profile showed it, and could find nothing. So it may be hard or imposable on an individual avatar basis to spot a registered scripted agent, but bot farms are easy to spot. There is no way for we users to discover whether or not an avatar is registered as a scripted agent. There is a way that can sometimes be used to discover that avatars are most likely to be registered though. If the land's traffic count doesn't appear to be in keeping with the number of avatars that are on it a lot, then some of those avatars must be scripted agents. I'll use Lucinda's example. Until recently, I had 4 bots in my store - for customer demo purposes. They were there most of every day but the traffic count wasn't all that much more than just one avatar can score in a day. So it was obvious that at least most of the bots were registered. If you hung around the store, you'd see people come and go, so you'd be able to judge that it was probable that all the bots were registered - which they were, and still are even though I haven't logged them in for a while. Other than that, there is no way for us to know.

Lucinda Bulloch wrote: Did it, I still wonder about you, who are you really, forgive me but most here have been told to hate me, so why are you different, is it the good cop, bad cop stuff. PS those brain damaged inbreeds are but children to me, so don't take their advice. You wish