Phil Deakins

Nice try, but all wrong I won't go into all the details of your post but I'll mention a few. Flight simulators are not games unless their is actual gameplay, such as flying from A to B so that you are allowed to go the next level. Dressing Barbie dolls isn't a game - it's a pleasurable passtime. Children "play" with Barbie dolls in the way you said, but there is no "gameplay" so they are not a game. Sitting on beaches isn't a game and dancing in clubs isn't a game. I'll leave it at that. Apart from preparing to play a game by dressing your avatar in other systems, everything you mentioned comes under the heading of passtimes. It crossed my mind earlier that SL business can very well be a game for many people - the earnings being the personal score - even though it doesn't compete with anyone else. But business isn't instrinsic SL, and it doesn't make SL a game. SL is merely an envorionment in which people can do whatever they like. No "game" or "gameplay" is provided for them.

I was here when those things existed but they didn't make SL a game by any stretch of the imagination. Ratings weren't for building, scripting, etc., as you thought. They were merely if you fancied rating someone for whatever reason, like you can rate items in the marketplace but ratings don't make the marketplace a game. For instance, friends used to rate each other just for the sake of it. Dwell was what is now called traffic. Neither of them were gameplay, which is what a game must have to make it a game.

Void Singer wrote: I would say that it's a game for people that use it as such, and not for those who don't. people can make a game out of war and killing (the real kind, not imaginary).... so the definition is only as good as it's usage. both views are valid depending on individual behavior, and people really need to accept that not everyone uses or views things the same way. The overarching definition may be the lowest common denominator, but it rarely affects individual response. I disagree. SL *cannot* be used as a game by anyone because there is no game to play. Some people have created small games within SL and people can play those, but SL itself cannot be played as a game. SL is only countryside and water, just like the RL world. And, just like RL, some people have built buildings and such. But the RL world isn't a game either. You can't wake up, go outside, and start playing the game because the RL world isn't a game. Some games have been created in the RL world, and you can play those, but the RL world itself isn't a game - and neither is the SL world. I'll clarify a bit. Imagine SL without users and without any user creations of any kind, and you, plus a few people, log in. Now go and "play" it. What's the game? Where does the game start? What do you have to do to win?

Luc Starsider wrote: Whether SL is a game or not is not a myth. It is a matter of how each of us perceive it and how we approach it, and is not something that can be proved conclusively either way. - Luc - It's very definitely provable that SL is not a game. SL is an environment without any form of gameplay whatsoever and, therefore, it's not a game. A game *must* have gameplay for it to be a game. If you think differently, show me the SL gameplay and I'll accept it. Remember that it's possible for users to create some gameplay within SL - Tiny Empires and Vampires, for instance, but that's not SL itself. So show me the gameplay that's intrinsic to SL and I'll call it a game.

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Dogboat Taurog wrote: Second life isnt a game i had to say it :smileywink: Yes, that's a widespread myth It's no myth. Show me the SL gameplay and I'll agree with you. But you can't because there isn't any The fact that games can be created within SL doesn't count because SL itself is not a game, and never has been.

Jo Yardley wrote: Myth #1: holding your cursor over a texture makes it load faster... Holding the cursor over a texture doesn't make it load "faster" but it does make it load more quickly; i.e. sooner than it otherwise would. If you change the word "faster" to "more quyickly" or "quicker", then you can add some red text saying BUSTED.

Bot or Bots

Prok is just an objectionable person - she does nothing but object to anything that comes to her mind. If well-known avs are to be added, Prok should be left out and Anshe Chung added, but I don't think any av names should be included as none are globally known. Even Torley is known only by a relatively small minority of people - mostly forum users.

Play it straight, then you won't have to deal with any such problems again.

I'm not going looking for the links but you can find it all in the archived forums. It's all still there. A story:- Soon after the adult land was launched and the deadline for the removal of sex places was passed, someone, who presumably held a grudge, ARed my bots which were on sexbeds for the purpose of demonstrating the animations. There was a male-female pair on one bed, a female on another bed, with the other ball for customers, and a male on third bed, with the other ball for customers. The bots were in the store but behind a wall so they were not in plain sight. They were covered so they didn't show any "bits", and, if that were not enough, no animation could last for more than 30 seconds on those demo beds, so that people would find it difficult to use them for their jollies. When the 30 seconds was up, the animation automatically changed to STAND. The out of plain sight part and the 30 second limit were in place before any adult land was ever mentioned, and I put tops on the female bots because of the adult rules (like the male bots, they already head the other bit covered). None of that was mentioned in the AR, of course. The first Linden who dealt with the AR simply sent me a warning, and told me to remove the bots, without ever going to see for him/herself so, knowing that it was the wrong decision, I appealed, but the next Linden (it may have been the same one) upheld the decision, also without going to see for him/herself. Through sheer ineptitude, neither of those two discovered that the bots were actually allowed. I know the first one didn't go and look because, if s/he had, s/he wouldn't have left the bots on the beds - s/he would have logged them out. I removed the bots after the first one so the second one wouldn't have been able to see, but I did describe it all in the appeal. The AR Lindens dealt with the AR in the manner of, "The AR sounds about right to me and I can't be bothered checking so, here, have a warning." So I wrote a notecard to their boss - Harry Linden - explaining it all. I included quotes, with urls, of what Blondin had clearly stated in public. Harry was the only one of them who actually used his brain. He removed the warning and confirmed that the bots were ok. I put the bots back, and they've been there ever since. It's possible that the first two Lindens didn't know what was and wasn't allowed, but that only speaks to their, or LL's, incompetence. Nothing has changed since then and the sex furniture in stores, and demo bots, are still allowed on mature land. Incidentally, it's not the only time that I've found incompetence in the AR team and Harry has been the straight one.

There is still reference to what Blondin told us all. As far as I know, what he told us was never put into a more formal setting like the text you pasted, but it still exists for all to see, so it's not wiped from LL's memory at all. The formal setting doesn't get into specific details but, in answer to specific questions, Blondin gave specific answers and that's still good enough. Nothing has changed.

The text that you copied and pasted here doesn't state what I said explicitly. I'm referring to what Blondin stated explicitly in the public discussions at the time leading up to the introduction of adult land; i.e. that it's ok to use sex animations in stores for the purpose of deciding whether or not to buy, provided that no "naughty bits" are uncovered. Nothing has changed since then, and what I said about sex animations in stores on mature land is correct. Incidentally, I've used the words "bits" etc. merely to avoid using the word "nude" or "naked", the first of which was used in this thread. The use of those latter words can be taken to mean that it's ok to do sex animations as long as no av is nude; e.g. wearing a scarf, hat or t-shirt, but nothing covering those "bits",. Of course, whilst it's perfectly ok to do nude sex in private on mature land, it's not ok to do nude sex is public places, such as stores. My choice of words meant that it's not ok to do sex animations in stores even if the avs are not nude but have their "bits" uncovered.

The marketplace isn't anything to do with this "land" discussion. What I wrote in my first post in this thread is correct; i.e. that the selling of sex furniture and animations on Mature land is permitted, and that the using of sex animations in stores on mature land, for the purpose of deciding whether or not to buy it, is permitted, provided that avatars don't reveal any "naughty bits". It was all made very clear by LL in advance of Adult land being created. Nothing has changed since then.

Chelsea Malibu wrote: Sorry, I can't seem to find any reference to "Bits" in any policy and it seems that Sassy has found the proper nomenclature. I think thnat "bits" was a perfectly suitable word

Sassy Romano wrote: As far as I can still interpret, this is ok as long as the items/shop is not advertised in search. It can be discovered but as soon as you promote the sale of such items in search then it needs to be adult. Roll on the removal of M and just give us back G and A. To the best of my knowledge, it's ok to set them to show in search, but it's not ok to have a sex venue on mature land, whether it shows in search or not.

A correction for you:- Using sex animations (e.g. in furniture) in stores on Mature land (Moderate in V2 isn't it?) is perfectly ok as long as the participants don't display any sex bits. It's necessary because people need to test stuff to know whether or not they want to buy it. That was clarified by LL during the introduction of Adult land.

For something to be a game, it has to have gameplay. Second Life itself does not have any gameplay, so it's not a game and it never was. Some games have been created inside it but SL itself is not a game. It's not a grey definition and it's not even open to debate.

The Honorary Rank thread in this General Discussion forum was moved to the Forums > People Forum > Forum Feedback subforum, but that subforum isn't visible. I know it exists because the link in the "moved" post goes to it. So why was a thread moved to a subforum that nobody can see?

Thank you for your excellent replies, Madeliefste. For a personal reason, I didn't bother getting into mesh and I'm glad I didn't as it seems like it won't be any good for my field (furniture) so, even if I were planning on keeping my store for the forseeable future, I haven't missed out on anything by not looking into mesh. I've never made a 1-prim couch or chair because, when the arms and/or back are higher than the seat, as they need to be, the bounding box is no good for a sofa or chair. I used it as a simple example for the question.

I don't accept that any group of people is "holding down the fort". I never look at the Answers part so I've no idea what it's like there. I'm only discussing the forums. I haven't said that all users answer the majority of questions. I've said that questions get answered, with or without the group you speak of. It's the nature of many people who use forums. Many people like to be helpful and they enjoy doing it. It's part of their SL hobby and pleasure, and I see no reason to add rewards for it. That enjoyment and the good feeling that being helpful generates is reward enough imo.

Medhue Simoni wrote: PE, which stands for Prim Equivalence, has been a roller coaster ride. I read a mesh thread today and saw the Prim Equivalent numbers for the first time. I didn't understand it until your post but I still don;t know if I understand it. So, a question... If I make a sofa using a single mesh, for instance, as some people made 1-prim sofas with a single sculptie, would the sofa be given an arbitrary PE number and be counted for the land as that number prims?

Wildcat Furse wrote: "breedable linden dollars" :smileyindifferent: *meows* I want to buy some shares in your company

Marcus Hancroft wrote: And even if my stores were doing fantastically good, I would not take the money out of SL like some people do. Oh yes you would As someone mentioned already, using Phoenix will allow you to upload textures for free - temporarily. Then, when you are sure that the texture is right, you can pay the 10L to upload it permanently. The Beta grid was always there for checking too. I spent thousands of free L$ uploading to the Beta grid before I started to use the free temporary uploads to the main grid. The same applies to animations if you ever get into making those.

Some things are properties of prims and don't need a script. You found one They only need a script to set the property. Another is the Sit Target.

Knowl Paine wrote: I agree that "they" appear to enjoy helping. I also enjoy helping and like you, I don't always have a lot of time. I do enjoy the social interaction to but I know that if the "regulars" were not here there would be less traffic. Providing timely responses and interaction is not a random fluke or generated by coincidence; other Residents are holding down the fort whilst I am away. Nobody needs to "hold down the fort" while you are away, and you are mistaken about there being less traffic if it weren't for people conciously ministering to other people's questions. Such ministering is not a job that needs dedicated people. The nature of forums is discussion, and the nature of many people is to discuss - in forums. There will always be people in forums who will answer other people's questions. That's why forums are successful, and they don't need any Rank system to be successful. There is one big disadvantage with forum ranks - the idea that those with higher ranks know more than those with lower ranks. It's natural for newer people to see things that way, and it can sometimes leave them with wrong answers. It's more obvious with the Moderator rank though - when moderators participate, that is. The idea that, if a moderator says one thing and a user says another, the moderator is most likely right, isn't uncommon. And that's purely on the strength of the rank. It's unrealistic, but it's not uncommon. I can believe that a newer person might think the same about differing answers given by an "Advisor" and a "Member". It would be a mistake to think that the Advisor knows best, simply because it's an Avisor, but I can see it happening. Those are my arguments against having user ranks at all. I've already stated that I'm against higher ranks being rewarded by LL, and I've read nothing here to change that view. But I have another reason to be against it.... Suppose LL did give rewards to higher ranks. You mentioned something like paying lower commision for marketplace sales, and something about land - 1024 tier free instead of the normal 512? Who would the rewards be given to? Those who have reached the highest rank? What happens then? Every forum user does everything they can to achieve the highest rank and receive the rewards, but then we'd end up with all forum users, except new ones, having the same highest rank, which would look silly, or LL would prevent so many reaching that level and the rewards wouldn't be available to all users, which would be unfair. And what would happen when a person has intentionally achieved the highest rank and its rewards? Perhaps s/he'd stop doing it and still receieve the rewards. If the rank is lowered because of stopping, and if the reward is land, what happens to the land? It's all very messy. Without any rewards, we've already seen that there are plenty of forum users who answer people's questions. That's typical of forums. There is no need for any rewards (or ranks) - it works perfectly well without them. You are mistaken if you feel that you and others *need* to do the job, as in "holding the fort down". Try not answering any questions for a while - you'll see that they get answered without you, or anyone, needing to "hold the fort down".