Scylla Rhiadra

I do too, actually! I just wish there were more active people there. But it's a very simple, elegant platform, and the level of toxicity is MUCH lower than on Twitter.

Inara now has one of her invaluable summaries up on her blog. https://modemworld.me/2024/04/26/summary-of-tilia-acquisition-lab-gab-sl-round-table-news/

I'd pay to see this.

Yeah. For me, the red line for Threads was that 1) it was linked to your Instagram account, which I don't have and don't want, and 2) the ToS and permissions required for access to personal information -- which included things like credit score, FFS -- are insane. Twitter is a hellhole, and getting worse daily, but one thing I will say for it is that it doesn't seem to data harvest to anything like the degree that Meta does.

Not even close to what we get buying Lindens using CAN$. We need to cry harder maybe.

I get this. As an SL photographer who sells her work, I understand that sense of proprietary pride in something one has created. It actually bugs me (a little, at least) when I see someone who has resized one of my images, but messed up the aspect ratio when doing so. BUT . . . this argument also reminds me a little of "elite" creators in RL who make stipulations. A classic was that very talented, first-class POS fashion designer Karl Lagerfeld, who deliberately restricted the sizes available for his creations because he didn't want to see "curvy" or "overweight" women wearing them. "No one wants to see curvy women," he opined, and he (and other designers too) made sure that they were certainly not to be seen in their own haute couture. **** 'em, says I. I'll wear what I want. And I'll do what I want with things I've purchased in SL.

So, basically you're sailing through SL on the ship of Theseus?

I do frequently leave reviews -- and often positive ones, especially if there's been an instance of real great customer support. In fact, I've actually bought items from a store's MP just so I could leave a positive review, when I've had problems with something I bought in-world that were resolved by the maker. I also read reviews, but I discount ones that don't explain why they are positive or negative. Just, "Looks great!" or "not worth the price" isn't going to persuade me one way or another. I also pay attention to responses to reviews, sometimes by the creators themselves -- I wish more creators would do this. I don't generally buy things that don't have a demo anyway, so I usually have an opportunity to "test" the veracity of the review.

Yes, you're quite right. You don't "owe" anyone an explanation -- you can do what you want. And as a consumer, so will I. But it is potentially useful to creators to know that I won't buy their things because they are no mod. Consider it free market research! I note that your items mostly seem to be mod, so this doesn't apply. Thank you, however, for offering these explanations even if they are not "owed." And yet, as you note, most items can be replaced through redeliver (assuming they are not also no-copy, which I definitely do not buy). I sometimes puzzle over this one: I mean, sure, again, that's your right. But in RL I wouldn't accept restrictions on what I do with products I've purchased -- I have, after all, paid money for them -- and the same is true of SL. If I am putting a table you made in a pic, but I don't want the flowers you've placed on that table there, I expect to be able to remove them. If I think that this pair of jeans goes better with this top than the skirt that it comes with, that should be my decision. This feels a little like the "subscription" argument for software: you don't really get to "own" something, because the dead hand of the creator continues to exert authority over it even after you've paid for it. Not sure I understand you here. We're talking about mod perms, not copy ones? I've lost too many no-copy items to accidents and glitches to spend money on them now. And it's really inconvenient. And, of course, you can't get a redelivery. So, no thanks. My understanding is that no-mod perms does very little to "protect" an item. Is that incorrect? I buy lots of building kits to create backdrops. I do so for a number of reasons, but one very practical one is that they generally come with maps. If they don't, the likelihood is that I won't waste money on them, because retexturing is important to me. So, if you are selling a complete house, and also one designed to be modular, I'll almost certainly opt for the latter (if maps are included in the package). But if you DON'T offer that option, and I can rip a window from your full version of the house that I've paid for, for use in a backdrop or scene, I'm not going to feel bad about that because you aren't selling a modular version anyway. In other words, you aren't losing any money from this: I'm not cannibalizing something that I could be paying money for in full perm or modular form. So, I don't see how this hurts you? Except (as Theresa has pointed out) if your object is no-copy. And "protecting" my possession of an item that I can't use in the way I intended when I purchased it isn't terribly useful, really. Just to recap: I totally agree with you that it should be your choice as to whether something you create is no mod. But consumers also have a choice, and as your post here makes clear, many of us want mod perms. I won't buy decorative or structural things that don't have these. So, if I'm telling you that, it's not to "shame" you -- it's to inform you that you've lost my business because of your choices. And that, surely, is useful information?

Yeah. Slowly trying to transition to Bluesky which, unfortunately, simply doesn't have the same critical mass yet.

No, this WILL happen. Because I'm personally going to kill it.

Not "dingy," dahling! "Interesting"!

Great minds think alike? Or fools seldom differ?

Um. Far from being antisemitic, the meme is actually mocking absurd conspiracy theories of the sort that suggest that "the Jews" are secretly running the US. It's only antisemitic if you also think that it's seriously suggesting that aliens, the Dutch, etc., are the real power in America. And I'm pretty sure that is not its point. I get that we are all very sensitive to possible instances of antisemitism these days (and I hope to Islamophobia, which is also on the rise), but the exercise of a little critical thinking should ease people's minds in this instance. To reiterate, this is not articulating anti-semitic conspiracy theories -- it's satirizing them. It's not a joke I'd likely make myself, for reasons too evident here, but it is not antisemitism.