Sassy Romano

Josh Susanto wrote: If you look at the stuff on SLM that even I would consider to be "junk", a lot of it has been there since XStreet; that is: over a year. If someone can't log on for something like a month, it seems a bit punitive to me to remove their items. But if they can't log on for a year or more, they probably have much bigger problems anyway. It's a moot point anyway but the time period would be easily determined as that time period where it's considered unnacceptable from a merchants perspective to receive a poor review based on there having been sufficient time for attempts by a customer to contact the merchant whom did not reply. If I buy something and there's no repsonse for a month from a merchant, personally I find that is ample time to attempt contact. In fact, in my opinion, it's far more than enough time. Am I really still interested in that product after waiting a month to resolve a problem? Unlikely. A year? I don't think it's reasonable to suggest that we should give a merchant a whole year before leaving a review about lack of support. I can't think of many reasons where a month would not be sufficient for someone with a sudden and unexpected issue that cropped up and if it's 6 weeks or 2 months, all they'd need to do is log on and re-list. Just take down inactive items while the merchant is clearly not in a capacity to respond. What about those merchants for whom this is their RL income? If that's the case, then for whatever reason that incapacity to log in exists... find a way. It's just a matter of priorities and one is expected to inform their RL employer of any absence or expected return to work date, they'd get someone to phone in or similar. It's not hard.

Simple solution. If the merchant doesn't log in at least say once a month, delist their items. Or a variant of this where merchants had to positively refresh their listing intent on a regular basis. If they're not logging in, they're probably not able to deal with problems, customer support and all the other things that an active merchant should be doing. Now i'm sure people will start saying "but what about unexpected ill health that keeps them away?" well in that case, I doubt that SL is their major issue and besides, how would they handle rent payments of any tier or mall spots? Probably get someone to log in for them... Inactive merchants are just as big a problem as "junk" items. This would seek to address both issues. (I was writing this at the same time as Tavo it seems )

Escort

I'd like to offer a different perspective. There is no fee required to join Second Life but it's far from free! Second Life is created by us, the residents. Linden Labs provides the platform (they sell "land") upon which we create the world. We, the residents, pay for that land and usually allow public access. So, while you don't pay a fee to Linden Labs to join, the land you visit, the places you go are all paid for by others just like you. Everything you wear, touch, sit on, interact with, see, hear, is created by us. Creation of objects often has a cost in the form of uploads of animation data, textures or sounds. A full region costs someone up to $295 US a month and they offer it to residents to enjoy be it a region to explore, a region that hosts a ballroom to dance at, a club, a combat region or whatever. Often the funding of that region is made up by the sales of the owners products or the rent income from other merchants that offer their items there. There are few revenue streams available to people. Please don't take this as an attempt to lay guilt, like most, I had no intention to spend money here when I joined but I do feel that it's worth a moment to explain how the places that you visit are often funded. If everyone had the perception that it's "a free service", when those paying shrug and say "stuff it, why should I pay near $300 a month for freeloaders?" and close their region, then there would be no service at all. Enjoy SL but be aware that others like yourself are paying for the "free" that is provided. My personal feeling is that there is no need to pay the premium member fee, it gets you very little but buying say $10 to $20 worth of L$ would let you go on a fun shopping spree and buy some very nice things. Bottom line, if you treat it as entertainment, you'd pay several $'s to go and see a movie or eat out. What's the difference?

Poor programming, bad QA. Memory leak.

Vendors no but vending system that logs ANS yes. Not that much of a difference really, if you use an inworld vending system right now, it doesn't deliver from magic box but can consolidate all the logs.

Marketplace offers ANS for data capture, just use that with an existing vending system that supports ANS

Irene Muni wrote: Totally agree with Toysoldier . I cannot see the advantages of sell unboxed items. It will be an absolute godsend for me but I don't need to say why. Other reason includes, no need to unbox it though that's pretty trivial to get around.

More to the point that banning them will not stop them creating a new avatar and repeating. The ban from LL is rather pointless.

Easy, just chat about your school homework *smiles*

Arwen Serpente wrote: When I'm shopping, if I have a question, I will usually im the creator or leave them a notecard as I wouldn't expect a person modeling to have all the info I might want and probably direct me to the creator anyway. To clarify, the assistants that help me are very competent at dealing with technical issues and can pull up the customers purchase history and redeliver and more. There's not much point having assistants if they're not empowered with the knowledge and tools to function properly. (They are assistants, not "models" but I recognise that the original question was "models") Of course people are still welcome to IM me but they could well have obtained help far faster if there's someone there ready to help and i'm offline. I'm not really sure what the fuss is if someone says "welcome, let me know if there's anything I may help you with". They're not going to stalk you around the shop. I'd be puzzled if that was found just cause for never returning. So often we read/hear of bad customer service or no customer service. Seems we can't win either way!

Opinions will always vary. I have no problem with a simple welcome and offer of help should I require it. I'm very proud of the assistants that help me and that's what they do and from what I see, more people ask questions and feel able to approach if they're extended the offer first than when they're ignored. Different shops sell different things though and I don't need to be asked if I need help finding a dress among all the other dresses. Some of my items are complex, interact with each other and require a degree of set up so it's expected that customers welcome the offer of help, should they require it.

Same problem in viewer 2. I don't doubt that it's a copy/paste something getting mangled problem

This is Phoenix 1050... I'll try with Viewer 2 but i'd be surprised if it won't compile in Phoenix.

Any of the 3 lines with llGetLinkPrimitiveParams or llSetLinkPrimitiveParams. First one is:- (86, 70) Syntax error with the cursor on the v of llGetLinkPrimitiveParams. If you want to pass me the same script inworld, i'd be interested to see what the difference is. I had an idea while offline that it was text conversion between copying and pasting and losing carriage returns but it doesn't appear to be.

Hmm, fails to compile for me failing at any link with llGetLInkPrimitiveParams or llSetLinkPrimitiveParams

Not quite what I meant. When someone searches by creator or shop, the new search finds them better but then lists what appears to be 3 random thumbnails from that merchants shop. USELESS... (in my opinion), show the customer the top selling products from that merchant, or better still, let us choose:- "present top sellers in search order" or "present in random order"

Toysoldier Thor wrote: Secondly, are the DD Beta Testers under NDA? If Brooke is unable to answer this, to those of my fellow Merchants that are in the Beta... did you have to sign into an NDA ? That was stated as part of the application to participate in the program. Yes the beta testers were required to sign an NDA.

Arwen Serpente wrote: This morning's server update has rendered my entire inventory and avatar missing from database. I am getting reports from everyone in world that this is happening to them too. Whatever is going on, the changes made to that server update need to be corrected or reveresed asap. - This is exactly why I do not want the DD system pulling from my inventory folders. If this were to happen, I would not be able to edit anything, find anything, period. Your local view of your inventory does not necessarily relate to what happens behind it. The items are still there, just because you can't see them doesn't mean they are missing and that you will not sell.

It's way beyond my primitive comprehension as to why the word list isn't published. It's fundamentally wrong that it only fitlers English language words anyway! How it can be perceived as a benefit to hide it such that people just waste time dancing around picking alternates is without reason? It might be gamed they say? What? That we find that "escort" is a bad word so have to find our own ways of choosing phrases like "shown a good time" or whatever else suits. I don't understand it at all and it doesn't even affect me, I just set all my items to adult because that's what I sell. I feel for those trying to sell non adult with this system.

Eric Castanea wrote: I bought an item from the market place. The merchant absolutlely will not make good. I wrote a review explaining my negative experiences, and it was astro-turfed. The merchant is lying on the market place and ripping people off. What can I do to get justice? Correct, you have little recourse. Although a burden, if you're unsure, check their policy first although again some don't have one. Check other reviews, pop them an IM. If I see a merchants policy that reads something like "products are no transfer, NO REFUNDS, NO EXCHANGES POSSIBLE, YOUR FAULT IF YOU BUY THE WRONG THING", that's a bit of a red flag to me. As for the NO REFUND OR EXCHANGE EVER POSSIBLE part of some policies,well anything is possible so again that gives me a hint of their approach to customer service. At that point, i'm probably already furiously searching for alternate products. Every merchant is entitled to their choice of policy, just as every customer is equally entitled to spend elsewhere. SL is a huge case of Caveat Emptor.

https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/WEB-3849

Claireschen Hesten wrote: if it's a last logged in date it should be a last logged in world date because if people are like me they may log in to the SL website/forum/marketplace every day but may go days where they can't get inworld Show both, last logged in to MP, last logged in inworld Primarly, I want to know when someone has logged in, in a manner in which they are able to respond to issues. Logging in to MP daily isn't going to help when they say NOTECARD ME ONLY, knowing that they lose IM's because they don't forward to email.

I have a suggestion, under the Merchant name in the Marketplace advert, show "last logged in <date>". That way when we buy something, we have an idea if there's going to be an active merchant behind the product, ready to offer support (or ban or mute us for daring to bother them, yes some are like that). Automatically migrating everything from xstreet wasn't such a great idea.

Valois wrote: Hello folks! I do hope your sales are ok and a business is prosper. I have found very interesting topic here about in-world trading. One person said that malls are dead because of the marketplace If I listened to the people that said malls are dead, i'd a) not shop in them and b) if I closed my inworld presence i'd miss out on 88% of my revenue. Marketplace does not favour adult content merchants. Marketplace requires that you be found in search and that's anybody's guess from week to week. I can't control Marketplace and its nuances. What I can control, is my visibility in world and ultimately that's where people visit. People don't role play on Marketplace, people don't socialise on Marketplace. Having said that, people don't go to malls to shop either but where mall spots are suitably designed and located AND promoted then there's no reason in my mind that they shouldn't have value. Where I believe that some misjudge their mall spot is that they expect to see a profit on each location. Well that's not always the case, there's always the value of branding and referals to a main shop (or even Marketplace!). I have LM givers at my mall locations and if someone takes an LM from a mall spot and then purchases at my main shop within 2 days, I attribute that value to the mall spot since that's where the sale technically originated. I have a single page vending system web page view that shows me total of income, rents, LM's issued, purchases made and overall net value as described. That's a hugely powerful view of the estate. Without that it would be easy to look at income from a location and assume it was unprofitable when in fact it had referred plenty to main shop where purchases were made. The other issue is the malls/venues themselves. Yes they vary but some put effort into the layout and promotion and others just use it as a means to subsidise their tier. If I ask a mall owner who sends me a notecard invite "what will you do to promote my items and help my sales?" and the response I get is "huh?!" then I have my answer. Similarly, 1 week free rent and a club doesn't really sell it to me either. Like many, i've rented at that place and 2 weeks later they've poofed with the months rent money. New malls i'm happy to offer affiliates. Yesterday I bonused the owner of one of these who was given that offer because the sales from that location met a threshold I have for extra percentage. Had she gone down the rent route she would have been less well off. As with anything, the effort varies but i'm not about to pronounce inworld dead yet, not by any means though I accept that it varies for different products. Mine favour inworld.