Sassy Romano

Assuming you have the rope already, just use llTargetOmega fiction to rotate it along the appropriate axis .

If you were trying a mesh top on and the alpha hadn't rendered, they could simply de-render the mesh object and you'd appear without that item. Don't worry about it.

Create a JIRA, new feature request. Nothing will happen by asking here. Actually, nothing will happen by creating a JIRA either but that's the place for it anyway.

Connor, have you tried *exactly* as I suggested?

Just another project with scope creep. Lindeb Lab will have no involvement, this is a resident to resident issue. Move on, nothing to see here. (next time, lock the specification and throw in a charge for changes after initial acceptance. End of problem).

Summary: Medhue likes to play with breasts and butts...a LOT

In innula's script, just change the first word from key to string and you should be good to go. Check that the script is set to run after you save it.

No, you cannot resize rigged mesh once imported to SL.

File either has waaaay too much detail or is corrupt. If it's corrupt, export as obj, create a new .blend file and re-import the obj file. This will cause it to be re-parsed on import.

Your sequence is a little wrong. You get the locomotion state with llGetInfo only once, then you start a timer and every 0.2s see what it says but you never check again. Within the timer() event, you need to call llGetInfo there instead so just move the buf=llGetInfo(owner) out of the attach event and into the timer event before your "if" test for the locomotion states of interest.

The issue is your attempted assignment of owner = llGetOwner() in the variables section. llGetOwner() is a function, it must be executed, you're trying to assign a variable to another variable, llGetOwner isn't a function, llGetOwner() is a function. So, quick and dirty, you could put the owner = llGetOwner() inside your state_entry function along with llSetTimer(). I say quick and dirty because that's fine but it will only resolve the owner at the time that state_entry executes and that's when the script is compiled or reset, so if you gave this to someone else, the owner variable would still be assigned with the avatar key of the person who gave the item. How can you fix this? There are a number of ways, take your pick. You can include a change event which in this simple case could detect the change of owner of the script and just reset the script (not always what you want to do as resetting will clear other variables but it's fine for this simple version). change (integer changed){ if (changed == CHANGED_OWNER) { llResetScript(); }} Another way would be to use the attach event since that will pass the key of the avatar to whom the item is attached at the time its attached. attach(key id){ if (id) { owner = id; }} If id == NULL_KEY then the item is being detached. You can also condense a lot of your "if's", for example:- if (buf == AGENT_FLYING || AGENT_ALWAYS_RUN || AGENT_AUTOPILOT)...etc. Be careful with the difference between | and || The first is a bitwise comparison, the second is a logical comparison and using the wrong one will bite you one day. Well done for having a go, we all learn somewhere.

I see no harm in listing the same item but with different permissions. There is no other way to offer that. If LL consider that a duplicate, challenge it on the basis I gave and create a JIRA starting that what they appear to ask is not possible under the existing system. You have choices but it depends on how combative you wish to be. I'm pretty tired of having to do it over simple things, over and over again.

And this is why I have repeatedly called for a marketplace listing to show the merchants last login date and also require that merchantsr evalidate listings regularly, otherwise they should automatically expire. The reality here is that LL IS acting commercially. They don't have your money, they paid it to the merchant. I understand your sentiment as far as user relationships go but that's their view. Caveat emptor.

Let me just state also that the droids that delist items often appear to incorrectly remove items that should not be removed. One of my listings frequently gets flagged and delisted yet it is completely compliant and the listing even carries an apology from LL as to prior incorrect delisting. Clearly, the delisting droids never even view the item as if they did, they would have surely read that prior apology... Therefore one can only assume that single celled amoebae operate that process and I shall always consider that to be the case until sufficient evidence to the contrary.

Changing the permissions of an existing listing is fine. Listing two identical items but with different permissions has to be permitted since there's no dynamic way to sell alternate permissions otherwise. If they claim that to be the same product then by the same logic, so would items that differ only by color. Until marketplace permits variants under the same single listing them there is no other way. I would list both and have each refer to the other as a related item.

"I also reserve the right to delete and relist any items for any reason I see fit"

CommerceTeam Linden wrote: This should now be fixed. In the future, if you hit other words which you think should be allowed, please file a JIRA, and we'll do our best to address the issue quickly. Yep, ok, i'll bite. ONE BIG FAT JIRA calling for the removal of this inadequate piece of junk. Did you ever fix the merchants listings that it broke the last time someone messed with it? Remember when many G rated listings got reclassified as Adult and yet responsibility and accountability was totally shrugged off? https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/BUG-7643 "Let me ask you this question. You've just compiled a mere 1000 line bit of code and instead of the compiler saying "syntax error at line 572, missing ) ", instead it says:- "There was an error in your program, please correct it and try again" How would you feel? would you class that compiler as fit for purpose or would you go screaming to your line manager stating that you can't possibly perform your role with such inadequate software. Now lets pretend your a merchant working with software that does just that... feeling it yet?"

Teleport to a different region Or using damage enabled region and set home to the point I'm standing. That really winds griefers up.

Thanks Qie, that's helpful to know.

Just to add that you can have the object respond to incoming http requests if you know the URL of the object. The killer to this plan is that unlike the key of a rezzed object, if a region restarts, objects obtain a new URL so you end up having to track the URL change in a database anyway. There's a JIRA open asking for the URL to remain constant but as with many useful things in LL, that one sits dormant.

That's merely a response from the outsourced scouts I suspect, NOT a proper response from someone within LL that has a clue. It goes without saying that "of course they have a full list of words".

Perrie Juran wrote: One is power consumption which is not a major concern to me. I have solar panels so could say the same but just as a passing observation for you, I have a GTX 680 and if I let that run unconstrained in a quiet sim with not much to draw, the viewer will quite happily run that into very happy three figure frame rates. What happens then is that the card is working much harder, the three fans spin up a lot so it becomes a lot noisier and the software that monitors my power supply is happy to inform me that it's now using about 60 Watts more...just for standing on a quiet region with a simple scene. I use the option in Firestorm to limit the frame rate as this is just unnecessary.

...and the graphics card? ("aiming" as supposed to be "assuming" but my phone auto correct felt it knew better ) My point remains, changing all the storage won't do a thing to people on slower connections and old hardware so the incentive for LL to spend in that order just doesn't exist when there are fundamental issues elsewhere and part of that "elsewhere" is user generated content inefficiency.

Items sold by scripted vendors inworld will be boxed when there are multiple parts If it's an item bought via Marketfarce, it can be boxed or unboxed If it's an item that uses an unboxing script, the item must be rezzed (or worn, same thing) and that can unpack to a folder. If the item is a prim set to sell content, the item will be in a folder. Nothing more to it than that.

my guess is "office" because it's a bit like ORIFICE and that's sort of like ass-hole but to be honest, it's anyones guess as to which word is the issue. Just keep remembering that we are to be treated like little children, presided over by awesome beings whose sole intent is to make life difficult for us by not treating us appropriately.