Couldbe Yue

Pamela Galli wrote: Hey if Rod wants to talk to me he knows where to find me. If you were more important to their bottom line, that might be a possibility but the sad fact is you're not, despite the amount you directly pay them each month. This isn't a company that works like that as you well know. Which probably explains their decline.

I seem to be experiencing something different with a recent build. If I do the child prim "none" for the one I want to be phantom it turns the whole thing phantom but keeps the reduced LI that convex hull on the others gives. Pretty useless for something people need to walk on. If I use my child prim phantom script, it works as it always has but only if I turn off convex hull on the rest of the build and go back to the full prim count rather than the reduced LI, otherwise the prim stays solid no matter what I do. I've tried every combination of ways of putting it together that I can but can't change either of these outcomes. So my choice boiled down to either going for phantom water and full prim count or reducing the count by a third with LI and having the water solid. I'm good with the solid water and my customers are going to have to be too.

I don't think this has anything to do with the magic boxes themselves and has everything to do with the delivery messages not making it out of the message queue and over to the marketplace, combined with the shoddy design of the slm order processing system, the lack of any original analysis (remember, they made it a badge of honour that none of the commerce team knew the processes we used to execute various marketplace functions - what they called use cases), no structured system design and their amateur tinkerings, it's a recipe for the troubles we see. and just remember that what ever promises they make to fix it won't be kept - if you remember the table corruption issue (the wrong pictures with the wrong listings) was actually unfixable without a restore according to someone I know in rl (who had bitter experience of such a cockup), yet LL insisted they could fix it without a restore and of course apart from fixing some by hand never actually did fix the problem - because it's too late and is unfixable without a restore - not that they'll ever admit it and of course the jira is now hidden. Just keep telling yourself that you are happy with whatever LL allows you to keep and you'll be fine. It's the only way I keep on going in here. (well, apart from snarling at them at every possible moment - a girl has to get her payback in for the aggravation they cause somehow).

This is the announcement https://www.xstreetsl.com/forum_archive/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=103052 and another thread was started to make sure people didn't miss it.. https://xstreetsl.com/forum_archive/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=495047 OK, so there's no mention of disastrous failings but then there have always been transaction failings - it's just that they appeared to be less of them back in those days.

The only comment I have to make on DD is that unlike MBs you have no inkling that an order has been made, delivered and not paid for unless the customer comes back to you for some reason. (been there) The only good thing about it is that you no longer know you're being ripped off, which keeps the bitterness down.

how about a nice slu post? Rod still seems to pop in occasionally and of course slu google-fu should position it nicely in google search returns. Just ignore troll boy if he happens to drop into the thread.

Pamela Galli wrote: They have not made any charges against my CC because I always have enough USD to cover tier. Actually since enhancements are paid in Lindens I don't know if they would charge my card or not. What I meant is that LL can and does charge me for whatever they like -- so far, tier -- not that they have ever charged enhancements to my CC. what used to happen is if there wasn't enough lindens in the account the enhancement wouldn't renew. The only time it should go into negative is for the 30L show in search fee (although for a while inworld classified renewals used to as well). If you know when the renewals are due and can sweep the money out, you might be able to cancel them that way. As for getting them to fix this, the only suggestion I have is to hit the sl facebook page and twitter and go public. It will probably have limited effect but they seem to react more to public shaming than anything else.

you two are beginning to scare me with this bromance stuff.. however it's nice to see a bit of harmony here. I'll add a little dischord to say that strictly speaking it is game currency and doesn't exist. The way to look at this is that whilst those lindens being taken from people's accounts for payment * are not real dollars. They will be when the person cashes out - which means LL is reducing the inworld income of merchants, which ultimately reduces their usd returns from the platform. This problem has minimal affect on their bottom line except that they're receiving less commission from the lindex because the merchants are cashing out less which may (unlikely but possible) be offset by those same merchants having to bring money in to pay their inworld bills. A better way to look at it is that LL has withheld repayment of convertable game tokens, which has ultimately reduced the rl incomeof their customers by around 58,000 usd (? can't remember the figure). I suggest this is why LL aren't particularly bothered as it's not directly affecting their bottom line, only their customers. Not only don't they behave as if they recognise us as customers but also they seem to steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that this is affecting people's rl incomes. Dealing with LL is like dealing with petty criminals - they'll rip you off sooner than look at you, you are never guaranteed to get what you pay for and you have no recourse. What's worse of course is that we know this and still encourage them by continuing to deal with them. Fun huh? *(and remember this isn't the first time - since at least 2007 there have been periods where inworld classifieds have been paid for and never appeared in search and there was the period when people would be double billed for tier and (iirc) if LL didn't repay it and you went for a clawback from your credit card company LL would suspend your account until you cancelled the clawback)

phaedra Exonar wrote: [...] Why LL has no requirements to sell to the marketplace is mind boggling, some thing like requiring a 30 wait for avatars with out a premium account to sell on the MP would help reduce or slow down repeat scammers, many scammer have high price items trying to make a quick $ so limiting the price of items to under 500L$ for non premium accounts for the first 30 days might help too at least that way if some one falls for a scam they are out less L$ I don't expect any thing to stop all scams on the marketplace but at least some thing to reduce them would help out a lot. The last time any kind of restriction on who could list was mooted by LL, the outcry was such that you'd have thought LL were going to take and kill all firstborns as a registration requirement. I doubt merchant registration requirements will ever happen in any form as it would require two things that LL don't have; the willingness to spend money on the development for no tangible gain (they wouldn't see the cost reduction in staff having to deal with the ip infringement as a benefit to them - everything else, from ripping off people to making the marketplace look better are intangibles) and also it's unlikely they have any skilled resource to do it (they can even seem to change where they send emails from without it going wrong).

be scared everyone - Rod threatened that they were going to make it easier for us We may may mistakes, perhaps even bone headed mistakes but we genuinely beleive in empowering our customers with more and more ways to be creative and (hopefully) monetize their creations. Not less. http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/general-sl-discussion/76184-jira-shutdown-limit-scripting-smaller.html#post1634050 Now why does that remind me of the time just before they unleashed slm on us? Am I the only one getting tired of their antics?

The only other thing to remember is if there's a problem with the group, depending on what it is, LL won't contact the currently identified owner(s), they will only deal with the group creator. I've only had this happen once in all the years I've been in here but it's a tidbit of information you may not find elsewhere.

JeanneAnne wrote: i tried SLU .. there was a thread about child abuse .. ppl were defending the catholic church re: abusive priests .. i suggested that they must be child abusers themselves .. to be defending pedophile priests .. so the cliquishness set in & i got dogpiled .. so i didnt really care to participate in a forum where the regs defended pedophilia .. so i asked the boss Nazi dude to delete my account .. he said he couldnt do that cuz id posted & ppl had responded to my posts .. but he said he could ban me .. so i said please do & he did ...sooooo .. been there done that Jeanne Cris rarely bans people and it's only when they're completely out of control and refuse to modify their behaviour. From what I know that's either they're threatening people or if they're outrageously trolling people. Just because you told him to ban you doesn't mean he has, in fact I'm sure he hasn't. also, you really do need to provide a link to the thread you refer to - it's a pretty serious unsubstantiated allegation you're making there. What I'm not understanding here is why those of you who are getting prissy were in the off topic boards anyway - particularly the one's that come with a warning that they're going to be rough. It really does smack of you going over there because you want to be offended and looking around until you found something that did. or (and most likely) you're just doing the hive mind thing and parroting what others have said. As for lolcats and the rest of it.. shall we talk about Mosley Sperber's adult content protest sign in this thread? It certainly fits the juvenile category and unlike the lolcats you see over at slu, wasn't even relevant as far as derails go. If you don't like slu, that's fine but this trashing of the reputation of it seems pretty petty and the allegations that the forum supports paedophilia is just spiteful.

The short (!) answer is that it depends on who you're trying to please: V1, v2 and the web (iirc) use different aspect ratios so there's always going to be someone who sees it looking odd. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Limits 1.x Series Viewers (official Viewer up to 1.23.5, most Third Party Viewers) Search > All for "Classifieds", "People", and "Places" - 4:3 (256×192 pi×els) Search > Places and Classified tabs - ~7:5 (398×282 pixels) Search > Land tab - ~7:5 (358×252 pixels) Profile > 2nd Life tab - ~4:3 (178×133 pixels) Profile > Picks tab - 16:9 (288×162 pixels) Profile > 1st Life tab - 1:1 (133×133 pixels) Profile > Classifieds tab - ~3:2 (206×137 pixels) Profile > Web tab- 1:1 (400×400 pixels)A scrollbar uses 15 pixels on the right-hand side. About Land > Options tab - ~3:2 (178×117 pixels) Group Information > General tab's "Group Insignia"- 1:1 (126×126 pixels)Some of these textures are shared (for example, Search > All place pages, Search > Places, and About Land > Options use the same image), so you should pick a well-balanced ratio and size. Learn how to get correct texture aspect ratios when editing images. 2.x Series Viewers Search > Classifieds thumbnail - 4:3 (60×45 pixels) Search > Classifieds expanded - ~4:3 (252×188 pixels) Search > Classifieds expanded > Details - 17:7 (272×112 pixels) Search > People - 4:3 (188×141 pixels) Search > Destination Guide thumbnail - ~4:3 (45×34 pixels) Search > Destination Guide expanded - 5:3 (250×150 pixels) Profile > 2nd Life tab - ~1:1 (100×99 pixels) Profile > Picks thumbnail - 8:5 (88×55 pixels) Profile > Pick expanded - ~5:3 (285×172 pixels) About Land > Options tab - ~20:13 (193×125 pixels) Places > More information - ~11:7 (272×173 pixels)

Boudicca Littlebird wrote: On the 17th of august I created a thread about the big bang http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Is-the-big-bang-fact-or-fiction/m-p/1638349#M74321 at the same time I put the exact copy of it on SLU http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/politics-religion-society/75407-big-bang-fact-fiction.html I wanted to see the difference between the 2, the replies here were more science based, wheres the replies in SLU were mostly very childish, (snipped for brevity and I'm going to ignore the rest of the comments) Boudicca Littlebird wrote: I was not testing people, I was testing my abilty to fit and I failed, read the post that stands out to. Make your mind up which it is. From your posting style on there I'd say the first. So they made fun of you, I had sympathy until I looked at your posting history (http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/search.php?searchid=4216195). I've checked out the posts you made and you came across as a drive by troll - slu seems to attract those kind of people - you kept making unsubstantiated statements and then never came back to answer questions or support your argument. It's hard to take someone seriously when they don't actually want to have a conversation or attempt to back up their claims. I notice you haven't gone back into that thread of yours to provide the details that were requested, enough people who do have crediblity there for knowing stuff weren't really impressed with what you'd written - unsurprising really since you didn't even bother to back it up with evidence. Also your very first post after joining was saying none of them appeared to know what they were talking about, it doesn't really give the impression of someone who was serious about "fitting in" with the community. I'm sure there are communities where you can go in and insult them in the first breath and then make statements without any facts to back them up and you'll be welcomed - I just can't think of any at the moment. pro tip: don't bother going back unless you actually do want to participate - the people there (and here for that matter) are not things for you to experiment with and the SLU community takes a dim view of it. Along with surveys, trolls and other timewasters. When they don't think you're serious they'll lolcat you from the outset and saying you've got a better theory than the big bang with no academic references to support it doesn't really come across as someone who wants to be taken seriously. just my tuppence

hey! welcome back to the fold

Medhue Simoni wrote: Irreguardless of how Gadget presented or handled the situation, it does make sense to check other settings, besides the lowest. It would be extremely bad advice to only view your product with low graphic settings. A creator that makes items only for low-end computers, is guaranteed to sell less and make less money. Why? This should be obvious, but a person with a low end computer is going to have much less cash to spend than some1 with a high-end computer. Now, of course, there are exceptions for every rule, but on average, this will be true. *warning, wall of text follows* I have to take issue with that on so many levels. Now, if we knew the various demographics of the users of sl and they fit your assumptions I'd agree with you but as a first point, kids may have a gaming box but have no cash. The rest would vary across the spectrum from no decent hardware and no cash through to decent hardware and lots of disposable income. Assuming that the general trend in gaming is followed in sl, it's young men and middle aged women make the majority (with what used to be a larger dollop than usual of people who are socially isolated to varying degrees because of location or disabilities) - with varying income levels. I came in here in 2006 and the hardest thing my pc and laptop had to do was run ms project. Even now, if you remove all the various apps I need for sl, I don't need anything more than being able to check emails, look at the occasional youtube vid and run the MS office suite. Which is why it took a while earlier this year for me to convince myself again that I needed to spend an extra thousand pounds more for a decent pc that would run sl, photoshop et al, despite the fact I made a reasonable income from here and its a business expense. Now that extra grand could have gone into my pocket and been spent on something nice rather than on a pc that is only used to its fullest potential perhaps once a week for an hour or so when I do sl related stuff. If I didn't make income in here I would have given up sl before wasting that kind of money on it. SL for casual users who have other, non pc based entertainment options, it is not worth upgrading to a higher spec pc. And like a lot of people in here (I suspect) the amount of disposable income a person has, has nothing to do with whether they spend or not. I'm sure some people see any money spent as the equivalent of buying a cup of coffee (i.e. you have nothing to show for it) at the other end there are others who still mutter about paying money for something that's not real or they don't own. Certainly in the last few years I've met more and more people who spend only the bare minimum to outfit their av - they spend on nothing else and their hardware varies. I'd say it's more about how much value gives them in these current economic times and for a lot of people the answer is "certainly not enough to spend stupid money on sl specific hardware, just so sl looks better and then have to spend money ingame". With creators, it does really depend on which type of creator you are talking about. An animator may be able to get away with quavimator (which still ran well on my hacked xp box up until I replaced it), a scripter doesn't need anything more than to be able to run an lsl editor, search google and run the client. If you're someone who uses pre-made components and just puts it together and textures it may or may not be such a big deal and really only become necessary if you make clothing or accessories. So, I'd say your generalisation doesn't really wash. and one last thing, I've just replaced my laptop - which is primarily business - and yet again decided I'd go for something that will allow sl to burn the vid card out again. After buying something reasonably specced (certainly more than if it were just a pure business laptop) I found it is only so, so running it. I probably spent double what I need to just to run sl when I'm working away from home and it's still not fantastic. I'd say the issue is not so much the demographics as the perceived value sl gives which would make people want to spend money. SL has lost a lot of the goodwill from users because it's sub-standard and with concurrency declining, I can give you lots better reasons why people don't spend than your unsubstantiated claim that only poor people run rubbish hardware and don't spend. /wall of text

Medhue Simoni wrote: And LL wonders why they can't keep new residents. I've said it before. Their most important job is to just take the dang money, and they can't even do that right. Everything else, we can handle. LL are very good at taking the money - the problem is getting them to pass it on where necessary (remember the days when people complained they used to take double tier and refuse to give it back and if they went to their credit card provider for a recall LL would suspend the account? I suppose at least that doesn't happen any more ) or give value when it's given for a service. LL makes the rules, no matter how egregious.

Welcome to Second Life where Linden Lab's motto is "there's one born every minute".

This issue has been around for a long time and along with things like paying for classifieds inworld that aren't indexed properly so they are never seen in search (around in one form or another since 2007 that I know of) , it's just another cost of doing business with an organisation that appears to treat its customers with contempt. Of course if this were usd being used then there would be legal recourse but it's not, so think of it more as playing an illegal game of poker where you know the house fixes the deck. If you play once you know, then you can't really complain when you're fleeced.

Hermione Lefevre wrote: I am no genious indeed but bright enough to not buy from a merchant who calls critical customers ignorant now you may have missed the, what appear to now be missing, replies which were nodding and agreeing with the greed - which is what my reply was aimed at. That said, if you want to take offense (and it wasn't aimed at you and your question) go right ahead - it's a free world, I'm not going to stop you. My only tip is don't buy transfer items if you don't like the perms.

I don't buy copy items unless I really want it and I can't find an alternative (very rare thankfully). The market I sell to is those people who think like me. It's not greed (it's ok guys, it's a full moon out there so I suppose comprehension skills and manners drop around this time of the month) it's allowing choice. Some of you might not be bright enough to grasp the concept that different people want different things out of the objects they buy in second life, so you may just have to take my word for it. There's enough people catering to each taste that this shouldn't be an issue. At the beginning I used to sell items with a choice of either perms but it took to long to set both up that when I made a choice of only selling one version I went with the perms I'd want. The percentage of sales of each set of perms was pretty well the same - so there was no overwhelming demand for copy. the pro tip here is that not everyone wants what you people want, so get over it and stop displaying your ignorance. eta: sorry Josh, that wasn't aimed at you - I clicked the wrong reply button.

sigh. it must be school holidays.

according to the latest missive they're jigging around with the marketplace again http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Merchants/Marketplace-and-Direct-Delivery-Update/m-p/1618945#M25611 so your problems could be as a result of that. one thing you didn't mention trying is another browser. It might be worth trying if you haven't, otherwise I'd say log a support ticket and hopefully they won't ignore you.

I thought all objects were only given an uuid when they were rezzed and when they're taken back into the inventory it's lost (the easiest way is to right click on the item in the inventory and check the uuid - it should be all zeroes). Scripts, textures, animations etc get a permanent uuid and I gather scripts get a new one each time it changes - but I might be misremembering. I'd say if you're trying to force a change to an object identifier in the database either a name change or a slight change to the object (new texture, slight resizing), or both, might force it but I'm grasping at straws here.

you know, it's quite possible that they're considering doing a forced migration for people who still have MBs but have left sl or can't be bothered moving over. A forced migration would have two benefits for them; those items that are still selling can continue to make money and they can do a forced switchoff of the mbs without having a sharp decline in the number of items on offer. It's quite possible that they're testing it and you fell into the pool because your stuff sells yet because it's in a mb they think you don't pay much attention. For 99% of people that would probably be the case and they appear to have some kind of shared delusion that their software deployments are perfect and never cause issues. Whatever it is, I'd say that anyone left on a mb should probably do their own migration as we know that LL will never get it right and won't care enough to fix it.