Ciaran Laval

Toysoldier.Thor wrote: Exactly my point Rachel regarding the Clutter Tax. You were very much for it - I was very much against it. So using the example I posted, you are in Focus Group #1 and when asked by LL you promote it, I get invited to Focus Group #2 and I express to LL how stupid an idea it was. LL has 2 Merchant Focus Groups, two opposite messages. So... how much guidance do they get from these two groups? Reaction - "Merchants are not commited to either dirction so we will make up out own minds. Agreed, this is my fear, I am compltely opposed to PIOF for sales because of how SL works, I refuse to put PIOF on all of my accounts, that's five points of failure but if these closed user groups find favour with that with no open platform, where is the chance of the opposing view?

Rachel Darling wrote: Loving Clarity wrote: ah! I misunderstood. I thought that was to be in addition to they standard style open invitation meetings. I didn't realize it was a replacement. I also thought it was meant to be "in addition to." That's a shame, if it's the case...after a couple weeks the trolls would have found better things to do and the OH meetings would have begun to be productive. As annoyed as I was with the "problem children," I would like to think that LL realized the first few meetings would be overrun with pent-up frustration, and given it a few weeks to settle itself down. I'm of the understanding this is a general initiative by LL to replace OH's with user group, a blog post is rumoured to be in the pipeline.

There have been some fixes rolled out, so some of the bizarre words and characters that left an item in the wrong category, will no longer do that.

The wiki page and sales information alone were enough to tell you how those lots were zoned. I can't say I have any sympathy for people who read the limitations and interpret them as "Do whatever." That's right up there with people who park in bicycle lanes and then complain that their car was impounded, "But there wasn't a 'no parking' sign!" People applying reasonable intelligence to either situation understand why building up an OpenSpace or parking in a bicycle lane is a bad idea. Not quite, they weren't talking to Ontynes when they checked whether usage was suitable, the sales pitch really wasn't the way you seem to think it was. I kept asking what was going on and kept getting told they were selling like hot cakes, as if that excused the way they were being used, but even the original sims, going back years, the question about usage was asked and LL did not say it was forbidden. The large estate owners had already been using them as residences. I wasn't happy with the way these sims were presented, or the turning of a blind eye whilst they sold like hot cakes, but none of that excused what happened in the end.

;-)) Let's put it this way; I think there were many lessons learned on both side in this case. However, at the outset I believe it was pretty clear how those sims were supposed to be used. With the direction it took, it had to come to an end. When they changed them from being sold in packs of four, removed the restriction of needing to be attached to another island, lowered the price and increased the prim count the landscape changed. I spent a lot of time arguing about how they were being used only to be told time after time it was allowed. Indeed when they had the old restrictions, in the old forums, there was a post asking whether they could be rented out and LL's answer was yes, they didn't recommend such usage, but if you wanted to do that, fine. What happened in the end was totally out of order. However, as you say, lessons should have been learned on both sides.

However, some other things they weren't so lucky... and what bugs me on most of them is that we tried our best to warn them. The OpenSpace fiasco was of course the most glaring of these. Countless people warned Linden Lab, over a period of two months, that if they stayed with their plans we would close down sims. I did projections warning them of exactly what was going to happen. They didn't give a flying fig. So sims started closing down, and even then they didn't care. I told them exactly how many sims could shut down before they would hit the point of no return-- but they ignored us. This honestly surprised me. Not for what Linden Research did, they were only enforcing the usage scenarios they advertised for those regions; but what people buying into OpenSpace did. Heck, even the name is indicative of what it was intended for: Sparse regions with little, light weight development. Not malls. Not apartment allotments. Just space where acreage mattered more than object count or scripts. They were asked by people if they could use them in those circumstances, Linden Research did not say people couldn't use them for those things, they said they on the wiki page they may not support you if you used them in that way but people were phoning and engaging LL by Live Chat and asking if they could use them that way and were told yes they could. Who on earth was going to put an open waterway in the middle of nowhere? Let's not try and rewrite history here, LL saw the sales signs, questions on their usage were asked from pretty much the moment the product was changed, and it was changed, you never used to buy one at a time. Linden Lab absolutely encouraged that usage.

Not only that, but these days, you pretty much need Facebook to be visible in the marketplace. Behave, even Mark Zuckerberg wouldn't try and pull a line like that, you do not need Facebook for visibility.

Toysoldier.Thor wrote: Rene, The transcripts released by Brooke were doctored. She / her team filtered out some of the texted discussion (like the comment from one that said Brooke and her team should be fired). Yes its disrespectful and the many comments like that had no value - but there is a key aspect to the transcripts of a conversation - they should NOT be doctored, filterd, censored. So, for someone like you that only read LL's account of the meeting - you dont know EXACTLY how the meeting went because you know now that Brooke censored them but you dont know to what extent. Thankfully for as little time as they stayed on the Forum thread, I was able to read the entire un-filtered transcripts - before LL Moderators took them down. Whereas I can see your point,no LL shouldn't publish comments uncensored, they have to be careful exactly what they put up and they should put in a disclaimer stating that these are edited minutes.

i like the facebook thing. always thought SL itself should be more like a facebook 3d. why not look at an ultra successfull concept like facebook and copy some of the ideas that made it that succssfull to improve your own product. Behave!

I try and teach you the ways of the force young padawan and you repay me with this!

You could do with maturity ratings on groups and picks so that adult groups and picks are only displayed to people logged in. An option on the widgets please.

Make a new one, you're allowed four alts officially....I think! Well that's where I got stuck anyway.

Loving Clarity wrote: at today's Office Hours, it was made clear that anything Gorean was considered Moderate by LL and that would remain the way it is. This is very very silly.

Looks like we have a huge pro-Facebook crowd here As mentioned in the original blog post: "Share your favorites with us here OR on our Facebook page" To all the Facebook haters: Message heard loud and clear! Why don't you promote Second Life to Facebook users, on Facebook? I have no idea why you want to bring Facebook promotion here when they don't allow Second Life avatars to have accounts in their Second Life names, but if you do have to dance with Facebook, it's better to do it there. That way, those of us who object to Facebook can clearly appreciate that you mean there's a choice, because the only reason we'd have found out about said promotions is because a Facebook user mentioned it. You could even do exclusive promotions there and whereas some folk would moan about that, you would genuninely be promoting Second Life on Facebook, rather than promoting Facebook on Second Life.

Can you just set this filter to look for obviously dodgy words and then some specific to LL ones that are widely known to be dodgy, the posts popping up with problems with "an", "5" , "six" and "X" are getting extremely silly. This filter is trying to be too clever, keep it simple.

TriloByte Zanzibar wrote: I'll bite... what's with the name change? Is this a company-wide direction, or is something going to be done differently with these sessions than is done with any of the other office hours sessions held by all the other staffers? I read a rumour somewhere that LL were looking at communications and office hours were going away, can't remember where I read this, but if user groups are a new communication initiative then that's better than office hours being replaced with nothing.

Loving Clarity wrote: Ciaran Laval wrote: Loving Clarity wrote: The "user group" is Brooke's new name for Office Hours. The link is below. She's posted the date and time and asked about any topics that should be discussed. No it's not, Brooke is fully entitled to hold meeting how she sees fit and so far, it looks good, but secret meetings where you ask if it's ok to publish logs are not open office hours. I'm not against this process, we'll see how it pans out, but an office hour it is not. yes, it is... see my post just above this one. Ah I see what you mean now, yup there are different types of user group meetings, we'll get used to what Brooke means

The like button doesn't need to be clicked, whether there's much useful info without it being clicked is a different matter.

Loving Clarity wrote: The "user group" is Brooke's new name for Office Hours. The link is below. She's posted the date and time and asked about any topics that should be discussed. No it's not, Brooke is fully entitled to hold meeting how she sees fit and so far, it looks good, but secret meetings where you ask if it's ok to publish logs are not open office hours. I'm not against this process, we'll see how it pans out, but an office hour it is not.

Rachel Darling wrote: 1. Except in rare instances, a single word in and of itself should not trigger an Adult or Moderate rating -- and definitely not when the word has perfectly valid non-sexual definitions. If you want to use a computer program to make those kinds of judgements, some intelligence MUST be built into it, otherwise ridiculousnous prevails...and ridiculousness is not conducive to business. Indeed, some words have mutiple meanings, context is important, Pamela's bird that cocks its head is a perfect example of why just focussing on a word is bad. Rachel Darling wrote: 2. Personal responsibility for our own content MUST be part of the equation. If someone with Moderate content -- or more importantly Adult content -- is purposely trying to avoid an accurate rating that reflects that content's nature, then punish the offenders, rather than making 100,000 users jump through hoops to comply with a system that's vague, inaccurate, and open to various interpretations across the globe. Absolutely, this can't be said often enough. I would hope that we all want an accurate rating system, there are of course grey areas but those can be ironed out. Rachel Darling wrote: 3. Publish the flagged word list. It is ridiculous in the extreme to make us waste our time guessing what might be in that list, for reasons I've stated previously. Well if they won't publish it, at least highlight which word is causing a problem in that particular listing, people shouldn't have to work out which seemingly inoccuous word is the problem. They say they won't publish this list because people will just get around it, but that takes us back to point two and those who are actively trying to get around the filters, will work it out for themselves anyway, as they know they're trying to circumvent the filters whilst those who are genuinely puzzled why their PG item isn't getting listed, are the ones being punished.

Dartagan Shepherd wrote: And that's not to say that a good portion of the Gor type lifestyles aren't chok full of responsible adults that would never do anything like this, because that's also true. As long as there are the exceptions of some fool knowingly hitting on jailbait though, with no job and no life, I think the lowest common denominator needs to be dealt with. The more you push Gor, the more a teen is eventually going to find out that its core element is the slavery bits, because without them, Gor is not much in the way of writing or storyline as RP goes. Failure to face that fact I think is folly. I'm more frustrated with LL I suppose, and even though I'll stand by the decision, and it's not likely to be changed, I just refuse to accept SL in general as a place for 16 and 17 year olds. But if they're going to do it, do it right and protect them properly. The logic part is easy though, it's all legal liability. There's certainly not an ethics or morals committee running these decisions Well I certainly have some sympathy with that viewpoint and I agree that it's not a suitable place for sixteen and seventeen year olds as things stand. I'm more concerned with profiles and groups though than medieval buildings and gowns in that respect, but that's for a different thread.

People use the Gorean search term for reach, if the items are Pg in nature, which many of them are, then it's silly to classify them as moderate just because of a keyword than in itself is not moderate. This is an example of the silliness of word filters and people trying to decide the nature of a product because of word filters. We all know certain terms are not considered PG, Gorean is not one of those terms.

Kyrah Abattoir wrote: maid,uniform,domestic,servant,hotel What exactly is not pg in this? I'm not sure but i think it's because i mention the word "cuffs" in the description which is retarded. Hmm I've tried temporarily adding your description and keywords to one of my listings and it doesn't get force changed to a different rating, which would leave just the title or maybe it's a bug, try and cut and paste the description and keywords and see if it lets you put it back to general.

Pamela Galli wrote: Madeliefste Oh wrote: And that is why I ask, for the next big change 'delivery from inventories in stead of magic boxes', can we start talking about this soon? Tell us what you have in mind, on how this shall be done. Let us react and tell what possible problems we see from our point of view. There are all kind of tools you can use to get feedback from us, discussions on the forum, but also polls or surveys. But do it before your team has made up their mind on how it must be done codewise. Use our knowledge and experience to make it in the end work better for all parties. My hope and prayer is that this will be thoroughly beta tested before forced implementation -- unlike nearly everything else about the SLM, in which we saw Xstreet closed down when SLM was barely out of alpha (if it was at all). We don't mind change, esp one like this that promises the elimination of delivery failures -- but let's be clear: Xstreet had plenty of delivery problems, but nothing like SLM has had. Forget scrum -- the elimination of Magic Boxes is only ready when it is working perfectly. Well tested will do, no matter how well beta testing goes, the amount of extra variables when it goes live are likely to introduce issues, but I do agree that it should be pretty damn near to perfect before being unleashed.

Kyrah Abattoir wrote: The rating listing doesn't work properly stop tieing it to keywords LL are you stupid or something? this is an example of one of my products which is force flagged as mature. https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/KDC-Classic-Housekeeping-uniform-black/1632631 What are your keywords for that item?