Deltango Vale

I agree that the problem lies at the doorstep of the Board of Directors. I believe they were largely responsible for pushing out Philip Rosedale in 2008, replacing him with Mark Kingdon. While it's true that Philip supported Rod's nomination, I can't help but feel it was under duress or, if not duress, then deception. Kingdon lasted two years before being replaced by Rod Humble, who lasted four years before being replaced by Ebbe Altberg. None of the three CEOs since Philip Rosedale has shared his vision. Indeed, they have taken SL in the opposite direction. I therefore doubt that any CEO appointed by the Board will be effective in achieving Second Life's full potential. I have long maintained that progress will only be made when the Board sells Second Life to a company with the vision and courage to achieve that potential.

Maddy, been ages Look at Hippistock. Why hasn't LL tried to promote it with a cool YouTube trailer as an example of self-organizing inworld communities? Or music videos done in nightclubs (some of which have extremely well-dressed avatars). Where is the glossy coffee-table book outlining interesting stories of SL residents? Or a limited-edition book on SL jewelry or fashion? Has LL contacted any of the long-standing SL merchants to publish such artwork? Where is Torley? Where is the LL staff? Where are the videos of devs talking about their projects? Where is the annual fanfest at which LL managers and devs outline the future plans of the company? I'm sure residents from across SL would attend, either in costume or to meet others in RL or incognito, to interact with the staff, formally and informally, at various side events or in the bar. Where are the guest speakers from related projects or academia or education or inworld merchants or related industries? SL is full of brilliant people. Who are they? Where are they? What are they doing? What are their stories? Many would love to share their experiences with other residents in a social setting. Linden Lab is a sealed envelope, stuffed into a folder, wrapped in a box, locked in a drawer, enclosed in a safe, hidden in a storeroom, located in an abandoned warehouse. Second Life is a distant memory in the media. The official SL blogs consist of 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day' and 'update 2011'. It's appalling! The standard responses when I tell people I'm in Second Life are: what is Second Life? does that still exist? you're joking why would you waste your time in a virtual world? That's when I send them info and videos about virtual worlds OTHER than SL because the SL promotional material is crap. I then try to work backwards from there to explain SL. Linden Lab is a huge handicap in getting people interested in SL. Do you think I'm going to send them a link to Ebbe's speech? I blush at the embarassment it would cause me. Surely to god, Linden Lab can do better than that.

Linden Lab has a promising future...and always will. I'm watching other companies move forward in leaps and bounds. Even stodgy old Facebook is getting in on the act. Meanwhile, Linden Lab, the extraordinary, innovative first mover into virtual worlds has squandered Second Life's potential on plastic surgery and social engineering. The plastic surgery included: Avatars United (to compete with Facebook) - fail SL Enterprise (to provide independent platforms to corporate clients) - fail rezoning the grid (to 'clean up' SL) - fail Linden Homes (to provide large-scale zoned, prefab housing) - mixed results (giving new residents easy access to a home, but, coupled with a massive oversupply of mainland, resulted in a price collapse and the dereliction of the mainland) V2 and Display Names (to squeeze the user interface onto new server software) - fail - thank all the gods for the Phoenix/Firestorm team for providing a replacement user interface (does anyone actually use the SL viewer anymore?) mesh (to enable 3rd-party creative tools) - mixed results (great furniture, lousy clothes) SL Marketplace (to promote commerce) - mixed results (it required a concomitant reform of the land pricing model, which never happened, resulting in a further collapse of land use) LL's recently aborted romp into tablet games (to compete with Minecraft) - fail LL's attempt to put SL on the head of a pin (tablet, cellphone, wristwatch? fingernail? toothpick?) - fail The social engineering has been a 7-year attempt to convert 'Las Vegas' into 'Disneyland'. The result is neither fish nor fowl, but instead a forlorn playground for senior citizens (no 13-18-year-old would be caught dead in Second Life) dreaming of the world that might have been had John Lennon not been shot. Now, it's all about kids, education and charities. Yes, there is a grudging acceptance of the need for commerce (the way the Ferengi are tolerated in Star Trek), but LL's heart isn't in it. One need only observe the sophisticated markets in other virtual worlds to appreciate how delinquent LL has been in creating commercial/financial tools to promote economic growth. So now Linden Lab wants to build another world. You won't be surprised to learn that I'm unimpressed. While I have no major disagreements with Ebbe's speech, it came across as banal and uninspiring. At least he admitted - finally - that the land pricing model is a disaster. He'd like to generate revenue through commercial transactions. Sure, no problem, that's how it's done elsewhere, but I see no strategy other than enabling better 3rd-party tools for creating content (one day, some day, eventually). There is no vision for the economy as a whole - no overall strategy - only tactics. As for the presentation itself, come on! Really? Is that the best you can do? Either construct an impressive avatar or take the show to RL. Either way, get beyond the 2007 look of a tired old world going nowhere.

Thank you, Innula, for your excellent overview. Note that it is you and not Linden Lab performing this valuable service. Having been away from this forum for a while, I'm appalled how little has changed. Linden Lab has got to be the worst company in the known universe for customer/public relations. It becomes even more apparent when one looks around at other VR companies who gather thousands of players to annual fanfests and produce stellar trailers. Here in SL, the best we can hope for is a clunky YouTube video maybe once every couple of years or a brief notice in SLU. In contrast to the enthusiasm and professionalism of the VR community, SL comes across as granny's knickers.

Brilliant. I have submitted three suggestions already with more to come. Nice to see Linden Lab finally paying attention to its knowledgeable, experienced and, cough, paying customers. Seven years late, but better late than never.

The Emerald viewer preceded the Phoenix viewer, which preceded the Firestorm viewer. Many residents switched to Emerald in the latter days of V1. It was a good viewer, but it was susceptible to abuse. When the main designer launched a DDoS attack, Emerald was doomed (and rightly so). The code was taken over by a responsible team of designers and the viewer was renamed Phoenix. All of this happened before the release of V2. Following the release of V2, Phoenix was redesigned as Firestorm.

"I use the analogy of a car. There is the engine under the hood and there is the Dashboard, etc, where we all the controls are where we 'interface' with the engine." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not quite. V2 destroyed the excellent, long-standing naming convention, resulting not only in 1) a greatly reduced name space for new residents, 2) account inflation as existing residents scrambled to create new avatars to prevent cybersquatting of their names and 3) a degradation of the user experience across Second Life. In other words, V2 replaced leather bucket seats with a single vinyl bench. More power under the hood maybe, but a less comfortable ride.

"Del, LL will be the only developer of their new virtual world. If you trust them to get that right, why not trust them to get the viewer right? If you don't trust them to get the world right, why care about the viewer?" -------------------------------------------- Good point. I don't expect LL to get it right with SL2. I expect catastrophe. LL's track record on development has been abysmal. It's not just about core engineering; it's about the entire development process. V2 was dumped on the community without any consultation. God bless poor Torley who struggled to soothe people with instructional videos, knowing all the while that V2 was a turd. The introduction of mesh was a mess. LL is sloppy, very sloppy. I expect the same sloppy development and shoddy workmanship for SL2. I expect SL2 to bankrupt the company.

If LL were to announce that the Firestorm team would be the exclusive developer of the SL2 viewer, I would probably agree with you, but LL has a proven track record of failure on viewer development. The contrast between the skill, intelligence and enthusiasm of the Firestorm team and LL's crude, sloppy V2 is legendary. Firestorm is the SL viewer now. The idea of LL being the only developer of the SL2 viewer sends shivers down the spine of the entire SL community. In the UK, there is the well-known concept of the 'cowboy builder'. He's the sort of guy that shows up at your house with a hammer in one hand and a saw in the other then proceeds to hack and chop at everything in sight until he finally leaves your house in ruins - and charges a huge fee for his shoddy workmanship. V2 was the result of 'cowboy builders' - a godawful mess that took years to fix. Without Firestorm, SL would have been severely crippled, perhaps permanently crippled. I doubt you would rehire the same company that installed your roof upside down. Do you really want to give LL exclusive control over the SL2 viewer?

Interesting comments. I was intrigued by CCP Games' intended realism for World of Darkness. There are good reasons for WoD's failure, not least the vampire theme, which is getting rather stale, but what caught my attention was the avatar rendering via CCP's . I even imagined CCP Games buying Second Life and appending it to EVE as a protected (HiSec) planet.As you know, both SL and EVE Online are unscripted and open ended. As with SL, many EVE players complain that there is nothing to do there. The dropout rate is quite high, an issue CCP is trying to address. Their approach so far is tactical - improving core functionality and the user interface. Strategy seems to be on hold, no doubt undermined by the resident revolt over Incarna. LL would be wise to study the autopsy of Incarna, but I doubt LL has ever heard of EVE Online. The point being that SL and EVE are similar in offering residents the opportunity to build up an enterprise over the long term, be it a fleet (EVE) or a clothing store (SL), as either a legendary badass (EVE) or a socialite (SL). Both offer few rewards to new and short-term players. Both, though, enable the forging of .I believe, therefore, that SL and EVE are closer in spirit than you suggest (notwithstanding the closeness of SL and Minecraft). I still believe that SL could capture a much bigger share of the top 11% space. Incarna taught everyone a valuable lesson. Tactics do matter. LL is trying to improve SL's functionality, but unlike EVE - and here's where I agree with you - SL needs a much clearer long-term strategy. Virtual Disneyland isn't working.

While I tend to agree with you, I think the issue might be more complex. I am puzzled by the success of Dr. Who (forgive the abreviation, but this blog software thinks it's porn and won't accept the proper name). It is the most shoddily produced TV show in history: cardboard boxes painted to look like machines, control rooms that are obviously the inside of a BBC broom closet and about the worst dialog imaginable. At the same time, EVE Online is hugely successful due to the realism of its virtual world - in spite of being universally recognized as the most difficult MMORPG to learn. CCP Games (makers of EVE Online) has roughly the same revenues as Second Life (about $75 million). King Digital (Candy Crush Saga) has revenues of $2 billion. So, what's going on here? I think it's important to remember what market is being targeted. Dr. Who, Candy Crush and James Patterson (to name an author) target the full bottom 55% of the social pyramid. CCP Games targets the top 11%, Second Life initially targeted the top 11%, but has since being trying to penetrate the middle 33% (to the chagrin of the top 11%). To be fair, Second Life and EVE Online have done rather well considering the small size of their market within the social pyramid. Perhaps that's the key. Second Life can't be mass market because of its core design and functionality - though the Firestorm Viewer has gone a long way to make SL more popular. Perhaps Linden Lab, instead of trying to dumb down SL should instead seek to make it comparable to Rolex and Hermes - in other words, to dominate the full top 11%. This will require not only greater realism, but new policies compatible with an educated, intelligent and adult (grown-up) market.

"SL and LL still are at least 5-10 years ahead of the mainstream requirements and mainstream demand (technicaly and by conception), while Minecraft just hits it perfectly right here and now." ---------------------------------------------- I think this sums it up perfectly.

I sometimes wonder if you are right. And yet, your average cellphone requires an engineering degree to even begin to understand its full functionality. People seem to have no problem programming their phones to launch missile strikes via satellite or curing cancer with new bio-apps or setting up conference calls between every single person in India. So, why can't they figure out how to use Second Life? I admit that Minecraft is virtual Lego. I also admit that Candy Crush Classic is the biggest earner around, but let's not forget that SL generates about $75 million in earning per year (down from a peak of about $100 million) in spite of terrible management. I figure the two big contenders for SL are Google and Facebook. SL is a natural extension of the social geography they are trying to establish. Sadly, I think both companies would dumb down SL even more than Linden Lab. Silicon Valley is all about short-term profits rather than long-term strategy. I figure there are only about six people on the planet who see the full potential of virtual worlds. Somewhere out there is a future 'Elon Musk' of virtual space. Let's hope he gets to SL before Google and Facebook.

Slowly, slowly, people are waking up to the potential of virtual worlds. So, who will buy Second Life? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29204518

One might think this would be an excellent opportunity for LL to fix the name problem (that LL created in the first place). SL2 should enable Joe447hatemyname32 Resident to become Joe Michael Starshine, or perhaps Joe Starlight or maybe Joseph Stargazer. Why do I just know LL will mess this up? Rolls eyes. Of course, LL should also enable residents to keep their existing proper names (ensuring that they are not cyber squatted). Good luck in your campaign. No doubt, LL will ingore it completely, as usual.

"What would your attitude have been if you had lost all your money when Ginko folded?" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The same as anyone who lost a hell of a lot of money in the SL land market. Thousands of residents lost large amounts of money due to Linden Lab's terrible land management policies (starving then flooding the mainland market, changing the rating system). By your reasoning, Second Life itself should have been shut down to protect people from financial losses. Anyone investing money in Ginko or the WSE or any other financial organization in SL or, indeed, SL itself, knew the risks. It was none of LL's business to get involved in residents' financial affairs. That's not just my opinion; it was the philosophy of SL as promoted by the company until, out of the blue, Mitch Kapor decided to play God. An adult makes decisions and is responsible for those decisions, whether it's playing the stock market, buying high-interest bonds from the Cayman Islands, starting a business, buying virtual land or spending a weekend in Las Vegas. People lose huge amounts of money in Las Vegas. Would you shut that down too? What about motorcycle racing or paragliding or rock climbing? Ban extreme sports? Smoking, drinking, sex with strangers, eating fast food - too risky, ban them? An adult (grown-up) deals with a world full of risk and uncertainty called 'life'. And that's the key point. Second Life began as a world for adults (grown-ups). It was admired as a world for adults (grown-ups). It was promoted as a world for adults (grown-ups). The first huge wave of residents were adults (grown-ups). It was successful because it attracted adults (grown-ups with money). Linden Lab has subsequently converted SL into a world for children (literally and figuratively). Linden Lab has become increasingly paternalistic - as a matter of policy and strategy - driving away the adults (grown-ups) that built SL, lived in SL and invested in its future. What remains is a controlled playground. Fine. If that's what LL wants, it's their world to do with as they please - but SL has become a very niche market with no prospect of economic growth because economic growth is driven by risk-takers (adults). SL2 won't change that. As for 'the law', of course, LL should follow the law, but the law is rarely clear-cut. That's why there is a hierarchy of courts going up to the Supreme Court - to seek to understand and resolve complex issues arising from poorly written legislation that may or may not also contradict the Constitution. Law is notoriously messy. Obamacare is 2,000 pages. The US Tax Code is 72,000 pages - and no single human being understands it. Yet people speak of the law as if it were ten lines of black and white text that's obvious to everyone who reads it. It is the task of every organization to seek to integrate messy laws with policy. This can be done well (informing customers as far in advance as possible, soliciting customer feedback, seeking to minimize the detrimental effects of laws without overtly breaking them, proceeding cautiously and wisely in the revision of policy) or done poorly, for which LL has a consistent track record.

"They have to comply with the Laws." ----------------------------------------------------- LL has a history of complying with the law - badly. LL also has a history of making policy and dressing it up as a legal issue (inworld banking, for example, and gambling policy). Rarely has LL been clear and upfront about the legal component of policy decisions. Rarely has LL been clear and upfront about anything.

Well well well, how interesting. The last time I brought money into SL was October 2013, but from memory, I did it via Lindex (out of convenience). I just tried to do it via 'Increase Credit' and got your screenshot. So LL now forces a double conversion (and two-way fees) to put $US into one's account. For the fist time in my life, I shall use the term 'raw corporate greed' to describe this change. Just when I thought LL was the dumbest company on the planet, you have shown me that it can reach new lows. All the more reason to pull money out.

"@Deltango. Increasing Credit still only changes the amount of Real Dollars you are able to spend on Linden Dollars. You see this as 'depositing cash' into your SL account and yes in a way it is. But it's not exactly the same as when we could add cash to our account with out buying $L. People used to do that as a way to make sure their Tier was covered when it became due." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I can still deposit $US into my SL account to cover tier. It's standard procedure. Nothing has changed in eight years. Perhaps this function was removed for Basic Accounts, but I have never heard of such a change. To prevent people from bringing $US into their accounts to cover tier would be stupid even by LL standards. My generation moved money into and out of SL depending on many factors. Buying a choice piece of land often required having $L ready and waiting to make the purchase. One could not trust an indirect CC purchase because things were always going wrong with the SL background systems. Therefore, one brought in $US and converted it to $L in advance of a potential land purchase. Only then could one be guaranteed that when he clicked 'buy land' it would work. Often one did not use the $L he had available. Sometimes the land was no longer for sale (things moved very fast in those days) or the landowner/seller would change the parcel size/shape overnight (making it less appealing) or someone would buy an adjacent parcel and build a monstrosity (forcing one to resell the land he had just purchased) or one simply changed his mind. Sometimes one would reconvert his unused $L back to $US to cover tier. Sometimes the $US was pulled out of SL depending on RL needs (unexpected expenses or to buy something special). Sure, one wished to reduce transaction fees, but transaction fees were not that important compared to the joy of participating in the SL economy. Remember too, land in 2006-2007 was expensive. Today, land is so cheap that 15% of it is abandoned. In 2007, half a mainland sim could cost US$2,000. My generation thought nothing of bringing US$5,000 into SL for prospective purchases. Back in 2006-2007, we had confidence in SL. Linden Lab was a smart, ambitious company with an intelligent strategic plan. Yes, there was hype, but much of the hype was justified by the enormous potential of SL. I remember how proud I was to be among the first million residents. As is well known, LL went through an internal coup in 2008. The founding principles were abandoned, the strategic plan was abandoned and there followed a string of major management errors. It's easy to see in hindsight, but you know the story of boiling a frog. The smart money, unencumbered by emotion, began to flow out of SL. The rest of us could not believe that LL would turn 180 degrees from its original vision. Digression: I'm amused that LL wants to build SL2. The company still thinks of virtual worlds as an engineering project. Even CCP Games has realized that EVE Online is not an engineering project - in spite of its military-grade technological infrastructure. Virtual worlds are a human project. Until LL figures this out, SL2 will fare no better than SL. In fact, it's likely to bankrupt the company. It was the announcement of SL2 that prompted me to begin removing money from SL.

"I think we are just having a little bit of a language problem here on this point, not understanding each other. I hope this clears it up." -------------------------------------------------------------- Semantics: the biggest problem for communication. I am also able to "Increase Credit". This is how I bring $US into my SL account. It's standard procedure. I have been doing it for eight years without a problem. Perhaps there is a generational issue here. Today, SL is all about free free free - about 'playing' SL without spending any money. This is due to LL's promotion of a free-to-play culture, the company's attempts over the years to convert SL into 3D Facebook, avatar Minecraft and cellphone Candy Crush, and the exodus of money by people of my generation who became disillusioned by the direction of SL and the compound errors of LL management. The cynicism toward SL/LL and the disparaging of virtual everything as expressed so often in the fora is a symptom of these changes. I must admit that if I had discovered SL today (as it is today) instead of 2006 (as it was in 2006), I would not invest a single cent. SL today is a sad and restrictive world, a kind of mini-California + Disneyland theme park. No one in 2006 imagined such a terrible future for SL.

Back in 2006-2007 when Second Life had a bright and promising future, I and thousands of others from around the world poured money into SL. A mainland sim could cost up to US$5,000 at auction. People bought land and built homes. Some opened businesses. When SL began to go south in 2008-2009, much of that money was withdrawn, a process that continues to this day. Others gritted their teeth and prayed for better LL management or a corporate buyout. Yes, we holdouts were stupid. I confess to being blinded by hope. The smart money read the writing on the wall and cleared out. Desmond Shang said he would have left long ago except for his commitment to his friends and tenants - and, boy, is he pissed off by the way LL has dealt with him recently. (Note: for those who don't know him, Desmond is one of the most sober and upright people I have ever met. From day one, he has run his business professionally, paying every cent of his taxes.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Now why someone would want to store their money in SL would be beyond me." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- People didn't sit down with a pencil in one hand and a phone call to PWC in the other, trying to figure out how to store money in SL. People came to SL with dreams. They paid for their dreams with money. Land cost money, homes cost money, clothes cost money. Second Life is not some computer game to be played during lunch hour; SL is an immersive virtual world in which people live full, rich and complete lives. It is because of this that so many people were reluctant to sell off their land, derez their homes and pull out of SL. Is it any wonder that they are infuriated by LL asking them for ID and tax info on the way out? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) requires Linden Lab to collect and retain Form W-9 (for U.S. residents) and Form W-8BEN (for non-U.S. residents) at certain transaction volumes. If you reach the transaction threshold and we do not have your completed and signed W-9 or W-8BEN on file, we are required to withhold funds from your account (at the current rate of 28% of your gross amounts received). Additionally, for U.S. residents with 200 or more transactions with a total amount in excess of $20,000 in a calendar year, we are required to file a Form 1099-K with the IRS reporting those transactions for that year." - Linden Lab ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You are right that Linden Lab never states clearly what the threshold might be, though the implication is the 200 transaction/$20,000 mark, but are you seriously suggesting that laws should be vague or secret to avoid people gaming the system? I can't think of a single lawyer who would agree with you.

"Again, you can no longer deposit cash into Second Life." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I can purchase US$5,000 worth of L$ in a 24-hour period to a maximum of US$10,000 every 30 days. I have been able to do this since 2006 (45 days after joining SL). If you choose not to believe me, well, I guess it puts an end to the conversation. I certainly gain nothing by lying.

"The only people being required to provide the information are those who cash out (have an income). So I don't understand your problem here." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cashing out does not equal income. If I deposit $5,000 into a bank account then later withdraw $2,000, the $2,000 is not income. Very few residents generate an income in SL. Most treat SL as a hobby or entertainment expense. Most simply wish to withdraw some of the money they had previously deposited. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Additionally, LL removed the ability to deposit money into your SL account quite a while back." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Almost anyone can deposit money into SL. For example, I can bring $10,000 into SL per month, $120,000 per year, if I so desire. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "What is arbitrary or inconsistent?" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Anyone wishing to open a bank account in the US is required by law to supply ID and tax information. If SL is a type of bank account then every resident depositing money into SL should be required by law to provide ID and tax information. Yet LL chooses not to treat SL as a type of bank account, which I presume LL is legally entitled to do, thought it raises interesting questions about the legal/tax status of virtual bank accounts. Be that as it may, SL accounts are, functionally, a type of bank account (deposit/withdraw, $L convertible with $US). The situation regarding Amazon Kindle is straightforward. No one deposits money into Amazon before publishing his book. Money withdrawn can only be income. The ID and tax information required to publish on Kindle therefore apply to all accounts for obvious reasons. There is no confusion. Nothing is arbitrary. SL is not so straightforward. SL is a mixture of pay-to-play hobby/entertainment (often requiring money to be deposited in advance to buy, for example, land or a large wardrobe) and business (sometimes profitable, often loss-making). Currently, LL does not distinguish between those who withdraw profits from their investments and those who withdraw from previously deposited funds. LL treats the person who withdraws $2,000 from the $5,000 he previously deposited as if the $2,000 were income. This generates massive confusion among the residents. I, for example, have deposited about $20,000 into SL over the previous eight years, generating about $15,000 in losses (pay-to-play expenses). Now I wish to withdraw a couple thousand dollars of what remains. To call my withdrawal 'income' is ridiculous. In addition, many residents who don't come anywhere near LL's stated threshold of 200 withdrawals and/or a withdrawal of $20,000 are being asked to provide ID and tax information. This too generates massive confusion. To be consistent, LL should either treat SL accounts as bank accounts (and require all residents to supply ID and tax information) or request ID and tax information only on profit-making individuals/businesses and/or explain to residents clearly, in advance, the precise thresholds that would trigger a request for ID and tax information. At the moment, as expressed in many blogs, the situation appears arbitrary, inconsistent and confusing. This is not the fault of the IRS. This is the fault of Linden Lab again being sloppy in the application of law and policy.

"If you never cash out you never need to supply the information." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cute. LL will love you for that one. Seriously, there is something very wrong with this picture. Either everone should be required to register with the IRS (as is done with US bank accounts) or only people who generate an income via SL (as is done with Amazon). Linden Lab's policy appears arbitrary and inconsistent. It is also grossly unfair to those who deposited money in SL before the new policy was announced.

The new tax reporting requirement is confusing. I can understand a writer who seeks to publish on Kindle being required to register with the IRS because it is obvious income. He does not deposit funds into Amazon beforehand. He only withdraws funds based on sales. SL is a different thing entirely. Most people bring money into SL then later withdraw some of that money. For 99% of residents, SL is more like a bank account. For 99% of residents, their withdrawals are way below the $10,000 reporting threshold. I do not understand why Linden Lab would subject them to a complex tax reporting requirement. Surely, LL can distinguish between the 99% of residents who do not make money in SL and the 1% who do. In my opinion, LL is once again shooting itself in the foot by harassing residents with tax reporting forms that are applicable in very few cases. This is particularly true for non-US residents who are, no doubt, baffled by the process. At the very least, it is a huge disincentive for anyone to participate in the SL economy. The message from LL is increasingly clear: SL = government regulations, social restrictions, transaction fees, red tape and taxes.