Darrius Gothly

Ai Velde wrote: Holy crap. LOL! Every time I refresh more items are adult. This is hilarious! Ai, that tells me that they are in the process of automatically scanning and "adjusting" your listings. Take a break, make a hot chocolate and come back tomorrow to see where it stands. I think you are fighting a computer right now, and it's not only much faster than you, it's also dumber and meaner. In those immortal words ... "Let the eWookie win!"

New JIRA regarding the Maturity Ratings changes: Add Maturity Rating Filter to Inventory > Manage Inventory page in Marketplace

Pamela Galli wrote: I had a new Adult item -- a birdbath, with little singing birds that cock their heads and raise up their tails. /me falls down laughing hysterically ... Those dirty DIRTY birds! ETA: Pamela, I am given to understand that "penis" is a more acceptable alternative to "cock". Perhaps you should rewrite the listing so those naughty birds penis their heads. Message was edited by: Darrius Gothly because sometimes the smart-ass just will NOT be denied!!!

After reading every post to this point, I think the root of the anguish and frustration might be related to the mechanism used to shove a listing into one of the three maturity categories. This first pass used a "Pass/Fail" rating system that basically states "any listing containing just one of the many words on the naughty list is automatically considered a naughty listing." Unfortunately, as we have seen by way of numerous examples, this black or white grading system is too restrictive and too inflexible; real life is seldom if ever that clear cut. I propose that the rating enforcement algorithm be modified to use a "grading algorithm" similar to that used by various Email Spam Detectors. Words on "The List" would not just be used to indicate a naughty listing, but would instead be used to grade a listing. When the program scans a listing, it will accumulate a total grade for each of the two non-general ratings (Moderate and Adult). If a listing receives a total grade that is above the threshold for that rating then it is forced to that rating. The Adult rating would take precedence over the Moderate rating. This method would not only allow listings with such relatively innocent terms as Gor or Gorean to exist without shoving them into the Moderate or Adult categories, but it would lend itself to smoother, more accurate adjustment as we gain more understanding of "current word usage and meaning". (For example, it used to be totally unacceptable to utter the word "bitch" in public, yet today you hear it quite often and not a soul even hesitates or pays a bit of notice.) There WILL be exceptions of course, Pamela's birdbath is an absolutely delightful example of this. But I believe a more flexible, less binary grading system will go a long way toward making the system more acceptable to all.

In your interview about Create, you said something that rang true with me. You said (paraphrased) "You love to click a button and watch stuff happen." You also used the word "Create" a lot. Used it in the sense that it's about creating new things, experiencing new things ... goofing around without timers or deadlines or levels that must be overcome. Imagination at play. Thumbs up Rodvik. Welcome Home.

First off .. HOORAY! LL has indeed listened to resident concerns. That's a major step forward and absolutely needs to be championed. Thank you! I saw an idea posted about sending a Notice of some sort to the original name owner when someone picks their existing name as their new Display Name. While this sounds at first blush to have some merit, I think it does not properly identify those that will be attempting to use Display Names for mischief or griefing. From my experience on IRC with name impersonators, those that are prone to engage in this "sport" do it routinely. I think it would be far more informational if LL kept track internally of those accounts that routinely pick new Display Names that conflict with existing User Names. They should also use an algorithm that detects the "common substitutions" .. for example a lower case ell 'l' is replaced with the digit one '1'. With the current font selection in the Viewer, these types of changes will escape casual notice and thus are ripe for exploitation. Overall, I'm happy that LL has shown a growing ability to listen. As others have stated here, it's not perfect, but it's alot better than it was when first announced.

Prok, leave these nice people alone and come back to the commerce forums where you belong. You haven't attacked me there in weeks and ... well honestly .. it's getting lonely. So run along, do what you do best .. and come on home now. PS: I recently polled a random population on the use of the automobile and found that 91% of respondents found them useless and noisy, with the remaining 9% simply unappreciative. Therefore it has been decided the automobile will be eliminated from society. Next week, microwave ovens. PPS: Did you know the Amish make GREAT hand-made wood furniture too?

Vryl Valkyrie wrote: Thank you very much. .. but even when I recync I'm not able to delete the items like we can on xstreetsl. This JIRA at least partially addresses your question Vryl. SL Marketplace: Allow deletion of old listings for removed products Note that it was first reported on July 8th and has been "Acknowledged" ... but no further status is provided.

Programming good end-user software is as much Art as it is Science. But the real "bottom line" that must always be considered is this: "Designer/Programmer Time is Free". I know that sounds untenable, but it is the hard truth of any good end-user program. The amount of time the Designers and Programmers spend creating the right balance of functionality, personalization/customization and ease-of-use are negligible in comparison to the amount of time (and frustration) end-users will spend working around a poor design. If it costs 40 hours of Designer/Programmer time to design and code a specific feature, that is equivalent to 400 users spending six minutes each. With software that has the intended audience size of an SL Viewer where the end-user counts can reach into the 10's of thousands, that 40 hours divided among those users is insignificant. (For example, 10,000 users would equate to 14.4 seconds each.) This is why you must carefully consider leaving a feature out. If ANY part of that decision is "it will take us too long" then you need to also consider how much time creating it will save your end users. Will your expenditure of 10 hours save your users a minute of time each? !0,000 users at one minute each is the same as 60,000 minutes or 1000 hours of end-user time. You can easily see that those 10 hours have a "Force Multiplier" of 100 immediately ... and that is just the FIRST use. If end-users save one minute each time they perform that function and it is something they must do often (say once per day) then you must also consider how many days you expect them to use the software. One year? That's only 270 days (assuming work week schedules) so the Force Multiplier of 100 suddenly becomes a Force Multiplier of 27,000!! In other words, 10 hours of Designer/Programmer time is equivalent to 270,000 hours of end user time SAVED over the first year. This attitude that "it adds complexity" or "it gets too complicated" or any other excuse is just that .. an excuse. Software and computers exist for one purpose and one purpose only ... to make something possible to do for a human that could not otherwise do it. It does NOT exist to coddle the programmer or save the Designer time ... their efforts to create the software are insignificant in creating good end-user software. Spend the time during the Design phase. Spend the time during the Programming phase. SAVE your end-users the time during the much longer and much more important USE phase. They will appreciate you taking the time to consider their needs and the fact that you put their needs ahead of your own desires or preferences.