[Recent Improvements to SL Search]

It healed itself sometime between yesterday AM and this morning (I just looked, was about to reset the LP, since I didn't get to it last night).  cant tell if they got to the ticket or not as the view tickets page just says loading with a spinning disk that never stops, but my store now has real, working coordinates.   And sales have started once again.   Something happened, not sure what, since if a linden fixed it they didn't bother to drop me an IM.

[Recent Improvements to SL Search]

Ayep, checked that as did the live support person.   But it comes up 0.0.0 in search...I think I will delete it and reset it and see if perhaps that helps.

Ticket still sitting there with NEW status in support.

[Recent Improvements to SL Search]

Hey Jack,

Perhaps you can take a moment out of your busy day buffing search results for your buddies who can afford huge plots of land and have one of you search people actually ANSWER MY NEARLY 3 WEEK OLD TICKET about my search listing now showing 0,0,0 coordinates.   Its really such fun to have inworld sales suddenly go to zero, finally figure out why (its dropping customers in the water at the corner of the sim) and then get ignored by support for weeks -- and when I do manage to get someone on Live Help, you close their escalation ticket without comment or actually fixing the problem the same day.

Between you skewing things in favor of big names, and mucking up the search results (if I search for dance, I damned well do NOT want dancing or dances) to be nearly useless, I guess I should not be surprised that I cannot get assistance from anyone to fix the problem YOU created for me.

[Help Us Test the SL Web Viewer Beta]

"And they keep going after "new users" when they can't even support their current membership." - Wayfinder WIshbringer

Amen....I wish the spent 1/1000th the time answering support tickets that they do on 'new users' gimmicks and trying to be 'cool' for the techies with web on a prim and PC-illiterate with web-client access.    I've had a broken search help ticket in for a few days shy of 3 weeks with a new/unread status, had live support help me but their their ticket was closed with no comment or action the same day.   They can afford time, money and employees to attract new users, and for Wallace to get up here and 'communicate' (badly, I might add) but can't take a few minutes to read a ticket and fix an issue for a current resident.  Pathetic, but typical of the LL 'Ohhh, shiny!' mentality.

[Help Us Test the SL Web Viewer Beta]

Wallace,

Sure you're not blowing smoke again, like most lab announcements?  I tried it with a low end laptop, tried it with a quad core, tried it with an i5 processor.

I was bored at work today, so I spent time testing.  I tried it on the company T1, on my cable link (12mb) AND on the company fiber optic link.   I even tried a friend's DSL connection for grins after work.  I NEVER got anything but join now.  No one I know personally ingame has managed ot get it either, regardless of physical location, PC or type of connection.

I also tried all the above connections with gaikai, never qualified...they gave the same bogus error message that others have reported on all PC and provider combinations.   I flat out think its 100% random depending on load at that particular time of day. 

Why bother announcing this at all if your idea of a 'test' is one in a hundred or fewer getting in?  You're running up expectations and when it doesn't pan out, increasing cynicism about the Lab and its skill at implementing anything right.

BTW, instead of just a join button when you fail to qualify, might be nice if it said 'You did not meet our (random) qualifications, but click here to join' instead of just a join button with no message about whether one has passed or failed the randomizer test.

[Check here if you want more options]

No, you do not have to be a rocket scientist, but you DO have to be able to do the following

1. Listen
   
2. Contemplate and Understand what you heard
   
3. Set your ego aside and act on what you learn in steps 1 and 2.
   

Based on Q's reply (and to a lesser extent Yoz's), they haven't progressed to step 2, treating disagreements like 'axes to grind' and taking things personally.

Nothing ever seems to change at LL, other than the name of the Linden stuck at step 1.   Q owes the players an apology for his comment.

[Check here if you want more options]

Very unprofessional, Q.    People disagree with your take and they are either 'misinterpreting' or 'have an axe to grind'.    Perhaps we don't agree with you?  Perhaps (less charitably) it sounds like a cop-out?  Perhaps we have been had sunshine blown up our collective ***es enough times we don't trust you?

Reciprocity?  Dear gods, man/woman/being, did you actually SAY that with a straight face?   This is the standard practice for the lab....we're listening, we want feedback, get feedback, promptly ignore said feedback (due to desires and constraints, etc.) and agree only with whoever post 'respectful' (aka, fawning) agreement.   The only difference between this case and previous ones (windlight feedback, viewer 2.0 feedback) is that instead of just ignoring negative feedback and stroking the egos of a few fanboys, you've added whining at your customer for disagreeing to the list.  Nice touch.

Now, just a few words of advice. 

Look at 2.x.x.  Look at the adoption rate compared to 1.2x and TPV's.  Look at feedback both during beta and thereafter on 2.x.x...and how it was ignored.    Folks hated the sidebar...it still went in, all feedback ignored.  Folks disliked how focus to the chat window works and wanted it like it was previously...again feedback ignored for what would be a simple fix.   These are STILL two of the top complaints about 2.x.x.    

Now, when folks see yet another giant blow-off of feedback brewing, you DARE to act hurt and mumble about respect?     Seriously, Q.   Never met you, probably never will...so I have no axe to grind against you....but I've been here long enough to know from past experience 'we want your feedback' means 'we want you to agree and we will ignore those that don't'.   You want respect and trust...YOU have to earn that by overcoming the past actions of the Lab when dealing with players...and a good way is to drop the attitude and TRY for once, just once, to give the players what they desire.   Copping an attitude about 'bad', 'difficult to QA', etc, does not earn one respect...that's the usual LL song and dance repeating itself on a different project.

My question to you is this...do you want this project to be a success, or do you wish to sit, spin your wheels and turn out another variant of 2.x.x that the bulk of the playerbase avoids like radioactive waste?   Your call....but I will remind you, the TPV's became popular by implementing community desired elements and options, not limiting options.

[Check here if you want more options]

Well, Yoz.  Let me be brutally frank.   You just don't get it....how easy it is for YOU has no bearing on customer satisfaction, none, nada, zero, zip....   Handing folks what YOU think they want based on how easy it is to code does NOT yield customer satisfaction.    It yields a viewer 2.0 which has a MISERABLE adoption rate.   Something is quite wrong with YOUR way of doing things when the antique viewer 1.2x has multiple times the users of 2.0 and TPV's proliferate.   AND the mere existance of more than one or two highly specialized TPV's should be indicative of failure on your part at the Lab to provide what customers really want.   As should the fact the majority of TPV's are 1.2x not 2.x.x.   People have clearly REJECTED your way of thinking (no options, ease of coding and QA) and top-down paternalism, yet you persist in trying to foist it on us yet again.

As far as how easy it is to code and QA....I truly do not care.   Your job is to code and test, not mine...if it is too difficult to produce what the customers want, I suggest a different line of work since the TPV's are providing it quite handily.  I regularly am given assignments at my job that have to meet customer expectations that are NOT easy to implement (but would be if I ignored the customer as it appears you and Q want to do).   I do NOT argue with the customer, telling them how much easier my job would be if they only did it my way, yada yada...that is rude, patronizing and insulting.

And no, giving me less of what I want and things that you think I want to make your job easier does NOT lead to higher satisfaction.   Crap scrummed out at 2.x.x speed is still crap.    Again, the whole 'we hear you' posts clearly mean nothing to the people running the Snowjob project, and sadly, the entire Lab.

[Check here if you want more options]

Well, after reading the transcript, and then your clarification / spin, I don't think it was misinterpreted.  Its standard SOP for the Lab when dealing with players 'We know what's best for you, you don't need choices'.  Here's how I read your points from the clarification.

1. This seems to be merely a refusal to sit down and plan.   You work out where you think they should most logically BE and go with it.  The main problem I have with v2.x.x is the sheer lack of planning...what little controls there are have been what feels like RANDOMLY moved around and grouped with things that make no relative sense.   Planning is difficult, I know, but it has to be done.
2. This is necessary only if your users are morons and you treat them as such.  The people that don't need the options don't touch them (the blingtardians just there for chat and clubbing) while the builders and coders USE them.   Simple...    And you already tried releasing a option-limited 'Viewer for those that cannot be bothered to think' in v2.x.x and we have seen how WELL that was adopted.   If that reasoning worked, you'd not BE DOING project snowstorm, we'd have flocked to 2.x.x.
3. More Linden Tao nonsense.   I translate this as 'this is unfun coding, it isn't glamorous or fast, so we don't want to do it'.   Other companies do it, its time to buckle down and code rather than picking the low-hanging fruit as you at the lab have done in the past.  

You seem to have NO trouble giving us unwanted features or features that are PRIMED for abuse (the new character names come springing to mind), but god forbid we want to have a modicum of control over our experience, you flip out and start coming up with reasons why choice and player control is 'bad' and centrallized, unchangeable 'linden endorsed' features and experiences are optimal.

I am rapidly getting the feeling that 'Snowstorm' should be called 'Snowjob' and that the changes to 2.x.x are going to be of the 'lipstick on a pig' cosmetic variety due to lab inflexibility.