Garvin Twine

And I still miss the point in getting a positive opportunity because something just got worse and my income declines for the 2nd time this year due to raised fees. But it seems that the main writers on this forum support LL what ever and posting something not in line with them gets you corrected 5 times for the same thing...

But recently added were fees only for the creators. And it does not change the fact that they take more than 30%! To get to the max fee of 500US$ you need to check out 10,000US$ which most are not able to do, as you start with a maximum of 1,000US$ per month which you need to ask to be increased. But LL will not increase this amount unless you have more then 1,000US$ on your account for several months which brings you then to the next tier of 2,000US$.... So this is only for the big businesses who benefit here but not the people who really do the creative and amazing stuff SL is meant to be about. Besides ... who earns like 1,000US$ a month within SL is very unlikely able to simply wait for nearly a year to check out their earned and needed money.

Just that LL does not allow you to sell things cheaper in World than on MP... I really fail to find any positive opportunity in having to pay more.

First I think it is quite harsh to double twice costs (double fees for LindeX and double MP fees) for creators within less than a year. Then the VAT issue: When you pay extra VAT for sim tier this would mean: LL pays that VAT they receive from EU residents and have to give it to the residents country tax department... And why would an american company do that for a service they sell and provide within the US? Same applies to check out, where they deduct the VAT before the fees which is wrong? Now you should be able to go to your countries tax department and ask to be freed from VAT for this stuff or in some cases you can asked it back. But I would really see the payment of LL to the different EU countries they collect VAT for. I think the MP pricing should change by now... lets say you want to sell something for 100L$: you put in 100, then 10% MP fees get added and the price would be 100+10 to make it transparent for the buyer where the money goes to. Maybe it should be even 100 + 10% + 3.5% + 5% so... 100 + 10 + 4 + 6 = 120 L$ as the actual price of the product. Keep in mind that LL does not allow you to offer the same product in world for 10% less!

then you simply take what is in the touch_start() event earlier posted and replace the if(llDetectedLinkNumber(0)==rightButton) with listen(integer channel, string name, key id, string message) { message = llToLower(message); if (message == "next") { //same code to change your texture as before } else if (message == "previous") { //same code to change your texture as before } } (where "previous" and "next" are the commands you choose to switch to the next or previous texture) Side comments: I would not remove the listener if you want to use this command more than once (I think you did that already). If you already reset the script on_rez event, no need to also reset it on changed for owner change as it has already reset before the change event occurred. I don't see a reset reason on every rez though, so I would keep the changed event reset (but lets not try to confuse you now more than needed but one of these is surely enough).

I am not sure you are aware that these RLV strip commands are for the default's SL Avatar layers. They won't detach anything nor change / remove an applied layer on any mesh body (where this is anyway another challenge) . You might only notice so called "shoe bases" to be removed as these are still used to move the avatar up a bit to match the shoes heels height. That's correct for llOwnerSay RLV commands but as quoted above not for relay commands (because the relay should check every single issued command and if it doesnt start with an @ it will be ignored) so the syntax used seems pretty accurate to me.

Obviously you do not want to understand what I write. So I do not see any sense in any further discussion at this point. I do not take any demand from nobody how I shall do my code when someone gets pissed because they make mistakes, sorry, that is just ridiculous. But advising people to mix scripts from different repos is bad advice and nothing else. It may work now and today but latest when you want to update something things will go rather crazy. So yeah, go ahead mix everything together how you think it is best and be sure some time in 2019 people who use your collars will be very unhappy and... come to us for help.

You still mix up the old repo with the current one which does not have these failsafes anymore. So again your statement and "advice" is simply false! Wendy refers explicit to her Peanut 9 repo at the end of her post as current repo,. And again, it is your job to obey the license and not the code's job to tell you every little mistake. All the other references are about work done before but not recent. I get that you have an issue here, not sure why and I would not care as long you stay away from false statements and bad advice. Thank you

You do not get the same thing if you replace parts of it, the result will be different. (But you are free to try and do what you like, just do not blame anyone if it does not work the way you like it) Strippy is designed and made for Peanut 9 Collars, it may or may not work in other things, it is not meant to. About failsafe: (which was removed in Peanut 9 collars so it is actually irrelevant here as it is no more deployed, so the statement "Wendy's script contain" is simply false, all script deployed these days do not even have a oc_ prefix anymore, part of what Wendy explained in her post about diverting from that) : The reason there was a failsafe, was user protection, this function was meant to ensure that the items made with the scripts are a) functional b) update-able c) following the license agreement Which would simply ensure that collars distributed with the scripts would satisfy the end-user, which is our main concern. So we implemented something that ensures open source stays open source and update able and for that we get blamed now... The irony of this would be funny if it wasn't really saddening me and well, as people hated the good thing, we removed it though I believe it was the right thing to do. There is no obligation to inform the one who violates license agreements for every of their mistakes, but their obligation to read and follow the license agreement upon using the scripts. So failsafe protected everyone, even the one who made the mistake from violating the license agreement. I simply fail to see how this can be seen in any way as a bad thing specially as this protected what you all find so important modify-able content.

Very well said!👍 And I believe many still use Lumiya, and this is how they appear most of the time to the rest of the virtual world (yes I had to censor the picture): You can get your IMs (and group notices) sent to your email, you miss nothing. You can reply to IMs by email without being logged in. And all that perfectly from your phone, any phone! But seeing quite a lot of Zombies standing (or running on the spot) around while using some mobile app is really nothing I think is great to have.

Correct. I should have said, the command can do both, where the role part is optional. In the documentation (sl wiki rlv api) it is (at least right now) not even mentioned to have the option for the role.

Actually the rlv command does both, and there is only this one command that does it. (Either it never was there or it has been removed from the sl wiki where all other rlv commands are documented). It sets the current active group and the group role in one command and was meant as one time thing, to set this and lock it with another command. This can be also troublesome in other ways, I talked to someone who abandoned by accident their own group when trying to leave another one, because the timed script did set the active one back to the one set there and so they had to file a support ticket to get back their own group again.

I totally agree. But if people start to bash on what I do, I have the right to correct wrong statements, I did not bring it here at all. Anyway for once collars are only a little part of scripted items ( I see regular avatars with way more and higher impact scripted stuff than collars (example just taken now: Script info: 'xyz Resident': [329/364] running scripts, 15712 KB allowed memory size limit, 0.402572 ms of CPU time consumed. (taken after the avatar was settled in the sim, in the first minutes the CPU time was around 4ms!) I seriously doubt any other product was so hard maintained in the last years (specially when we started with version 4) and focused on less impact than these collars you like to blame here. (Main Brand AOs still use ZHAO 2 scripts from 2008, sometimes multiple instances!) Yes Collars are scripted items and add to the lag, as everything you add to your avatar but they are for sure not the root of lag issues and then blaming our brand to be the worst is just plain wrong. This is exactly the attitude of many if not most SL users. I do agree it looks cool to see the group tag switching every few seconds, and so they love this and do not care about the impact it has. Same applies to many other things, users do not care about script or any other impact things they use have as long as things go the way they like them for themselves. This leads to products that just bash it out (because SL has so many flaws and to overtone them, it is easiest to just slam with a sledge hammer rapidly on it so things look smoothly) and in the end the lag gets worse but your group tag switches soo lovely. I hope I could add some info and view point on the issue.

I won't repeat false accusations and facts here but I think it is clear who tries to use any opportunity here to accuse and shame the ones that brought everyone what collars are these days in SL. Just to make clear here, that Drakonadrgora Darkfold was one we had to remove and now he is using other forums and places to continue his agenda to harm us (no clue why). But you see how he knows everything and gives advice to scripters and viewer devs just never did anything himself. BTW, the new strip feature (which filters already certain folders by default and can be setup to filter out things you do not want to be stripped at all) is called Strippy and was developed by us where they only added a detach feature which simply shows all attachments, including your head, body, eyes etc . Please just stop to blame because we do not like you stating false info to our community. To add something to this thread: Of course Collars are relative "heavy scripted" with 20+ scripts, but these do most of the time nothing. RLV is pure viewer related (Restrained Life Viewer) and only very view functionality of RLV goes on sim resources. One of these is used by a tool that switches group tags, which is not a function collars make use of, specially not in a short timed fashion. Also do many popular AOs use still overly scripted 10 years old scripts with rapid timers that go on script time as well. Please do not forget these different combat huds for vampires and demons roleplay who use the whole grid as they play ground which are always active scanning for possible opponents and unlike collars, which mean something for the people and are therefore locked in place. The high impact an avatar has when entering a sim is for sure the biggest issue but that can only be asked to LL to reduce this problem or at least give general guidelines or better detailed guidelines for scripters how to keep this at a minimum. (I develop in a high traffic sim, so I know very well what lag we talk about here, but so we also test right away in such environments and know what impact we do and always try to be as low as possible) Just to mention it was again us who introduced the "Highlander" rule which allows only one collar instance to be worn, before that you could meet avatars having multiple items attached where each of them had a fully scripted "collar" inside. (and we get more critic and hate for that than thanks)

This is false information. For once Peanut9 is not a fork of "OC 7.1" but they forked our 6.5.5 code and it basically stayed that way, nothing really was changed but headers. Where we developed further to Peanut 9 which is in no way heavier scripted at all. RLV is not using higher script times if it is not in use which it normally is not, unless specific functions, mainly inventory related are being used. Some half-knowledge gets blown up here and things and people get blamed for simply untrue and false facts. It seems to be popular and common these days though on every possible occasion to hurt the ones who gave all the users for year and years what they use and are happy with. We had to remove people from our help groups already because they caused confusion and deliberately gave false information. Also reading collars use so much script time more than other things, well look at this: WIth Collar: Script info: 'Garvin Twine': [49/49] running scripts, 2944 KB allowed memory size limit, 0.047939 ms of CPU time consumed. Without Collar: Script info: 'Garvin Twine': [29/29] running scripts, 1664 KB allowed memory size limit, 0.034929 ms of CPU time consumed. For me the 20 collar scripts used only 1/4 of the script time, which makes the remaining body/head scripts use 3/4 though they are only 9 scripts more. Please just do not spread wild guesses without real knowledge and blame it on the wrong people.