Anaiya Arnold

The DD will solve the problems we are currently having. Whether or not they create more or worse problems is a whole other question. I would guess that yes, DD will come with its own disasters, possibly built in as "features", because that's just how LL roll. But you are right about having nothing to do with taking boxes into inventory or X-Street listings. I've never taken my boxes into inventory after setting them up, and I had no boxes when X-Street was active. Also, I had no market delivery problems (possibly due to low sales volume) until a few months ago, but now they happen quite often even though my sales problem is still really very low (and in fact lower than when I was having no problems with non-deliveries around Halloween, which has been my busiest time to date in terms of sales volume). Also there's that whole takes hours at certain times of the day, every day, to deliver thing that started up around Halloween. Marketplace function has deteriorated in my view. @Ann: I disagree about no motivation to own land. I like owning my land. I have next to no stock on it (I don't have enough prims to bother with putting many full objects out, and sometimes I don't even have space for vendors, and I sure do not have enough sales to bother uploading pics to put on vendors or sale-boxes), and rarely does anyone come to land looking to buy anything. It's happened once that I know of, and since I was there at the time, but the items they wanted were not, I just gave them what they were after. Paid for as a yearly subscription, premium is decent value for money. I get the 400 lindens rate of stipend so I only have to come up with less than 5 dollars a year (from memory) for my own little slice of 'do what I like with'. Mostly I just change on my front lawn and knock down my dominos from time to time, but I could do other stuff if I thought of something else more interesting. DD will do nothing to convince me to get rid of my land. Only a raise in costs or loss of value might do that. Otherwise, I'll probably stay preimum so long as SL continues to exist.

The US government is a travesty. A bunch of traitors, like many other governments around the world. It has nothing to do with any ordinary political group, like "socializing liberal progressives" (for goodness sake). It has everything to do with the fact that the US government is entirely alienated from the will and service of its people. It's not about coddling people and making laws to protect them at all. It's purile nonsense to suggest that this is about protecting anything but centralized power.

Honestly, there are only a few both willing and able to contribute the kind and level of support Void has put in over the years. Will those who can be willing and able to spend enough extra time here to fill the hole Void's departure would leave? Maybe, but I sure would not assume that everyone else who can (by virtue of their relevant expertise) and has time to increase their contributions to make up for Void's absence will necessarily want to spend more of their time so thanklessly. People able and willing to contribute as Void does are an asset LL would be incrediably stupid to sit idly by and watch leave, especially as a result of trivial and perhaps not rational action of someone who is supposed to be facilitating the well being and good functioning of the forums. I will be frustrated and annoyed with LL beyond description if they do nothing to convince Void to stay when resolving this issue would be trivial and takes only a little good sense. It's plain and clear Void's not even going to require anyone nom the humble pie, but merely an accepting working environment in which to deploy her free, voluntary labour to LL's benefit. I rely on Void's expertise every time I script and the fact that I could post a question and someone like Void will be kind enough to respond is often all I need to not panic and be able to solve the problem myself. Mostly I solve whatever problem I am having by researching solutions through google. In so many cases the answer I need is in a post of Void's responding to someone asking about a similar issue. Thank goodness for the archives, as it means I have years of Void and other similar contributor's patient, generously given expertise and advice to fall back on. I'd be lost without the contributions of a relatively few posters, some of whom no longer post as it is (and may have moved on from SL for all I know). While I know I have no right to expect it from Void, I think that LL is letting me and many, many other users down if they do not take reasonable steps to resolve a minor issue that could bring about such drastic consequences as the departure of volunteer labour of the kind Void puts in and has put in for years.

Honestly, there are only a few both willing and able to contribute the kind and level of support Void has put in over the years. Will those who can be willing and able to spend enough extra time here to fill the hole Void's departure would leave? Maybe, but I sure would not assume that everyone else who can (by virtue of their relevant expertise) and has time to increase their contributions to make up for Void's absence will necessarily want to spend more of their time so thanklessly. People able and willing to contribute as Void does are an asset LL would be incrediably stupid to sit idly by and watch leave, especially as a result of trivial and perhaps not rational action of someone who is supposed to be facilitating the well being and good functioning of the forums. I will be frustrated and annoyed with LL beyond description if they do nothing to convince Void to stay when resolving this issue would be trivial and takes only a little good sense. It's plain and clear Void's not even going to require anyone nom the humble pie, but merely an accepting working environment in which to deploy her free, voluntary labour to LL's benefit. I rely on Void's expertise every time I script and the fact that I could post a question and someone like Void will be kind enough to respond is often all I need to not panic and be able to solve the problem myself. Mostly I solve whatever problem I am having by researching solutions through google. In so many cases the answer I need is in a post of Void's responding to someone asking about a similar issue. Thank goodness for the archives, as it means I have years of Void and other similar contributor's patient, generously given expertise and advice to fall back on. I'd be lost without the contributions of a relatively few posters, some of whom no longer post as it is (and may have moved on from SL for all I know). While I know I have no right to expect it from Void, I think that LL is letting me and many, many other users down if they do not take reasonable steps to resolve a minor issue that could bring about such drastic consequences as the departure of volunteer labour of the kind Void puts in and has put in for years.

Yeah, if it was once priced at exactly the wrong price it sold for then this will definately be a stale cart. And sure, it looks more like a bug than a feature to me too. I wonder if throwing temper tantrums on Rodvik's feed only works for easily implemented stuff like getting a banned poster on the forums restored to posting status. Imagine the possibilities if this worked for stuff that LL should be doing without customers nagging them into it, like getting the merchant UI to resemble something any self respecting business would not be deeply mortified by and ashamed of? We might get actual pagination navigation instead of three pages in and then click "next" however many dozen times to get where you are going, or maybe the ability to filter out items that were delisted months ago, or perhaps Rodvik could be nagged into getting the commerce team to fix the bugs they introduced in August, or (heaven forbid) we might be automatically informed what category to list an item in when it is delisted to "educate" us. The possibilities are endless (given the scope and volume of the problems).

Yeah, if it was once priced at exactly the wrong price it sold for then this will definately be a stale cart. And sure, it looks more like a bug than a feature to me too. I wonder if throwing temper tantrums on Rodvik's feed only works for easily implemented stuff like getting a banned poster on the forums restored to posting status. Imagine the possibilities if this worked for stuff that LL should be doing without customers nagging them into it, like getting the merchant UI to resemble something any self respecting business would not be deeply mortified by and ashamed of? We might get actual pagination navigation instead of three pages in and then click "next" however many dozen times to get where you are going, or maybe the ability to filter out items that were delisted months ago, or perhaps Rodvik could be nagged into getting the commerce team to fix the bugs they introduced in August, or (heaven forbid) we might be automatically informed what category to list an item in when it is delisted to "educate" us. The possibilities are endless (given the scope and volume of the problems).

Sure, you can do that.

That was my thought! Give it back.

/me sniggers. Yeah. Do that some more.

You might have been wearing two HUDs. I never got one so maybe you stole mine? I'd like to play but it does not seem to work without a HUD and there seems to be no contingency for HUD attachment failure. I spotted something giving off an error message while I was there. Something trying to contact my non-existent HUD perhaps?

What? LL's biggest source of revenue is from tier. Your argument was that LL should not cater to baron landlords because there are few of them. Either selling anything at a wholesale rate is stupid and pointless or your original argument was wrong. Here's what you argued "however the Lab cannot cater to landlords either because once again their number is insignificant as compared to the total number of players." But the lab can and does cater to landlords with significant holdings, despite them being few in number, and as you now seem to understand, this is not an uncommon practice at all. Your argument that the lab cannot cater to landlords because they are few in number is wrong.

An IP ban is not going to stop any determined person with half a clue. LL can certainly figure out how to ban by a specific IP from the grid. LL can and does ban by IP when LL feels it's warrented.

LL needing to receive tier for substantial volumes of land is not all about merchants or land barons but all about LL's ability to remain solvent. That's their primary revenue source and make believe play money from marketplace commissions is not a viable alternative. The Lindens cannot pay their bills, their staff and their share holders in play money you know and that's all they get for hosting our content on the market place. In world on the other hand, they get to charge tier for hosting our content, and that tier is payable in real US dollars rather than imaginary play money. Evidently the Lindens do not agree with you. They offer discounts on tier to the biggest landlords because while they may be few in number, they happen to account for a huge chunk of LL's income.

They could avoid devaluing existing sims by simply charging a set up fee to those who want to pay it and offering a set up fee free option and having different tier rates for the two. For any sim that has ever incurred a set up fee, tier should be one quarter to one third cheaper than current tier. For sims that are set up free, tier should remain at the rate it is currently charged. This makes the set up fee a worthwhile investment for those who have already paid it and for those considering getting a sim over the long term. Anyone who does not wish to front up a set up fee should be able to rent a sim from LL at the current going rate. This would be attractive to those who wish to have a short time event. It's also a good way for someone to trial sim owning with the ability to not pay anything beyond tier, so they can determine if they can afford the sim long term and therefore want to commit to paying the start up fee (to access cheaper tier). While LL is both not growing and slamming sims on servers like sardines, a start up fee is really not justified, particularly if it offers any hinderance to long term tier payments being received. A short term one to two month rental of a sim should be profitable to LL at the current tier rates without a set up fee as they should have both surplus server space and a somewhat automated and relatively low labour-cost means of initiating a new sim. LL should certainly be able to make a good profit on longer term sim rentals (given the current state of servers) at a rate somewhat lower than they are currently charging and the lower rate would justify a start up fee from the buyer's perspective if there was an alternative option with no start up fee, but significantly higher ongoing tier.

I got inventory missing too. A number of people were posting in one of the other sub forums about random disppearances of rezzed prims in-world, including prims that were rezzed months ago.

My first guess was that it wasn't intentional and merely the genuis of the commerce team at work again.

Customers are obliged to have lindens, not common sense.

The comparison to governments is beyond stupid. Governments are not private businesses relying on sim owners optimizing their experience to stay in existence and hopefully return a profit to shareholders. Your comments about the information all being there are equally stupid. Even Linden Lab accepts that their documentation is a mess, and that navigating it is confusing at best. If LL want to sell and get tier for more sims (and they do) your "solution" is actually part of LL's problem.

I've experienced a lot more of this for the last few weeks. The item delivers (I see my magic box change color) and I get the inworld message, but the marketplace takes hours to catch up.

I agree that it's borked. I once searched to see where my product appeared for a query and came back with a result of maybe three items, and none were mine so I immediately clicked refresh to redo the search and got an entirely different set of results (including my item). There were around 4-6 items. Because I found this odd I decided to click refresh again to see what I got and I got a result that combined the first two results. I performed the searches in under a minute, so that's three different search results returned in under a minute for the exact same query. Also most days the same item that I've never sold a single copy of keeps turning up on the front page of my best selling filtered results (internally to my store). Both of these examples cannot be explained by creative filtering methods intended to circumvent gaming or ensure more merchants get exposure of their items, or anything other than borkage. Search is borked plain and simple.

Like skins and shapes, you can only wear one physics layer at a time.

Griffin Ceawlin wrote: So the answer to my question... "... while everyone should be sympathetic to the OP and anyone else who has a shorter avatar, it's perfectly fine to try to make people who have taller avatars feel as though something is wrong with them. Is that about right?"... is yes. Got it. Believe it or not, it is possible for adults to express frustration and distress without attacking... scapegoating... the Other. When someone does that, they tend to lose a lot of sympathy, including my own. You go ahead and "cut them some slack," if you like. Just don't expect that everyone else will go quietly. No ithat's not the answer to that question. Try reading it again. Is there some reason i should not make light of your reading and comprehension skills while I am here since if they are not substandard then you are deliberately misconstruing my words in order to mischaracterize my argument? You would not need to do that if you honestly beleived what I have to say is so absurd as to be easy to refute without having to first recast it as something entirely else. My point had nothing to do with whether or not Ariel's meanness was warranted but with whether or not this is consistent with encouraging such expression as the OP's. It's not no matter how many blameless strawmen you try to drag in here to torture before my eyes. None the less, since it seems you accept I was right enough in my initial point that you do not even want to try to refute it, I guess I'll have to try to save that poor strawman from your clutches. I'm well aware that adult humans can manifest idealized responses to all kinds of adversity, just as I am aware that adult humans can win Olympic medals and climb Mt Everest. What you are describing are not the most common reactions of adult humans to feeling victimized and under seige from a group that vastly outnumbers their own, but rather ideal reactions. Adult humans who consistently manifest ideal reactions to adversity in every case are probably rarer than adult humans who win Olympic medals and climb Mt Everest on the same day. Certainly the number of adults who consistently manifest ideal reactions to adversity in all cases is much less than the number who do not deserve to be kicked when they are down in my opinion. There's a difference between being unsympathetic and kicking a person when they are down. Now you might be quite happy to have a philosophy that is in essence "if humans under stress react like typical humans, I will have less sympathy for them", but no matter how well advised that is, it still does not make kicking someone while they are down consistent with claims to be encouraging them.

It's a new setting in V3 I believe Baloo. Apparently due to the merging of the Basic UI with the "classic" UI there is now a click to walk setting that overrides the expected function that you see in V1 and V2 viewers. The setting is on by default and needs to be turned off to restore the V2/V1 behaviour.

Griffin Ceawlin wrote: Anaiya Arnold wrote: Griffin Ceawlin wrote: I would suggest that the OP, and others who are accused of ageplay merely for having shorter avatars, should direct their accusers to this page. A little education goes a long way. If the OPs avatar resembles her current inworld profile picture, I certainly would not be one to accuse her of ageplay, or even mistake hers for a child avatar. None of which explains why rather than bring out the emotional blackmail guilt trip, Ariel does not just choose to not read forum posts that make her wonder if something is wrong with her. "Emotional blackmail guilt trip"? I must have missed that. The one that you seem to be trying to say that Ariel is guilty of trying to foment, anyway. Hard to miss the OPs attempt, though... Most people who have shorter avatars that come to the forums and claim to have been accused of age play due to their height also don't lead off talking about taller avatars looking like "barely human... monstrous stick insects." Do they? So what? It did not cause me to wonder for even a second if there was something wrong with me? Did it make you wonder if there was something wrong with you? Just how insecure am I supposed to believe Ariel is? No, I didn't wonder if there was something wrong with me. I'm perfectly happy with my avatar as it is. I don't know about Ariel. She doesn't strike me as someone who's terribly insecure, but I also only know her from the posts of hers that I've read. The message that I'm getting, though, is that while everyone should be sympathetic to the OP and anyone else who has a shorter avatar, it's perfectly fine to try to make people who have taller avatars feel as though something is wrong with them. Is that about right?  Instead of just venting some of her frustration, the OP has chosen to attack the choices that other people have made in the sizes of their avatars. Is there not a whiff of hypocrisy there? I'd say there is a good deal less hyposcrisy there than there would be if she'd added that she encourages people to have tall avatars. Do you disagree? Um... No? I guess not, but... Huh? You seem to have missed my point. OP comes to the Forum... "Boohoo! My shorter avatar is accused of being a child avatar. Discrimination! It's the fault of all those FrankenBarbies! Monstrous, hideous things that they are!!!" So... OPs avatar and others of comparable size are "normal" and everything else is... well... just "ludicrous"... and other people should "stop the insanity" and make their avatars smaller. Is OP not guilty of behaving in much the same way as those she rails about? P.S. I find your assertion that you hadn't attacked Dresden's reading and comprehension skills laughable. Did you actually read your comments to him? Well it's odd you'd miss something I requoted since you replied to the post I reposted it in. I do not believe that someone feeling under seige and lashing out at a trait shared by the majority is any cause for Ariel to wonder if something is wrong with herself, nor do I believe she is so insecure that she'd actually wonder if something was wrong with herself due to such a non-cause. So what other than guilt tripping is behind those comments? An attempt at censorship through guilt tripping seems a much more likely explanation to me than that Ariel is really so insecure that the OP's comments genuinely made her wonder if something was wrong with herself. I'm just not buying that and I think if you are honest with yourself, you don't buy it either. As to OP, she is obviously feeling under seige and attacked due to how she has been treated by people in what passes for SL's face-to-face interactions. It seems impossible to me that any healthy adult would be so lacking in empathy that they do not understand how someone in this situation feels and anyone not setting out be intentionally mean has not reason to not sympathize enough to " cut them a break" when interpreting their expressions of frustration and distress. If I had a message in addition to "it's really rather stupid and dishonest to discourage someone from posting something in every post you make in a thread while claiming you encourage such posting" it would be that anyone who has reasonable cause for feeling unfairly under seige should have their comments interpreted and judged accordingly, which is to say slack ought to be cut for them. It's what I'd want for you if you were expressing hurt and distress for such reasons no matter what the height of your avatar in some jumped up internet chat environment. Understanding and empathetic interpretations and responses to genuine expressions of hurt and distress are just one of the ordinary mundane concessions that reasonable adults of good intent make for other human beings. I did read my comments to Dresden and there's not a single assertion about Dresden's reading and comprehension skills in the intial comments he objected to on those grounds. Not a one.

I see your objections to personal insults certainly do not extend to your own behaviour. No surprises there then. Of more importance since your hypocrisy is really rather trivial, I see that you have yet to come up with any point by point refutation, or indeed any refutation whatsoever, so it looks like we can add liar to your list of interesting characteristics.