Emma Krokus

You can already bulk edit listings for maturity ratings. See Ivan Benjammin's post in this thread (no. 6): http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Merchants/About-new-MP-BUG/m-p/2769924

Thanks for the heads up Marina. I discovered some of my listings were incorrectly suddenly mature or adult, too. I was able to edit the listings and change the ratings, and I saw in the JIRA that this is now being worked on. Hopefully people with many listings won't have to go through each listing manually! Emma

So glad it worked for you! And how nice of you to come back to let us know ) Emma

I had the same issue - there is a workaround, involving using 2 prims one inside the other. See old forum threads here: http://community.secondlife.com/t5/LSL-Scripting/Gift-give-to-certain-group/td-p/709297 http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Scripting/Group-Gift-Not-on-Group-Land/td-p/334922

Be well! Lovely to hear such a positive story - thank you for writing. Emma

I'd like to know too .

Rhys Goode wrote: When I look at transactions history, for things I have sold on marketplace.... Description: Order #135427nnnn Item #530nnnn What the hell did I just sell? I have to build a database for cross refference? Now the price is a clue, but really... the items have name? Hard to imagine a more opaque reporting system. I agree Rhys. Of course I can download the report as someone said, But I actually would love to have all transactions with enough detail in one place as I have an inworld shop as well as marketplace listings. Strangely, it seems no problem for the item name to appear for that transaction. So, sure I'd love a change to that - maybe there are more important bug fixes to be made first though. Emma

Perhaps the script needs resetting after you added the textures? FInd resetting scripts under TOOLS from the top menu. As for showing textures just on one side of the prim, this is possible. You need to find what number the face of the prim is, and then find the words ALL_SIDES within the script and change them to that number. The first script on this page helps you find the face number: http://http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlDetectedTouchFace Emma

I think it may be a single "pipe" between AGENT FLYING | AGENT_ALWAYS_RUN... Emma (noob scripter)

Hahaha that is a brilliant work around Rolig

There is an lsl function to have the script "shout" something, so on the face of it that would be an easy modification. However, the script has to be modifiable to be able to make the changes.

/me emerges red-eyed and shaking from a pile of crumbs: Thanks so much Arton! And getting the rotation as well as the position of the childprim makes sense to me - not a common experience with rotations hahaha. Emma

Wandering Soulstar wrote: Hi Emma ... have you tried using llGetLinkPrimitiveParams? I haven't. Must admit at first reading I don't immediately see the relevance to my problem ... but then they say persistence is the mother of progress, don't they? /me adds supply of ginger nuts to the tray with the coffee Emma

Dora Gustafson wrote: Use these basic relations to fix your problem :smileysurprised::smileyvery-happy: Thank you Dora! /me brews huge pot of coffee Emma

This works perfectly while the object is at zero rotation: default { touch_start(integer a) { llRezObject(llGetInventoryName(INVENTORY_OBJECT,0), llGetPos()+<0.0,0.7,-2.1>,ZERO_VECTOR,ZERO_ROTATION,0); } }As I am rotationally challenged, I'd like help with getting the object to rezz in the same position relative to the child prim when the linkset is rotated. I have tried llGetLocalPos - although the script compiles, it does not rezz the object at all. I don't think it was the right function for this. I would really appreciate some explanation for how to do this. Thanks! Emma :)

For now, you have to use a magic box to sell items that are no-copy to you. Direct delivery doesn't work on limited quantity items yet. You can "buy" a magic box from Marketplace.

Phil Deakins wrote: Emma Krokus wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Emma Krokus wrote: I posted my opinion about the survey. And I am sorry the thread was pulled, especially as it seems the student was open to comments about the research design. What bothered me was the wholly negative attitude the survey questions displayed towards users and use of Second Life. To me this demonstrated ignorance and a lack of understanding of Second Life and the survey's target audience. I felt that the bias shown by the questions was likely to engender defensive responses by participants, thus skew survey results and affect whether useful conclusions could be drawn from the data. It bothers me that such surveys get posted with depressing regularity and I'd like students to think harder about how they approach their research. The questions did appear to show a pre-conceived idea about SL users. It wasn't the way they were put though. It was that there were only such questions. However, every question had a range of answer options, from Never to Always, so there really wasn't a negative bias. Suppose there was just one question, such as, 'Are you addicted to SL to the extent that your RL suffers?' On it's own it just sounds like an interesting question. The usual answer would be, ;'No, of course not'. The questions in the survey covered a lot of possible RL areas that might affected by using SL, and, put together, they did seem to give an appearance of a pre-conceived idea about SL users. But all the answer options ranged from Never to Always, so, if there was such a pre-conceived idea, then plenty of people filling it in would soon straighten it out. Maybe so, but it's not for anyone here to teach them how to approach their research, and especially not by jumping down their throats in the way that some people did yesterday. It's for their tutors to teach them. I disagree. If students simply looked to their tutor to teach them, I would seriously doubt they were university material. At this level, I would expect a lot of learning to be self-directed. Learning comes from consulting a whole gamut of sources - and a good student would consider feedback from potential and actual participants a very valuable tool. I do not believe I "jumped down the student's throat" - I expressed my opinion about the survey and its bias. When all questions are about the negative effect of using Second Life, never mind the scaling of the answers, then the bias is clear to my mind. Past research ( social desirability effects ) has shown that bias does effect the validity of data. I don't remember what you wrote yesterday, Syo, so I have opinions about it. But you can'#t say that that thread was just fine. It was loaded with jumping down the student's throat, which is why I posted in it. As for whether or not it's the business of anyone here to teach a student how to create a survey, it really isn't any of our business. It's fine to point out errors and/or improvements, but there are ways of wording it that don't jump down their throats. Maybe there were a number of people who posted in the thread who may have been trying to help, but worded the help badly, and it would have been much much better to just fill in the survey or move on. It was obvious from his/her that the student was rather shocked by the reactions s/he got here. Something was wrong, wasn't it? I am not Syo. I didn't say the thread was just fine - I did not see it again after posting my response as it was pulled. I am unable to comment on the contents of other's posts since I did not see them.

Phil Deakins wrote: Emma Krokus wrote: I posted my opinion about the survey. And I am sorry the thread was pulled, especially as it seems the student was open to comments about the research design. What bothered me was the wholly negative attitude the survey questions displayed towards users and use of Second Life. To me this demonstrated ignorance and a lack of understanding of Second Life and the survey's target audience. I felt that the bias shown by the questions was likely to engender defensive responses by participants, thus skew survey results and affect whether useful conclusions could be drawn from the data. It bothers me that such surveys get posted with depressing regularity and I'd like students to think harder about how they approach their research. The questions did appear to show a pre-conceived idea about SL users. It wasn't the way they were put though. It was that there were only such questions. However, every question had a range of answer options, from Never to Always, so there really wasn't a negative bias. Suppose there was just one question, such as, 'Are you addicted to SL to the extent that your RL suffers?' On it's own it just sounds like an interesting question. The usual answer would be, ;'No, of course not'. The questions in the survey covered a lot of possible RL areas that might affected by using SL, and, put together, they did seem to give an appearance of a pre-conceived idea about SL users. But all the answer options ranged from Never to Always, so, if there was such a pre-conceived idea, then plenty of people filling it in would soon straighten it out. Maybe so, but it's not for anyone here to teach them how to approach their research, and especially not by jumping down their throats in the way that some people did yesterday. It's for their tutors to teach them. I disagree. If students simply looked to their tutor to teach them, I would seriously doubt they were university material. At this level, I would expect a lot of learning to be self-directed. Learning comes from consulting a whole gamut of sources - and a good student would consider feedback from potential and actual participants a very valuable tool. I do not believe I "jumped down the student's throat" - I expressed my opinion about the survey and its bias. When all questions are about the negative effect of using Second Life, never mind the scaling of the answers, then the bias is clear to my mind. Past research ( social desirability effects ) has shown that bias does affect the validity of data.

I posted my opinion about the survey. And I am sorry the thread was pulled, especially as it seems the student was open to comments about the research design. What bothered me was the wholly negative attitude the survey questions displayed towards users and use of Second Life. To me this demonstrated ignorance and a lack of understanding of Second Life and the survey's target audience. I felt that the bias shown by the questions was likely to engender defensive responses by participants, thus skew survey results and affect whether useful conclusions could be drawn from the data. It bothers me that such surveys get posted with depressing regularity and I'd like students to think harder about how they approach their research.

I number mine so I don't get out of sequence. What makes it much harder is that the previews on the listing edit page are so tiny I often have trouble telling which one is showing.

Thanks for highlighting that Innula. And I too appreciate the openness about the issues that affect Linden Lab, Thank you Landon and Linden Lab. Emma

Thank you for the giggle!

Thanks for pointing that out Freya

Yeah I'd like to know to - 19 hours per day on call including an undisclosed number of hours in the morning, it'd better be good!

Hahahaha that is well cute! Emma