[Possibilities for design using mesh discussion on ArchVirtual.com]

Well... the Linden's point is that something the architectural world and 3D modlers have wanted for a long time is here. That part is fact.

Whether mesh will save the Lab and even that the Lab needs saving is a matter of opinion. That all information points toward the Lab being a profitable business suggests they are no more in need of saving than any other business struggling through this economy.

The suggestion that all users of SL totally distrust the Lab is an over statement. There certainly is a good sized number of people that do not trust the Lab. But, there is likely an even larger number for which the idea of trust never comes up. Also, that a massive number of people have trusted the Lab with financial information suggests a much larger number of people do trust the Lab. At the least it suggests a clearer phrasing of what one means by distrusting the Lab.

As to owning virtual land... I've only been reading the ToS for the last 3 years. I've never seen any promise that I would own land any more than I would own a web server's hosting account.

The idea that land is too expensive is a matter of opinion too. In any free market each individual gets to decide the value of a commodity or service. If it is too expensive, they don't buy it. If they see a value, they do buy it. A significant number of people are purchasing land each month. The trend lately suggests that competitors may be having an effect. But, watching the monthly stats posted on SLUniverse shows almost as many new regions leased as given up. So, it is hard to say with any authority that SL Land is over priced. I'll concede that for the casual hobbyist it is too costly.

Also, the Linden strategy guiding the Lab right now is about 50% complete. It is having an effect on sign ups and a perceptible effect on retention. Consumer service is changing. Bug fixes and upgrades and user features requests are handled at a much faster pace than 18 months ago. So,lots of things are changing.

If anyone wants to see what has and is changing in a detailed way, follow my blog.

[Check here if you want more options]

Good reply Q.

In dealing with people shrinks use a concept of 'mirroring' or technically; transference displayed as projection. People see their behavior in another whether it is there or not. Many posts reveal more about the one placing the post than the person targeted in the post.

One can most often see this when people describe another’s behavior and motivations. They move off the topic issue and stop discussing whether the options are good, bad, necessary, or just evil. Instead they discuss things like the Lab being disassociated from customers. There is no evidence ever provided that is true, it is just opinion provided as fact. I suspect such people are unaware of the personal projects various Lindens have in SL. But, when one is projecting facts are irrelevant.

On axes to grind… some do. Some people have agendas and past grievances. Others are just in their stuff and projecting. Their preferences and viewpoints are not met so obviously the Lab has no clue. While the Lab runs usability tests and reads through the forums, emails, OH responses, JIRA’s, backlogs and more the derogatory poster usually posts from a limited viewpoint.

I've been around SL for about 3 years now. I like lots of the current changes in the development side of the Lab since Phillip's return. That you have taken the time to make this post is nice and I think it a good example of the new openness in LL development and communication.

I read the Office Hours Meeting transcript where this came up. I thought it was clear then that options were not the first solution you wanted see and that better planning could remove the need to some option settings. Nor did I take it new options would never be added. Your OP seems to be consistent with what I read in the transcript. Unfortunately no matter what you do some are not going to get it.