Jump to content

iSkye Silverweb

Resident
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About iSkye Silverweb

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Someone made a good point in one of the groups inworld: "LL made a big mistake when they made only one kind of group, and crammed everything into it. If they had Land Groups, Social Groups, and Merchant Groups as separate things, I think would be easier. At least, wouldn't be so much hit on servers checking land permissions against groups every time you cross a sim line if most groups didn't have that." Would it help if they were different types of groups? Another observation: Currently in one group that is set up as a land group, we noticed it used to be you could untick ability to rez for the "everyone" role and other roles could have the ability to rez but that's apparently not the case. Any role in a land group is able to rez on the land. Having different group types would be helpful in some cases.
  2. Why should we have to go outside of SL to do that, when events are inworld, and the system as it is set up sends an email of the group notices to a person if they are offline, and they've opted in to receive those offline emails? They can opt out if they dont want them. The main reason for having notices going to email for offline group members is so they are kept in the loop about events. Discord, well...if you don't mind finding yourself on a zillion servers all of a sudden... I got bowled over with just so many servers and all of them sending out messages etc. and if you don't look at them for a couple of days you've got hundreds of messages to catch up on. I ended up muting most of them because it was taking up too much of my time to go through all the chat to find important stuff. I suppose if they were announcement-only servers that'd be livable. I found it just too much, all the chattiness on Discord.
  3. As a resident I have set my preference to receive group notices in email. I also have gone into individual group profiles and unticked the "Receive group notices" option for those groups that I don't want to get offline emails OR inworld notices from. I tick that option for those groups that I want to get inworld notices and offline emails. Always worked well for me (and yes, I have a gmail address - no problems). I like having that level of control over my SL experience. Also as a resident, my concern with the Lab removing the ability to have group notices sent to email when I am offline is to do with getting messages capped. I would really hate to miss notices that came in after my messages limit was reached because I was out of SL for a couple of days. I am a member of several very active inworld groups that have private regions, and they frequently communicate with their members using group notices. By taking away that option, Lindens, that's a pretty darned effective way to torpedo our efforts to be part of our communities. From the POV of a member of a management/organising team for some groups, being unable to keep the community members in the loop via offline notices sent to email when they have opted into receiving them is just making our lives more difficult. We want to keep these members informed, as they wanted and opted in to be informed, so that they can feel they are still connected to their communities even when they cannot be inworld. It could have catastrophic consequences to all the hard work and effort that goes into trying to build and strengthen our inworld communities. As regards the SL Events calendar...one of the groups that I help manage has events that are intended only for members of the group. To expect these private groups to post their events on a very public events calendar just won't work for them. In those particular groups, they don't need or want everybody and their uncle coming to their events. Other private groups are more public and more open to it - it should be an available option, and not the only way, to inform these private communities about upcoming participation opportunities. I really hope you will reconsider the idea. Good intention, not great execution. I think the effort should go toward educating/reminding the residents (many newer ones may not even know they can opt out of receiving group notices!) and educating them about the choices they have, and also about whitelisting in their email options those offline notices so they don't get marked as spam, etc. I think that's a much better solution, and it will remind SL residents that they do have this level of control over their SL experience, and what they get in their email.
  4. I'm REALLY uncomfortable with the idea of elected officials and all that bother. Just let people create, with just a few good, basic, common-sense ground rules. I've always liked the comparison to a sonnet - simple rules, with potentially beautiful results: fourteen lines, iambic pentameter - within that structure you can write anything you like. We all know the line about beauty and the beholder...
  5. You have FREAKING got to be KIDDING me that they are going to just break scripts that show online status - there are a lot of legitimate scripts in SL that NEED this. As I was saying to someone - why not have that as a preference (I thought we did?) where "show my online status" can be set off by default, and let residents decide for themselves if they want that or not? It's not a violation of privacy if they have to go into preferences and specifically set that on. We're all grownups, we can decide that for ourselves instead of LL going all parental and "protecting" our privacy. Sheesh.
  6. " It is not too late for Rod to turn the ship around. Critical mass is still a bit of a distance away. However, as CEO, he has to inspire and if need be, manipulate the LL staff to change course." I agree, it's not too late. But...Rod? DO SOMETHING!! What are the Linden crew THINKING??? HONESTLY! "Log in to Facebook to see what your friends are doing..." on the Second Life HOME PAGE?? If you want more residents (customers, whateveryacallem), you DON'T send them to a competing platform! Even if it's a "strategic partner" platform!! "Find friends in Second Life.." makes a whole lot more sense, doesn't it? And inside SL, "Invite your friends to join you in Second Life." Residents want to get the news about Second Life, IN Second Life. Prospective residents can go to Facebook and get hooked from there, fine, but the really good stuff should be found only inside SL. Is that concept just a wee bit too deep for the Linden Lab to grasp?
  7. Mercury got it right on the nail's head. And "social" does not mean "facebook", "twitter" or the like. It means making connections with other people. That's why the removal of the community gateways is such a crying shame. The welcome islands SL set up are fine - but cold, impersonal. The Help Island, okay. Mentors determined to make that all-important first-person connection with new residents have found their way there to try to provide that initial personal contact, but all these new people see is the welcome/help island environment which is so separated from the rest of SL that it's hard for them to see they are really INSIDE of SL at that point. The Community Gateways at least gave new residents the sense that they were entering a new world, meeting people, and learning exciting and fun things they can experience and - then "What? Me?? I can go there? Do things? CREATE THINGS? How? Ohhh....neat...wow..." and get them engaged, and ... IN.
  8. That seems to be the typical response time these days for tickets, sim move requests, sim close requests, etc. Six months. At least they're responding to them now.
  9. I'm incredulous. "To get the inside scoop on what's cool and new in Second Life, don't come to Second Life, go to Facebook." "Got a short attention span? Just follow us on Twitter! Don't bother coming in world..." Facebook and Twitter are supposed to be your tools to bring new residents to SL, not chase away your existing user base...
  10. You want people to PAY for a beta program? I don't understand that.
  11. How would that be a good thing? I don't see banning Adult content as being the solution, nor do I see bringing under-18ers as a good idea; SL was intended to be an adult environment, created by and for adults. However, LL in its infinite wisdom has decided to bring the teens onto the main grid. And if they follow through, so be it, but they better be prepared for consequences if they do not put the appropriate protections into place. Adults are adults and can decide for themselves if they want to see G, PG, mature or adult content in whatever form they choose, and they can elect to avoid or block such content for themselves. They DON'T get to decide what content other adults can access. However, adults DO have the responsibility of looking out for the vulnerable, under-18 crowd and therein lies the problem - how can we (and LL) ensure that the under-18 crowd never gets access to mature or adult content as long as they are under 18? There have been some suggestions made here, and hopefully someone at LL has been reading the comments here, if not posting any comments of their own. And maybe they will show some transparency or at least share the thought/decision processes that led to the decision to bring the teens onto the main grid. Wishful thinking? Probably. But threats and rants are not the answer. Figuring out what WE can do to mitigate any potential problems, is part of the answer. Pleading with LL to see reason may be another part of it - but if it's a done deal, they might not be able to reverse their decision.
  12. Uhh, SirJason...Philip doesn't work at LL anymore. He's got his LoveMachine these days.
×
×
  • Create New...