Solar Legion

The way it is shaping up? Steam is more or less a kind of Software repository for the modern age. The big problem though is how Steam started out (game distribution) - many still see it in that light and sadly this skews things a fair bit. At the very Least Linden Lab listed Sansar as being Early Access - Steam's equivalent to Late Alpha/Early Beta. There are some actual games listed on Steam that have been Early Access for years. If they ever listed Second Life on Steam, they'd have a problem: It's not exactly Early Access but it sure as heck isn't exactly a truly finished/polished product either.

Well .... Blender is listed on Steam, if that's the way you're looking at it.

While the bulk of Steam's offerings are indeed, games, they do have bits of software and other tings not traditionally thought of as "games" on offer .... Not much mind you but still ... Either way, honestly neither Second Life nor Sansar belong on Steam, despite Valve's now lax approach to certain kinds of content.

This almost reminds me of another user who decided to go to the middle of Nowhere and crank their Draw Distance up to a level well beyond absolute absurdity .... Just out and wandering about on foot? No reason at all to have Draw Distance set above 256 meters. Using a vehicle at a sane speed? Most you'll need is 512 meters. Everyone's different? That's nice - the above is sane, that's all there is to it. There is no reason to have your Draw Distance set above two sims length - none. Not for most use cases. "But what about photography?" - Do you really need to be able to see what is going on three or more sims away? If the answer is no, then keep it sane. In the past, Draw Distance was calculated from the position of your Avatar. Now it is calculated from the position of your camera. Gads .... and some wonder why their lag is so bad or why network based/render based lag is so bad for them ..... Some even wonder why they get "crap FPS" ... Yeah yeah, not the point of the OP but it still irritates me to no end ...

VVO, now. Virtual Verse One. The other mentioned - slsecrets - is little more than a Tabloid.

Account Deactivation and a downgrade are not the same thing.

The text files ARE the logs. The file you seem to think is the main log is a record of the most recent conversations, not the actual log. That is why you HAVE text files with the names of accounts/groups you've sent IMs to/received from as well as a general "chat" text file. The generic, recent message log aside, this is how it has ALWAYS worked. ETA: Since the original post has been edited to remove the question: The OP was asking about conversation logs and mentioned a specific .log file, assuming that by its name that it was the conversation log.

It's real.

That's just it - if all that was done is to update the look and add in newer animations/tweak a thing or two in the script .... it's an update. In Iren's case: Similar look to the original with (according to their post) wholly new scripts and animations. That's not an update - not by technicality. Hence why I mentioned how some avatar makers handle such things - in that instance it boils down to how the creator views it. is it actually the exact same product, just with some updates or is it a similarly designed (even named) but different/new product? If it is the latter, do customers have to buy the new product and if so, do they get a discount for owning the prior one or not? Iren is calling it an update but treating it like a similarly named but actually different product, one which must be bought again.

Like I said, I can be a bit of a pedantic arse at times ... It honestly depends on my mood though much of the time I prefer that if someone wishes to know my thoughts/opinions on something that they ask for them a bit more directly. From where I sit the main interaction was predicated on the assumption that the majority of my statements reflected my opinion and thus that there was either some deeper reasoning behind such blunt, fairly straight forward statements or that something was not being communicated properly. I was treated the requests for clarification as not understanding what had been stated rather plainly, not as a request for clarification of or a statement of my views. A bit of a mutual misunderstanding/error there.

If the product being offered only looks the same/similar but in reality has a new script (or several) in it and wholly different animations (not just new ones) then it is not the same product - technically. Some avatar makers will actually do that: "Update" an old product (say a prim and shape based avatar) so that it looks similar (sculpt or mesh that retains all or much of the original look) but utterly replace the scripts and/or animations with brand new ones. They then offer it at a new price while often offering a discount to those that bought the now outdated avatar.

The system doesn't care about user wishes. It cares about the permission flags that have been set, what scripts tell it to do and such. I answered your question regarding scripts with my personal view on the matter - it is covered by Terms of Service/Use. Your question however was born of assuming my statements prior to your asking were my own opinion on the matter. Your reaction to my answer was born of the same assumption. Perhaps next time try asking - directly - what a person's view is instead of using a dovetailed question as a form of "gotcha". In short - no contradiction was made. You may continue to try and go round and round with that ... I'm not interested in playing games.

Honestly Bitsy, I had hoped someone would have thought to ask if what I had been stating earlier was my personal opinion or not. And yes, I am a bit of an arse and a bit pedantic on that. Yes, I will often give my opinion from the outset, especially in threads where opinions are being asked for. In this case tough I felt it was necessary to lead with how Second Life's systems treat things and what options one has on a system level. It was not my intention to give the impression that those responses reflected my opinion.

Now for my personal view: Want to "close" on any specific day? Go right ahead, I can come back another time. However don't complain if someone visiting your MP store (if you have one) bought from you on the day where you in world location was "Closed for Business" - especially seeing as it is not so easy to make this clear on the MP. Your present method to do so is to make sure every product description lists the days you're "Closed for Business" ... Not exactly ideal. Maybe next time ask - directly - if I am stating my personal view before reacting as if I had?

I suppose it is hard for you to understand the difference between stating personal views and stating how the system itself functions. Until the post following this one, my personal views were left unstated.

No, I am not. I am stating how the system functions. Nothing more, nothing less. You can stop reacting as if my personal views were given - they were not.

Just so everyone is clear on something: I am doing nothing more than stating the way the systems in Second Life work - the reality of their functions and thus the consequences of trying to act as has been described by this thread: Pretending to "close" your store without making it impossible for sales to happen. I have not stated my personal views as of yet so some of the reactions to what I have posted thus far are ... Well suffice to say treating these as my personal views would be a mistake.

They have a choice: Active/Inactive. Those are the only ways to enforce their wishes - all else relies on others to honor requests. Some won't - that's reality.

Scripts can (and some do) have Terms of Service/Terms of Use. They're a vastly different beast.

I'm not deciding - reality is. Reality: Active vendor/MP - sales can (and do) happen. Inactive? No sales. Unless there's some new script function or the backends have changed ... That's how it works. Like it or not.

To be a bit more clear on my stance: I have no issues with RL stores closing on certain days. In Real Life you cannot buy anything from a place when it closes as - beyond being unable to access the store (legally) - none of the register systems will function even if you powered them on. They require a cashier to log in before they'll function. No such restrictions exist with Second Life. A scripted vendor will respond to being clicked on and paid. The MP will respond to adding items to cart, going to cart and checking out. Your direct presence is required only on the sim the store is on or being logged into the MP. The direct presence of the owner or a sales associate is not required.

That's nice. It also utterly misses the point. If you're going to ban a user because they dared to buy something from an active vendor or from an active MP store ... don't have a shop. Harsh? Sure it is.

See edit to prior response and see the other responses. If you still cannot see it, that's fine. I'm not going to try and explain it any further as it's right there in plain English: Don't place active vendors or have an active MP store if you don't want sales.

There's no explanation needed - it's right in my responses. But to humor the question: Active vendors/MP store? You're ready for sales, especially if said vendors are located in a place one could - ordinarily - simply walk to.

If they have active vendors and/or an active MP store - they aren't closed. It's that simple. "Closed" for a shopkeeper in Second Life means "nothing can be bought" - not "you cannot come inside". Others have used networked vendor systems that can simply be shut down for their in world shops. How they manage any MP store in a similar manner is ... not something I am familiar with. And no, the issue is with the expectation that a user will not buy from an active vendor. Also with the notion that a digital shop can somehow be "closed" with active vendors on parcel. Don't want sales - for any reason? Don't have an active vendor out. not where a user can simply cam in to use it.