Ephyu Reino

"It's okay, everyone, we're still hangin' in there! ... Barely." Maybe listening to customers would make these "we only lost 10% of our user hours! That's better than 11%!" statements into some actually exciting increases. Right now, it all sounds like one of Obama's speeches about the unemployment rate. It's funny, but not surprising, that Viewer 2.x, which was supposed to be a big cash cow by letting "average Joe" users access SL, which LL invested so much money and time into... Is a massive, financial bomb, on all fronts. I'm not sure why they're still clinging to it. At first I thought, "maybe they're actually seeing enough success with new users that they can afford to piss everyone else off." Apparently not. I really think, at this point, it's some weird matter of pride. Like so many companies are suddenly doing, they have to prove (to who?) that the customer isn't ever right. Definitely not how to run a successful business.

My biggest concern here, what with all the childrens bein' allowed in and all: Is anything being done about profile ratings? This conversion to a new, web-based system seems like a great opportunity to let us voluntarily censor ourselves by rating parts of our profiles PG/Mature/Adult, or even "Private" or "Friends Only" like many of the social networks you're emulating. Would be great for anyone with stakes in an adult business, or who have information regarding adult activities in their profiles (whether it's advertising "services," or just a funny quote that's fine for adults, but really shouldn't be seen by the kiddies). I know this has already been done for the Classifieds, but are we going to see anything for the rest of the fields/tabs? Or the opportunity to provide alternate PG/Mature/Adult versions of certain fields, depending on who's viewing the profile? Imagine someone with adult and non-adult business, who wants to use their Picks section, or their main profile page, to explain relevant information? They might not want non-age-verified users to just see "CENSORED."

Most of what I'd want to say on the subject has already been said, multiple times, so I'll try not to re-state too much, but I have some things to add. However, I support the idea of allowing us to flag ourselves as Adult or Mature. It would solve a lot of problems if we could flag our: Avatars (Visually) Profiles (As a whole, or)Specific Picks Specific Classifieds - Another post says this one's already done. Thanks. The rest is still imporant. Main profile page. Group listings. "First Life" page. Web tab. Interests tab. Account as a whole. In the case of adult-flagged avatars? Visually mute (grey cardboard cut-out) when seen by a minor. Profiles? Eliminate the specified tabs, allow us to substitute a censored version for kids, or substitue text-fields with a "This user has their <profile/first life/groups/web info/interests> flagged as adult content." message. I'm sure many would love to take advantage of a feature that allowed us to hide our entire account from search if the user isn't an adult. Under-18 accounts also need to be clearly visible. A tag in their profile info, where payment info on file and age verification currently shows, and an (optional, set in preferences) message to let a user know that the person that is IMing them is a minor, would be nice. On the subject, here's some good JIRA issues to go vote on: Meta-Issue for adult content: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-2778 Adult content flagging: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-15298

I've noticed the clients (1.23, most TPVs, and my most recent shot at 2.x) all seem to keep your bandwidth setting, as far as the slider goes, but it doesn't actually seem to know it. Much like a badly installed toilet, you have to "jiggle the handle," so to speak, by opening the preferences, grabbing the slider, and increasing or decreasing it a bit, then applying. I notice an INSTANT, dramatic increase in loading every time, as if the viewer didn't realize the setting had been changed until then (even if it was showing my chosen setting).

The completely useless e-mail subjects for sales are now only slightly useless, but more cluttered. "Customer <Firstname Lastname> purchased 1 item from you as part of order #123456 on the Second Life Marketplace" I'd much rather see the following, as I don't need a full, weirdly-worded sentence to understand what's going on: For a single item: SL Marketplace Order #123456: <Firstname Lastname> purchased <Product Name>. For multiple items: SL Marketplace Order #123456: <Firstname Lastname> purchased <number> items. In all cases, so far, I've sold single items, and would rather know what the product was than how many were bought.

Oh. Wow. Really? Accusing your userbase--which is already unhappy with your product (not you)--of being out to get you. We're not "out to get you." We're not hating for the sake of hating. We're dissatisifed with what you, and the rest of your team, are producing. When you cite, very clearly, something the users have a problem with, and lend your support to it, they're going to be annoyed. When you make a post trying to justify this point, it's not going to convince anyone. When you make another post calling everyone a bunch of big meanie heads, well... In regards to wanting us to listen to you, and not be condescending... We are listening to you, and we don't like what you're saying. Our fate's much more directly in your hands, despite the fact that your paychecks come (indirectly) from all of us. Your initial tone wasn't inviting a "nuanced, open discussion." You were taking the high ground and adopting a defensive tone, which is just asking for it. You've all been treating us like low-class peasants who shouldn't know better. How dare we revolt? It's the very definition of condecension. An "open" discussion would imply that you might listen to all points of view. I'm sorry the points of view seem to be, almost universally, in opposition to you, but this may indicate how out-of-touch you and the rest of the Lindens are at this point. We're listening, and we're engaging. Are you? On another note. You said one option would be to... Make an interface that covers all use cases. This is the hardest of all, requiring real understanding and design, but is usually the right answer. It's hard. This means it probably won't happen. Real understanding already seems to be out the window, as indicated by, well, this entire blog post and the response I'm replying to. Design? Yeah. Everything to do with LL currently looks like the wet dreams of a bunch of DeVry students and café culture fetishists, but I don't think most of the users sit around with a Starbucks cup in one hand and a Macbook perfectly balanced on one knee while they use Second Life. And if they do, they're probably happy with Viewer 2. They don't want functionality, just flash and "Dazzle." Yes, we remember the Dazzle project (the one thing LL reversed after we yelled enough), and it seems this viewer has been its revenge.