Penny Patton

I haven't tried this myself yet, but my understanding is that resetting your account password will update your inventory in the beta grid. I heard that the reason for this was that requests to have an updated inventory on the beta grid had risen to such a high level that LL was no longer able to keep up with the demand, so this was a way to automate it.

Like others have said, it's the "c" button or "page down" on the keyboard. I just wanted to add, however, that crouching in SL only plays an animation. It, unfortunately, does not actually allow you to crawl under low ceilings. In combat sims it will not protect you from being shot at by others. It's purely cosmetic.

I've been keeping an eye on this one. Looks great so far, tho I haven't found any of those nice little spots that give a build character. It's just ruins as far as the eye can see. But that's likely because the build is still a work in progress. I understand it's supposed to be an RP area, so I'm guessing little nooks, crannies, living areas, etcetera will be added as time goes on. Hangar's Liquides has a bunch of those kinds of areas scattered around making it a lot of fun to explore.

>You do all realise that whether my little man boobs are an A-cup or a B-cup turns upon the outcome, don't you? Heh, there's a whole other topic right there. Most people severely underestimate their cup size in SL. Not just SL, I've seen comics actually joke about how what would be D-cup breasts in real life being only A-B cups in comics. Most people walking around with "a modest b-cup" are actually DDs.

I love seeing what everyone else around the grid does with their avatar, and I love showing off. This is the image that I made my forum avatar from. Here's a couple more shots of my avatar in SL; A puny 5'7" in a world of giants.

I'd recommend not buying any clothing item that is no-mod. Or anything else that is no-mod for that matter. Why do people make no-mod items? Mostly fear of having their items ripped off combined with a lack of knowledge about how "content theft" in SL works. No-mod won't stop the most popular methods of ripping content. Copybot won't even blink at a no-mod item. Press a button, it's copied. So, like mopst so-called "IP protection" techniques, all it does is hurt the legitimate customers. Here's some problems you run into with a no-mod attachments. 1) Poorly scripted re-size systems will lag an entire sim. Making the object no-mod prevents people from removing the bad scripts. 2) Re-size scripts are painfully limited and ill-suited to adjusting an attachment to fit your unique shape. Most content creator's avatars are poorly made, with awful proportions, as a result a no-mod attachment made by them will likely only fit an avatar with similarly poor proportions.Stretched out, anorexic legs are a common example. Just try to fit a no-mod boot with re-size scripts to a properly proportioned leg. Can't do it. 3) No-mod prevents basic modding. Want to wear a hat with your prim hair? Sorry, you can't without your hair clipping right through the hat. Want to retexture that awesome military vest you picked up to work with your SL military group? Sorry, no-mod. You're stuck with bright pink and purple polka-dots. 4) No-mod prevents you from correcting the creator's mistakes. Creator left a few prims fullbright, so they stick out like a sore thumb in a dark sim? Sorry, you're stuck with it unless the creator is nice enough to fix it and send you a copy. Not to mention nearly all furniture in SL is too large, too prim-heavy, and generally needs slight colour adjustments to properly fit a given environment. If you have even a bit of building know-how you can often reduce overly prim-heavy furniture by half or more, but not if it's no-mod. Really, aside from scripts and closed combat/game systems there's really no reason anything should ever be sold as no-mod. On the up side, there are plenty of content creators out there who realize all this and provide high quality copy/mod content. The SL Marketplace even allowsx you to omit search results based on what permissions are set. So you can have it only display moddable content.

>30 FPS > 10 FPS any day of the week. Oh, I agree, but you made it sound like if you're getting 60FPS in Crysis, you should be getting twice that in SL because the graphics are so much poorer. I'm saying if you get 10FPS in SL with mid range graphics, no shadows or depth of field, you'll get like 20-30 at those same levels. (And that's a generoues esitmate.) Turning on shadows you'd drop right back down. It's an improvement, a great one even, but the inefficient nature of the way most people build SL content means even if the graphics engine was exactly the same as those major AAA videogame titles, it would get a fraction of the framerate.

>Even user generated, mainland sandbox trash would render well if SL had DirectX 11 support, ran on multiple cores, SLI, etc... All these new (even some of the old!) technologies that modern graphics cards are using. Fair enough, but it's important to remember SL still would not run as well as people expect from videogames. A computer getting 10FPS might bump up to 20-30FPS even if they geto 60FPS with no slowdown in Crysis or the latest Modern Warfare. It'd still be a very welcome bump in performance, but it's good to keep things in perspective and be knowledgeable of why.

@GadgetPortal This is precisely what people mean by arguments failing to take "user generated content" into consideration. SL looks worse but gets lower framerates because the art assets, what you see in the world, is nowhere near as efficiently made as the same environment would appear in a Call of Duty game. Those exceptional looking Crysis environments? They're almost certainly rendering far fewer polygons per frame than SL, it's just that the trained, professional artists who made those games know how to build efficiently to get the most out of fewer polygons, and mesh modelling allows more ability to do that then prims. It's similar to how one SL sim using only 2/3 its prims can look larger and far more detailed, and provide higher framerates, than a set of sims using all their combined prims. It's in the hands of the artists. It has nothing to do with that one sim having a better rendering engine. Maybe the rendering engine could use work, but it's definitely not the whole problem. LL would do well to encourage better, more efficient builds via better content tools. We're getting mesh, which can be great or terrible depending on the user. LL should do what they can to encourage efficient mesh work for import.

I don't understand the comments in this thread that seem to suggest that good graphics can only be possible at the expense of good content. I think some people are setting up a false dichotomy here. We can have both good graphics and good content in SL. In fact, good graphics made good content even better. Good graphics also make SL more appealing, so we'd see more people, more potential new content creators, arriving. I do agree, wholeheartedly, that a large part of SL's poor graphics are due to the nature of user generated content (art assets made by amateurs and hobbyists, rather than professionals), but I do want to stress that the tools and starting standards are important too. The poor quality of the average SL avatar shape (shrunken heads, "t-rex" arms, tiny hands and feet are all so common that properly proportioned human shapes are the odd ones out) is much more related to the lack of tools in the appearance editor than it is to the fact that most SL residents have not taken human anatomy and proportion classes in their spare time. Any well informed and properly skilled resident can create or find their own improved windlight settings to better view SL, but the average SL resident will never see anything besides the default skies. SL's poor camera placement is every bit as culpable for the rampant up-scaling in SL as are the 7' tall starter avatars. Problems like these are far reaching because they affect us all. I may know how to fit four sim's worth of content into a single sim via proper use of scale, but if I'm building a public space I'm forced by LL to make painfully inefficient comrpomises, greatly resitrcting my ability and creativity, resulting in smaller, less detailed environments.

>Might it not be possible simply to allow sim owners to set a different meter size in their sim, and have everything in it scale if it is rezzed there? Something tells me that would not be very simple at all. I'm an artist not a coder, so I could be wrong, but at the very least it seems to me that it would require everyone to set a scale to begin with, and if this were applied to the mainland it would amont to the sort of forced re-sizing that would not sit well with most people who own land there already. It also seems like this would also require the sim to re-size attachments, which is not always possible.and it would put a whole extra layer on top of shape settings. Again, I'm not a software engineer, so I can't really say. If there were an easy fix to the mess I'd be all for it. I don't see an easy fix being feasible, so that's why I suggested the "long view" approach. It's slow, there'd be a transition period of a year or two, but in the end it would have the same effect, would require far less work and no complex software changes would be necessary.

Ok, so that was three things.

>If every resident were to choose today to re-size there Avatar to so called accurate height, the net effect would be a lot of in one sense broken content. Everything would look out of proportion. It would take a long time by attrition for all the then mis-sized content, mis-aligned poses, etc, etc to go away. Two things I need to address about this statement. 1) I think LL should take the "long term" approach to encouraging smaller avatars, as I suggested in some of my earlier posts. I don't think an overnight "scaling down" of the population is feasible or realistic. Introduce smaller starter avatars, fix AgentHeight, start building public areas to better scale. In this sense, scaling down becomes similar to a new feature. Much like sculpted prims or mesh. New content is slowly phased in as old content is phased out. Over a substantial amount of time. 2) One could, quite rightly, argue that the existing content is broken. Keep in mind, as there is no common sense of scale on the grid, avatars are not up-scaled consistently as compared to one another. Environments, furniture and other content are similarly not consistently up-scaled with the population. Yes, almost everyone and everything is too large. But "too large" is not a measurement. A bus is large. The Empire State Building is large. These things are not similar in size. Avatar height ranges from 6' tall to 8'10" tall among the majority of the population. That's a nearly 3' difference in stature. Environments (houses, buildings, landscapes) tend to be scaled up anywhere by 1.25 times to more than double scale. Animations and furniture are notorious for not being one-size-fits-all among the general population. 3) As stated above, everything is way of proportion right now, whether you're 5'2" or 8'10" you are constantly surrounded by avatars, environments and content that is scaled differently than your own avatar. As you said yourself, you had to scale down because you were towering over women. You're probably still extremely tall, yet there's people much taller than you still!

>Finally, I think this discussion has taken a more reasonable tone. I've only been repeating the same things I said in the other thread. >By extension, though, we might as well make avatars as small as possible, and make everything else to match them. That seems like a reasonable conclusion on the surface. A few things that should be pointed out tho, and I already mentioned several of these in the other thread. The big one; 1) You can create adult proportioned shapes between 5-6' easily enough. Smaller than that and you run into the issue where it's possible to create dwarf and child proportions, but adult proportions are no longer possible. Now, assuming we could get around that we'd quickly hit these issues. 2) Prims have a minimum size limit. We'd quickly hit that limit where prims become useless for attachments. 3)We still have the issue of a limited number of prims per sim. Shrink the avatar further than is possible and you'd quickly run into the issue of not having enough prims to fill a sim with content. > In fact, I might like to see more size variance in SL, if only to parallel size variance in RL. I'd like to see this too, and beyond even. Currently, avatars seem to be (generally speaking) in a race to the top. Which means it is currently impossible to create a "tall" let alone "giant" avatar compared to the norm. Few people, relatively speaking, seem willing to shrink. You see more women willing to shrink down than men, who are much more reluctant. So there's currently more variety in women's sizes. But still, if LL were able to push (through passive, encouraging measures like those I suggested in my previous posts) the size of the average avatar would be about middle of the road for avatar size possibilities. This would open up the whole range of avatar sizes. Those wishing to be giants, trolls, minotaurs, orcs, etcetera could tower over regular humans. I think you'd also see more people willing to shrink below adult human sizes to create dwarves, hobbits, etcetera. Add to that, if LL provided a broader range of properly scaled and proportioned body types to new users, they could encourage a wider range of sizes that way, too. Tall and thin, short and fat. Orc warlord, gnome alchemist, human auto mechanic, drow barber...you name it. >If changing the name of the meter would help to emphasize that it lacks the implied utility, I would support that. But currently the only argument in favour of what you're suggesting, as far as broadening the range of avatar sizes and allowing for more creativity, are the same people arguing that the measurement system provided is a good one and we'd be better off adhering to it. Speaking as someone who does design professionally, scale is important. It allows us to give the world a more coherent and deliberately varied design aesthetic. As I pointed out of the current situation, where SL lacks any coherent sense of scale, we cannot create giants because everyone is already pushing that end of the spectrum. We can't create animations that work reliably between multiple avatars because any given avatar is as likely to be 6' tall as they are almost 9' tall. This lack of a common sense of scale is very limiting to both avatar and content creation, not the other way around.

If you call it something fictional then there's no reason to equate it to real world measurements at all, wouldn't change the fact that building smaller means larger, more detailed sims and more affordable land which is the real issue.

>This is a virtual world, so the unit of measure is whatever you want to imagine it to be. A "meter" on my screen is a different size from one on yours, so the absolute measurement is meaningless. Relative scaling of avs to their surroundings is a matter of convenience (or inconvenience), hardly anything to have a fit over. This doesn't take into considertion that land size is static and finite, or that there are hard limits to prim sizes.

>What's wrong with glow and shiny (in the deferred renderer). I suppose you could complain about the glow "slider" being out of wack, I think it's logarithmic when it should be linear or cubic. Other then that I'd say it's rendered fine. Well, we can't apply either as a user created map, which limits us to prim faces. (Meaning, you cannot apply glow or shiny to an avatar mesh or defined areas on a prim face, for instance.) Shiny is also skewed to too much of an extreme. You can't apply a small amount of "shiny" to an object. It goes straight from "chrome" to "chromed chrome". > Windlight is clientside.......if someone was their preferences set with a certain windlight setting, they won't see all that "hard work" you might have put into some mood lighting. I often have my light set to mid day or 3 pm (those are just my preference..............I don't see those foggy meadows with the soft, blue morning sunlight. I respectfully disagree. Yes, windlight is client side, but if better windlight settings were available, or we had estate level windlight/inventory windlight (both of which were promised before windlight was released) fewer people would have reason to run around with their settings always at noon-3pm. The default settings, which are all the vast majority of SL users ever see, are atrociously bad. They are the settings SL's graphics are judged by non-users and new-users, which means they are an obstacle to both drawing in new SL users and retaining them. >Avatar scale and camera height have nothing to do with graphics This statement is simply incorrect. Avatar scale and camera height have EVERYTHING to do with graphics. Avatar size and camera placement dictate scale. Land area in SL is finite and costly. Larger scale builds take up more space, meaning you have less area overall to work with. Build a 10x10 hours and a 20x20m house that are, visually, identical. The 20x20m house takes up four times as much area and also requires far more prims than it's smaller twin. The smaller house can be more fully furnished, as there's more prims allotted for that. It also leaves enough room that you can either get away with owning a smaller parcel of land, or have yourself a sizeable yard to landscape with some of those leftover prims. Since scale is dictated by your avatar size, the person with the smaller house gets 4x as much land at no additional cost. Expand that to a sim size build, one sim basically becomes four. Why doesn't everyone do this? Besides requiring smaller avatars to be feasible, it also requires users alter their camera settings. The default placement for the SL camera precludes the possibility of smaller scale builds. It requires both heigher ceilings, and wider rooms. >Once mesh comes, SL will have all the same tools any professionally built game has This statement is factually incorrect. SL has a much smaller tool set. See my comments about shiny and glow, then add to that a whole host of other effect maps. Bump maps, shadow maps, etcetera. Not to mention the ability to rig and animate non-player objects, something SL has been in dire need of for its entire life. >our low poly count avatars that haven't been updated since release. Actually, it's not even that our avatars are low-poly. Our avatars are actually fairly high-poly. The problem is the models themselves are poorly made. Pinched and bunched up vertices, too muich detail in some areas, not enough in others. Not to mention, you can only deform a mesh so much before it looks warped and distorted. Most avatar shapes go well beyond that. >But, think of all the existing SL clothing that would suddenly need replacing. False argument. Nothing would "need" to be replaced. Suddenly or otherwise. Not if LL did it the smart way and introduced new avatar meshes while keeping the old. Let people choose which mesh they want to use. Over time, more and more people would switch to the new. Old content always gets phased out in favour of the new. There's nothing wrong with that. > I think LL is banking on mesh solving that problem for them when mesh creators start making full avatars rigged to the base avatar..........and that would be fine too. The rest of SL is user created, why not the avatars too. This is a terrible idea. Without a universal mesh there is no clothing industry. User made mesh avatars preclude the possibility of clothing anyone can wear. You'd only be able to wear clothing supported by (which usually means created by) the same person who made your avatar mesh. You wouldn't be able to buy custom skins, you'd have to buy an all new av mesh, only in the shapes provided by the creator. It would be extremely limiting and completely fracture the market for user created clothing. >The fact there is no substantial competition to Second Life probably gives some indication of how complicated creating all of this is. It's no indication at all. Besides the fact that competition does exist, the reason there's so little competition for SL is primarily due to the reluctance of any company to support user generated content. The very idea is horrendous to most companies. Do they really want to be known as a company that supports pervert sex, rotating-multiplying cubes with flashing nazi swastikas that blurt out the theme to Sanford and Sun, and flying genital attacks? This is what they think of when they think sandbox worlds like SL.

>None of this makes sense unless A) everything in SL is supposed to be bigger than in RL, OR B) the Linden meter is substantially smaller than the RL meter. As I stated in that other thread, neither of these are the case. It's a false dichotomy. The reality is that LL didn't put much thought at all into visual design matters such as scale or avatar proportion. There are statements from Lindens which admit this, and it's obvious when you look at things like the starter avatars provided to new users from SL's beginning right up to the present. The average SL avatar has a tiny, tiny head and freakishly short arms, do you really consider this to be by design? My position has always been that it is only practical to build smaller in SL because the size of a sim as well as the constraints on the size and number of prims we can create with are most efficiently used at a smaller scale than most people build to. Realistic scale actually falls into a sweet spot where we have adequate prims to create highly detailed environments from border to border in a sim, we're able to make prims small enough to create small details for avatar attachments, and we afford ourselves ample amounts of area to create in. Look at it this way. Without using megaprims, a 10x10 room, four walls a ceiling and floor, can be built in 2 prims, working with the utmost efficiency. (Two hollow cubes, one used to create the ceiling and floor, the other used to create the walls.) That same room scaled up to 20x20 takes up four times as much area, and eats up 12 prims. Consider that applied to much larger, more detailed environments. Regardless of what you think about "how large a linden metre should be", the fact of the matter is when you up-scale to the degree that the vast majority of SL users do, you and your content take up four times as much land for no additional gain. If anything, graphics also sugger because more prims allotted to structures (walls, floors, etcetera) means fewer prims available for detail and content (furniture, vehicles, decorations, landscaping). For what it's worth, I have never seen anyone suggest that we absolutely must adhere to real world dimensions. I've never made that argument, and I've yet to see anyone else make that argument. The argument has always been that larger content means a smaller, less detailed Second Life. That argument is demonstrably true. Environments built to a smaller scale are consistently more detailed and (relatively speaking) larger than environments up-scaled for larger avatars and SL's poor default camera placement.

The tools are there to a degree, but some of them are incomplete (windlight, camera controls) some are broken (appearance editor, basic build tools) and some are just implemented poorly (shiny, glow). Also, the defaults LL provides for SL set the bar for SL's visual presentation. Yes, it's possible to create visual experiences far beyond what we often see in SL, however most people will never see that. Most aspiring content creators have the bar set by what they see when they first arrive, and what they see in their travels. The rest of us have our hands tied trying to compensate for broken defaults. When I build a public sim, rather than creating the most efficient, detailed and immersive environment I can I am constrained by necessity to make wasteful and limiting compensations for issues such as the average avatar standing 7-8' tall, with a camera set much higher. Any idea how much we have to scale up a build to compensate for those issues and what that means in terms of content quality and quantity? Most people have no idea. Though there's plenty of talented people creating amazing windlight sky settings we never recieved the "windlight as inventory" feature promised before windlight was added. The day cycle editor is completely broken, allowing only a single day cycle to be saved. The default windlight settings are atrociously bad, yet that is what the vast majority of SL users see. Speaking as s design professional myself, there's really a lot LL could do to encourage and cultivate better looking creations among all skill levels of SL users and a better looking SL in general. Just by improving the default settings and tools, without driving up hardware requirements one bit. It seems to me that this is where LL would be best focusing their efforts to improve SL's graphics, although I do look forward to features like mesh import.

Yes and no. Yes, they will continue to improve the technology. Improved light and shadow effects are on the way. Mesh import is currently in open beta and will probably arrive on the main grid before the year is out. Over the past 8 years we've also gotten other graphics improvements such as windlight, specular shaders (glow), flexi prims and sculpted prims. So SL hasn't been entirely stagnant. No, LL will probably never grasp the graphics side of things as thoroughly as they ought to. Starter avatars will remain poorly scaled and proportioned. We probably won't get better control of shaders (ie: glow or shiney maps wearable by avatars), the windlight defaults will remain poor as will the camera defaults and the upcoming Depth of Field defaults. We'll likely never get the ability to rig and animate non-avatar objects beyond the crude prim animations we have now. Yes, we'll probably get estate level windlight controls, but no we will probably never gain scriptable control of things like windlight, camera settings, etcetera beyond what's available to users utilizing RLV enabled viewers. So...SL is likely to remain an odd mix of increasingly decent technology combined with limited tools and poor defaults.

@Josh Susanto If you want to debate whether or not it's too late to make improvements to SL then go back yourself, dig up the relevant counter points you've conveniently ignored so far and try to argue them. No one is going to take you seriously otherwise. As for what LL could do to fix the problem, that's easy. 1) Fix the SL camera placement. 2) Provide properly scaled and proportioned starter avatars to all new residents. 3) Fix AgentHeight to display correct avatar size. That's it. No drastic, content breaking changes necessary. After that, SL will correct itself over time. Just like the introduction of sculpties didn't mean overnight all non-sculpted content was replaced. Just like the introduction of mesh won't mean the overnight removal of all prims from the grid. I'm not holding my breath that LL will do anything of the sort, of course, just pointing out how easy it would be for LL to address problems like this to make SL a more viable product.

>What part of this is incorrect? Everything from "because" to "stuck." Sign of a bad troll that you just keep waving this statement around even though it has been throughly trounced.

>But pretending that they are (or have been) anything but complicit in the use of the Linden meter as a unit substantially shorter than a metric meter is pure denial.  Your position is that LL deliberately went about with the intent of making a system where the "linden metre" as you put it is shorter than a standard metre by intent and design. My position is that LL simply didn't put much thought into the visua design side of SL at all when it comes to scale. Which of us is in denial? > tried the all 50 AV both in male and female, and I agree it's not how most people probably want to look, but I actually have met RL people who look like that. Originally your argument seemed to be suggesting that a height of "50" meant "average height". This is flawed for two reasons. One is that the height slider is only one of several which affects avatar height. The second is that an all-50 avatar isn't even human in proportion, "let alone average". So I can say with complete confidence that you are mistaken, lying, or in dire need of an eye exam. Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to introduce to you, Mister and Missus All-50s. Mr. All-50 has ape-like arms that are about 4-5 inches too long for his body. This ape-like body structure is also evident in his legs, which are short compared to his body. Mr. All-50's brain is underdeveloped due to the small size of his cranium. He stands at 8.25 heads tall. The average human being has a larger head, standing at about 7-7.5 heads tall. 8 heads tall at an extreme, almost always indicating a very tall individual. Any more than that and you enter NBA all-stars territory. Mr. All-50's may want to look into a career in basketball due to his massive hands. Or perhaps the circus with his massive clown feet. Mr. All-50s is also a Star Trek fan, or maybe a Lord of the Rings/D&D fan, take a look at those long, pointy vulcan ears. Mrs. All-50 is much worse off. Unfortunately, she is apparently a thalidomide victim.Her arms are about 4 inches too short for her body. Also inverted is the issue of the legs, where her legs are actually too long for her body by human standards! The return of the pointy ears suggests the couple either decided to get surgery to show their devotion to their mentor Spock together, or they are of the same alien/fantasy species. Mrs. All-50 is only a couple inches more than 8 heads tall. Like her husband, her hands and feet are far too large. She's also appartently expecting a little All-50's Junior. In addition, her boobs, despite considerable sagging, manage to point directly forward, as if they were unbound by our earthly laws of gravity. I can say, with the utmost certainty, that you have never in your entire life met anyone in real life who suffered the full combination of deformities it would require to look like either of these avatars. Again, they are not human, let alone any sort of depiction of the "average" human, which was the basis of you bringing up the avatar height slider in the first place. >Again, I think I should point out the heights of the Lindens themselves. What is the secret message, and why should we listen or not listen? I can assure you no professional artists were employed in the creation of most Linden's avatars. With very few exceptions. This may have something to do with it and SL's other visual problems. >It has often occurred to me that a lot of space could be saved if people just made avatars smaller. But why just a little smaller? Why not really, really small?  If we could shrink avatars and prims infinitely smaller, you'd have a point. However, there are two problems with this argument. First, we cannot shrink prims or avatars infinitely. We have finite controls over avatar and prim sizes. Even if we shrink avatars to the smallest size allowable, we run into the issue of minimum prim size. We can save space, to a point, however we eventually reach the point where we can't actually build anything and keep it in scale with our avatars. Oddly enough, shrinking avatars to realistic sizes allows us the "sweet spot" of prim size controls, allowing us to fill sims with highly detailed content, and create attachments that don't look like giant cubes dangling from our limbs. It is pretty much the perfect balance, actually. Now, if I were to follow your reasoning, this must mean something, right? >Regardless of what should have happened, what has happened is... What has happened is that this very same argument already recieved a thorough debunking earlier in this very thread. By this logic sculpted prims and mesh should be abandoned. It's too late for them to have any effect on SL. Of course this is rubbish. The reality is, exactly like the introduction of sculpted prims and now mesh, there would be no massive "Scaling down" of existing content. Instead, slowly and over time old content would be phased out with new and improved content. This is how SL works. You also remain under the assumption that everything in SL is scaled up to exactly this imaginary "Linden metre" which happens to be about 2.5 english feet. If you want to talk "pure denial", try and test that theory. You'll find it's not the case. Few people follow any measurement at all. Most peoplke "eyeball" scale based off their own avatar's size, or entirely without any reference at all. I'm simply pointing out why it's a problem. Everything I've said is demonstrably true, and has been proven in the only place that matters. The grid itself.

> I really don't care what the Linden meter is, but I take exception to the claim that it in any special way correlates to the metric meter. You mean, despite the fact that LL chose to use the metric system as the basic unit of measurement. They could have let it entirely unnamed, or chose a fictional method of measurement, but they didn't. >One of the first things I did when I joined was make an all 50 avatar to see what it looked like. It wasn't normally proportioned, but the discrepancies were smaller in total than the observable discrepancy between the way a meter looks in SL and the way a meter looks in RL. I can only assume you are not very familiar with human proportion. The discrepencies are immense. A woman avatar needs to have the arm slider set around 90-100 to have her arms not disturbingly short. What you get with an all 50 avatar is not human. Not sure why you're leaning on that as any sort of argument. >The tape measure may have been made by residents, but I have yet to see a competing tape measure, much less one provided by LL to settle the matter. The prim editor window has several built in methods of measurement, all of which contradict this resident made tape measure you're talking about. Not the least of which are the measurements for prims themselves. >I think the core issue is not ultimately the meter, itself, but the idea that SL is or is even intended to be a perfect analog of the Earth.  No one has made this argument, and this argument entirely misses the point. I've only pointed out the very practical and costly consequences of SL's scale issues. Issues that have had a very real, very direct impact on 1) What residents pay in land fees. 2) How much detail you can get out of a given number of prims on a given amount of land. 3) New user retention (an ugly SL is going to drive away more people) 4) LL's ability to sell the idea of owning land in SL (people often opt not to own any land at all due entirely to these problems) 5) Broken animations Etcetera.

I thought I laid the problems out pretty clearly. I'll let you go back and find my posts if you want to understand how the scale issues break animations, furniture, attachments, etcetera, but I'll repeat the biggie. Land in SL is a limited and costly resource. The rampant up-scaling means that everyone who owns land is paying four times as much for the practical use they're getting out of their land. The Prim count of large structures (houses, shops, castles, etcetera) similarly goes up by about a factor of four as you double the size. Combined, this means SL is less detailed (more prims eaten up by structures means fewer prims allotted for details) and smaller. (Say you could fit four whole city blocks in an SL sim if you built to scale. Up-scaling to double size means you'd only be able to fit a single city block in that same sim. This is why sims built with attention given to scale consistently seem much, much larger than a single sim's worth of content.) See the problem now?