Freya Mokusei

So, to review:- To the full is barely started. Inherent is subjective. Not essential is very common. Ain't this fun.

You can have as many partners as you can handle. The problem is that the Second Life profile window only has room for one 'partner' at a time - but this doesn't need to limit the terms of endearment you use. I have multiple partners, and resolve this by not using the partner box at all - it's more comfortable either to create Picks, or some part of my profile text to talk about them.

It's against the Terms of Service to allow anyone into your Second Life account except yourself. There is no recourse in this situation - no restore is available. It was a mistake to allow another person access to your inventory, and Linden Lab are well within their rights to withold all offers of support. Maybe a good opportunity to start afresh.

Phil Deakins wrote: I do like your suggested list of attainable goals that should be advertised P.S. Ok. It's not an essential. Is that better? I can feel the steam condensing around my inner ears already.

Phil Deakins wrote: The thread certainly caused me to change my original statement, but I think my final statement is absolutely true. There is a steep learning curve at the start for some, and they don't need to climb it. It isn't an essential for using SL to the full. Eeeh. Need is one of those words - I don't need caffeine, but if you'd met me before I'd had a cola in the morning you might say differently. Given that SL's ads say things like "Choose your style!" "Find love!" "Create an avatar that looks like you!" I'd say that while new users don't need to climb the Everest of styling, many of them will try and many of those will fail. I'd definitely agree with any push to change these ads to more reasonable, attainable goals for new users, such as:- "Bumble around for a bit!" "Come look at some pretty shapes!" "See if your PC can hack it!" I'll agree that there's other issues that can give me a short-fuse at the moment, I've been posting here less while those disrupt things. I probably wouldn't have attempted explaining my perspective if it wasn't you as the OP - I know you can handle it. But thanks, and I'll keep being careful.

Phil Deakins wrote: nobody needs to have a steep learning curve to fully use SL You're still poorly qualifying It's these weird defacto statements from your opinion that get my back up. But I get it. I'm probably reading something into your tone that doesn't exist - it's always sounded to me that you believe there factually isn't a steep slope for the average user - for 51% of new users who join Second Life. I've been trying to demonstrate that it almost certainly does affect >51% of new users (we just never hear from them), and so, by my definition it's a steep slope by average. I don't beleive that 51% of users are smart/patient/prescient enough to know how to dodge the fork in the road. Some might make it, and some might pass the tests our service provider sets for them - some might spot that the claims made in SL's advertising aren't accurate. But is this good enough when compared against other online services? - my position is no. Sorry if I got snappy. It's why I hate such subjective terms, what is a problem to one person will appear fine to another - and the reality is often somewhere in the middle.

Phil Deakins wrote: You keep talking about all these things happening together in the initial phase, but it doesn't normally happen that quickly. I suspect that you consider the initial phase as lasting longer than it does These unqualified terms are so useless ('steep' is another - steep compared to what? 'to the full' - whose impression of full?). I've been specific throughout - within the first 24 hours of using the service - being logged in in-world. This is a very useful point in time, it lets you see how commited a user has to be in order to still be here. I've avoided obvious and predictable traps that very few people ever learn (writing scripts, anything to do with Marketplace, Skill Gaming). Both myself and other users have tried to explain why your perception of the "initial phase" is the one that sticks out as non-normative. You seem to think that the potential for 'steepness' is low, that very few users are caught in this trap. I can tell you, as someone who posts to the Answers forum almost daily, these are not edge-cases. As someone who's watched concurrency and sign-up graphs side-by-side for years, the numbers that give up climbing the curve are not insignificant. As someone who carefully researches every new advertisement that Linden Lab release - what they say SL is for, and what the impression would be to a new user - new user expectations don't come from the ether. You've provided only anecdotal evidence and gut-feeling based only (according to your words) on your experiences ten years ago. But you're right, it doesn't seem as though we're going to make progress here. All I can say is you probably didn't miss the opportunity to become a UX specialist. I've tried to compare the first hour in SL with the first hour in Minecraft (and other social apps, such as Tinder or WhatsApp), tried to use literal examples of new users struggling to understand basic principles, and linked-out to demonstrate the cost of poor user retention. I was trying to help you understand, but I've always disagreed with your position in this thread - I've been clear on that throughout. See you in another thread.

So - in your view - it's not a choice any user makes knowledgeably, not a choice they can detect as being a hard route, and the appearance difficulty alone (I think we've highlighted others - buying land, using scripted objects - most things except standing in a place and talking or wandering around) will shove a new user into a steeper and more complicated path where they are inevitably more likely to abandon their attempts to understand SL and leave well in advance of mastering the learning curve without realising how easy they could've had it. Any user who struggles but persists may not be able to find support, and user retention in SL has always been very poor. And yet this curve isn't 'steep' to you because...?

Sorry, there were some edits in my post. I'm mainly interested in your answer to my final question:- "I genuinely don't understand this approach to the discussion. Are you seriously suggesting it's the user's fault for trying to do too much at once? That the user sees this choice - simple and slow vs. hard and complex - and they choose the hard route?" I'm especially interested in any reason you have to believe this choice is made deliberately, and any theories as to why users choose the hard route so regularly.

Oh jeez. I'm not nuts about approximately 90% of the assumptions and implications you're making in that post. I can see your angle, and I'm sympathetic toward trying to help you see the thing everyone else is seeing. I'm going to try not to crucify you for probably the second time in this thread. Your solution reads as telling women simply to shrug off the lifelong barrage of appearance-based judgements and comments they receive in real life, and just 'deal with' looking basic in SL while they learn the ropes "as men do". I don't think that approach is workable (I've already talked about the criticisms new users get if they stay as their Library avatars), and I think it suggests the steepness is caused by the user through an act of choice - which is both faulty and potentially harmful. Phil Deakins wrote: So I accept that, for some people, SL does have quite a steep initial learning curve, but it is by choice and not out of necessity. -and- SL does not have an inherent steep learning curve. For it to be a 'choice' it has to be something that a user recognises as a choice. If - as you claim - female-presenting avatars are drawn toward prettifying themselves before they socialise, then is it something the user identifies as a choice ("I could go out dressed like this...") or is it an extension of the expectations placed upon women in real life? Are female users able to spot that Second Life appearance is an "optional" extra? Are male ones? Does any new user realise how complicated - how *unrealistic* and *impractical* it is to want to change clothes on their first day? Can any user spot that this learning curve *can* be slowed down, are they made to feel safe and secure while being ignorant of terminology and mechanisms (I'll answer this for you - no, they can't, and no they're not). Given the hyperness of both masculiniity and femininity in SL I'm inclined to say that your assumptions are junk from the top down. Males in SL have many expectations piled on as well - especially because competition for attractive females runs high, and the appearance bar can be set very high, and it's still regularly assumed they're often more technically compentent than women in online spaces. Male new users joining SL with the intention of partnering-up would need to spend (anecdotally observed) more time and money than women reaching this bar simply because the fashion in SL is tilted against them - there's less variety and a much smaller top-end. This undercuts your theory. You could *perhaps* attempt to argue that female-presenting avatars see this problem more accutely because of real world experience in receiving criticism for personal expression (which I could perhaps understand). You could also try to explain that this perceived 'gendered steepness' is seen by women because they're often socialised to be more empathic. Both of these would be less ridiculous theories, but my personal perspective is that they'd both still fall short. None of this addresses the reality that Second Life is heavily populated by female-presenting avatars - for whatever reason you want to imagine. Given this reality, and your claim that women tend to see prettifying as a 'need' when joining SL - why is the learning process slanted against such a large user demographic? Why have LL's repeated attempts to improve the New User Experience never made prettifying easier? I genuinely don't understand this approach to the discussion. Are you seriously suggesting it's the user's fault for trying to do too much at once? That the user sees this choice - simple and slow vs. hard and complex - and they choose the hard route?

Kelli May wrote: Happening to me with Chrome. I noticed it after a large Win 10 update, although that might be coincidental. That's a really good point, and one that I hadn't considered. The Windows 10 Cumulative 'Anniversary Update' has been causing havoc for everyone who manages IT systems this week as it moved to mandatory status. I'd be interested in hearing if anyone seeing this issue is on a non-Windows platform or doesn't have the Anniversary Update (KB 3176929) installed. I'd also be interested in hearing whether this bug presents itself in Edge.

Phil Deakins wrote: I'm not being deliberatley obtuse, Freya. Why would I want to do that? You talked about teaching an alien, who knows absolutely nothing about life on Earth, how to make a cup of tea. That's an alien brain that knows nothing about how to do anything on Earth, but is capable of being taught. That's the way I understood it, anyway. That situation doesn't apply to a new user entering SL. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and try some literal examples. Just because new users aren't aliens doesn't make it less applicable. It's a metaphor, a thought experiment. Here, I'll post some "Answers" from the Answers forum (leaving them unattributed, because this isn't about targetting anyone who is trying to help - this is absolutely not a failure of the volunteers there), see if you can imagine how alien these would sound to someone with zero experience of SL terminology:- "What kind of house do you have? If it is a rented property, you will most likely be required to wear the appropriate group-tag for your furniture/rezzed items to stay inworld, otherwise they could possibly be auto-returned to your inventory." "Usually all this means is that you left on an invisible mask prim/layer that makes your bits invisible so they don;t poke through your Mesh Outfit.. Look in the Current Outfit folder and take off the Alpha Layer that looks like a little white shirt." "Scripts can be deactiveted for parcels/regions, that don't allow it, in the world/ about land window. Scripts can be made run, by selecting a object, and in the menu build/scrips, set scripts to running. Same with resettig and set to not run." Is paying tier the same as 'rent'? What's a group-tag, where is it found? What's 'rezzed'? Can I rez them again if they're auto-returned? Who auto-returns them? Can you not see how these are difficult answers, that rely on a lot of tacit knowledge in order to be understood by the new user? These are all absolutely problems that a user could encounter within their first 24 hours on the platform. Bear in mind this is what they receive from a helpful volunteer when a new user does find someone to ask these problems to - usually the viewer is totally silent in resolving any concerns. Getting these answers to the new user is the best case scenario. It requires the new user to:- Be able to verbalise their problem Be invested enough to want to try and resolve the problem themselves Be able to find the SL forums (and the Answers section within that) - or some other help resource staffed or maintained by volunteers Be able to correctly determine the resources they'll need to resolve the problem Puzzled new users who pass all four tests are definitely in the minority - is basic CS statistics. If you think all that doesn't add up to a 'steep' curve then I really don't know what does.

AdelleBelle wrote: I had the same issue myself and was bugging the crap out of me. I even tried to do a browser restore to no avail. Until i found the solution. In order to have your MP appearance restored in Mozilla Firefox, you must do the following: Copy the following code and paste it into your browser window: about:config?filter=layout.css.prefixes.webkit Push hit; a confirmation window will show up. Hit ok. On the next window a parameter will show up. Double click it until will change from "true" to "false". Restart your browser and you are done. I hope this helps. It works superbly. Well done and thanks!

Phil Deakins wrote: It's not really the situation that anyone is in when they first arrive in SL. Everyone who arrives here knows how to type on the keyboard, and they all know how to use and click the mouse. So they're off to a good start already Cool! Then why does any service bother with orientation or tutorials. Why does anyone hire or train UX professionals at all! "Everyone" (not the word I would use, disability exists) can use a mouse - halfway there! I can only assume you're being deliberately obtuse in this reply, and that's disappointing. If there's an application (WhatsApp or Tinder, as top-of-my-head examples) that makes communication quicker and easier, has a lower bar than SL has... at what point do new users decide the bar is just too high to be worthwhile (spoiler alert: regularly). You're right that conversation can happen immediately after signing up - but does it? The thread I posted earlier illuminates slightly, people want (or feel they should) 'look good' and be able to socially conform before they mix with other people - ditch the starter avatar, get an AO, all those messages that we've been culturally passing onto new users for 10 years or more. I posted earlier too that even in 2006, as someone who felt they came from a semi-technical background (I'd been using computers for a decade or so, I could 'type and use a mouse'), I still secluded myself away from other people for a week in Second Life - until I felt I wouldn't be a burden to those around me, and until I could appear to be skilled in what I was trying to do, the buttons I needed to find. I know for a fact, having seen plenty of it, that many new users face criticism for not changing their looks before attempting to socialise. Your approach doesn't appear to be realistic, and it's my opinion that you trying and failing to understand the new user experience is not helping. This thread reads as though everyone else can see the problem, why are we still trying to convince you that it exists?

Phil Deakins wrote: The people in that thread are using Firefox.. Right. That's one of the reasons why I said it wasn't related. I was clarifying, in case anyone accidentally spotted the other thread. The interesting thing to know is whether the cookie/log out issue exists on all Lithium-powered platforms, or just ours. That would determine, at least, which company we can blame.

Can confirm, especially for me hitting refresh on a page after a little while appears to sign me out (it doesn't really sign me out, clicking Sign In gets the page to confirm the cookie). Interestingly as well, all my fonts are now a mix of... it says font-family: Arial (which is a bit of an inaccurate way to do it), but my browser is - for some reason - rendering in Arial Black and Arial Narrow. Started today. //EDIT, this font bug's on me - it's affecting other websites. This is via Chromium 44.0.2350.0 and it doesn't seem to be related to this bug.

Phil Deakins wrote: So there's no point in me trying to answer her questions It's a thought experiment. I write technical manuals every so often - one qualification for this asked me to "Describe the process of making a cup of tea to an alien." The point being, how do you describe elements that require Tacit Knowledge to someone without the common frame of reference? What's a teabag, how do you describe a kettle to someone who's seen plenty of metal but never had to boil water. That's the situation many people are in when they join Second Life. If you can't empathise with that missing knowledge, then you won't see the learning curve.

VanillaSunsets wrote: What do ppl do when there are no limits. Looking at SL I am starting to think that ppl need those limits, if not provided by others, authorities or for some ppl a God I playfully disagree. I mean, I understand your perspective, I just think it's more nuanced than that. Peer pressure and social conformity applies to humans whether we're online or offline, whether we look like unicorns or amoebas or Kardashian's. It doesn't surprise me that people invent new ways to enforce conformity in online spaces, of which the striving for 'realism' is one symptom. To my eyes it's not realism, but hyperrealism - looking at expressions of gender in SL, the women often strive to be hyperfeminine (thin/frail, tiny feet, tanned, symmetrical, bust/butt-heavy), and the men often strive to be hypermasculine (muscled, wide shoulders, tanned, tall). Pick any type of expression you like, you'll probably find that SL exhibits it in a way that's more like reality on steroids. It's realism if E! ran the world. I don't know why many folks choose that path. I understand in-group psychology is a strong part of it, but it all seems very boring to me, and I choose not to participate. But one thing it's allowed me to do is practice my own expression of social conformity - rebellion. I've never been good with authority, and SL has taught me that there isn't really any such thing to be worried about. After a decade of eschewing social norms in SL, I'm beginning to realise that social norms in RL are just as silly. Lately I've been massively enjoying experimenting with putting into practice all the things I've learnt about myself in SL, through orienting myself against 'norms' of all varieties. So there's my answer - people don't like realism, they like conformity - it's comfortable, and you can identify the 'others' to be excluded very easily - whether they're not-normals or just not-good-enoughs. I like to conform by non-conforming. And so it goes.

Callum Meriman wrote: Freya Mokusei wrote: Maybe it's more normal to ask those things now than it was previously - it could reduce social engineering attacks on accounts. Maybe it's a commerce thing? Could easily be - throw up a couple extra barriers, shift off the workload from everyone wondering where their products are as 'too much hassle'. In fairness though I wouldn't be too surprised if CSRs working in common routes of exploitation have had their scripts adjusted to try and prevent things like accepting a change of payment information, change of recovery email address etc without verification. But I don't see the need to do it just to redeliver an order - though perhaps to discuss specific order status. At any rate, I'm just guessing at this point. Important thing is that the support case got moved forwards.

Maybe it's more normal to ask those things now than it was previously - it could reduce social engineering attacks on accounts. Maybe someone who's dealt with support tickets recently has experienced the same thing. Sounds like you did the right thing to be cautious, but still to give the answers they wanted.

I agree that sounds odd - what they should've told you is that unless the problem was with the Marketplace delivery system, there's no way to chase undelivered items. How did you contact support? Did you create a ticket at support.secondlife.com? LiveChat? If you emailed or telephoned then I'm not surprised they needed verification, but via support tickets, I'm not sure I can understand why they'd need confirmation of your account. Perhaps it's a new anti-fraud technique. Remember though that most of the CSRs are just reading from a script - if that's what they need to ask, that's probably what you need to answer.

I don't think the average newcomer expects to spend the first day or two just learning how to walk around and move their camera. I also don't think any newcomer plans out a "slow route" or staging process in learning features. This all strikes me as being unrealistic. Especially, very few newcomers have measurable technical experience. They don't understand networks or latency, often don't understand the nature of a "virtual world", "server-side physics" or even "buyer beware". They don't understand GPUs, HTTP vs. UDP, or how to effectively use search tools. When I first played Minecraft, I was able to hunt a few pigs, knock down a dozen trees and build a log cabin within about 20 minutes. That matched the expectations I had - I carved out a quick existance for myself in some green landscape with monsters. When I first joined Second Life, it took me three weeks before I knew how to teleport, and I met players a few months older than me who didn't know how to alt-cam. I spent a long time wandering around in grey nothingness, not realising at the time that my 16Mb graphics card and dial-up connection (cut me some slack, it was 2006!) was inadequate. I came from other virtual worlds and even other 3D chat applications and a student studying web development - I still fell a long way short. It took me about a week before I felt safe mixing with other users, being entirely unsure of what the dynamic would be. Users don't join to experience a world anymore, being slow-learning tourists and explorers (if they ever did), they join to accomplish a goal - find a girlfriend, have a family, become the best zombiekiller. It's impossible to even start on goals like this within a users first 24 hours on the service. You can argue about subjective knowledge and paths all you like, but you can never predict the route a new user will try to take if they see EVERY SINGLE path is immediately available. You won't be able to understand the intimidation felt by new users as they see the huge pile of esoteric words, brands and menu options that emerge very quickly as you first experience Second Life. Look at this post, made today by a super-enthusiastic person - how do you even begin to answer all these questions? Can you do it without using words only more advanced users would know - so, without sending the user out to do additional learning just to accomplish a change of outfit. I dare you to try.

Sassy Romano wrote: Implement stronger authentication in the first place and prevent the hijacking of accounts. Right. Two-factor would solve this 100% of the time. (I imagine you know this, Sassy) Currently the log in form is just two text fields (name, password), a design that's easily copied and requires no special attention from the user. No-one even reads the page, let alone the URL. Solution is to create an Authenticator, as used by many popular web services of equivilent size - and is increasingly standard. This creates a fixed-digit code derived from the current timestamp and an encrypted hash of your password, meaning the elements on the log in form would be (name, authentication). In the event of a phisher copying the form, they would only capture the hashed code (not the base password), and being tied also to the current timestamp the hashed code would expire within only a couple of minutes preventing delayed or persistant exploitation (combine this with the need to enter your full password - or hashed code - when buying Lindens or changing your Secret Answer, Recovery Email or Password and you have a bulletproof system). It is entirely predictable that our userbase is being exploited in this way. We're an old service using old security methods, and our service operator is shying away from spending resources on new developments and is well-known for not actively-policing its users - the perfect target for phishers.

Takes about a dozen lines of code - in a script anyone can write. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlRequestAgentData I don't post this to scare you - it's just that this is public information, not private in any way. You'll have a far better time in SL if you learn not to sweat the small stuff. Good luck.

You may change your Display Name once a week. This is your informal name, used by some people but not all. Your Account Name will stay the same. Nothing else changes just by changing your Display Name, and there is no way to hide login/logout events - even non-friends can tell when you're logging in and out.