Kampu Oyen

I am presently inclined to give more credit than that to all but one of them. The only problem is which one, exactly. There are a couple of easy targets, but we don't know all that's put upon them. Even if it's one of his underlings, though, I increasingly think the buck stops with Rodvik. If he can't identify and fire the correct person, maybe he also needs to go. Or if they're just doing what he's told them to do, all the more reason he should step down... ... Unless, of course, he's really just doing has to be done, no matter how unpleasant or legally questionable; a possibility that certainly occurs to me. Watching this process longer and longer, I find myself becoming oddly sypathetic to what I imagine may be a company that has to shut down the marketplace in order to save the grid, but can't just say that for legal reasons. In way, I'm almost starting to hope they'll just hurry it up and get it over with.

I'll stop talking about it when LL stops doing it. But I guess than never gets old, huh.

>I guess that is because discussing with you is highly frustrating for me. I appreciate your response. Thanks. I think we all find this frustrating for various reasons, but I don't think people tend to frustrate me because they are stupid. >Now you are even putting the blame for your own call for gaming the system on them. I don't blame LL for people gaming their system as such. I blame LL for making it possible and making it justifiable. Really, I'd rather it was neither possible not justifiable. It's a sad, sad choice on LL's part. >But those Lindens you despite so much, there are only a few hunderd of them. I don't despise Lindens. As far as I know, there might be only one bad egg among them, and that might even be someone who is very badly compromised by some kind of criminal influence from outside the company. If I knew what that person was up against, I might even be a lot more sympathetic. But, from an organizational standpoint, that's not really an excuse to keep allowing that person (or persons) to keep messing things up. Some way needs to be found for the incompetent to leave their positions of incomptetence, nicely if possible (yes, nicely), regardless of whether the incompetence is natural or constructive. >Customers on the other hand are with hunderds of thousands. And I support their right to a free market, rather than a market weighted to a small collection of merchants with inside information about LL promotions. >I see it as unresponsable behaviour towards those hunderds of thousands to stimulate merchants to game the system, just because you have issues with those few Lindens. I do believe that I understand that. There's an upside and a downside to this action, not only for a lot of merchants, but also for the customers. I understand that we may continue to disagree about whether the benefits to customers outweigh the costs and/or risks, but must urge you to try to see that there at least is an upside for customers. The upside is that efforts to manipulate them to support a less competitive market have been undermined.

>They seem to be trying to fix things, they just have no clue what they are doing, or they don't understand the programing well enough. This is a claim which is every bit as unsupported as would be the claim that the abuses are intentional. Things have very consistently happened that are not statistically explicable as mere accidents. For example, why do the transaction errors alway favor LL, rather than merchants and customers? What kind of accident can you suggest that would explain this as a persistent pattern, just to begin with?

>treats them like second class idiots while crowd sourcing them. The idiotic treatment would seem a lot more forgiveable if they at least made proper use of the crowdsourcing instead of ignoring it until they need to rationalize some kind of decision they've really already made.

>It's serious, buggy, costly and condescending business requiring far more patience than a game I think people who don't see it as a game may not appreciate that it begins to feel like a game when you finally figure out how to start winning at it. I seems to me a bit like playing chess and poker at the same time. I think what you might need to do, Dart, is just focus more on getting inside LL's OODA loop. Once you start seeing conclusively that you're at least 2 moves ahead of them, the whole picture will start to come together.

>If they happen to fall on the same days for all or most of us, then we can pretty much safely assume that it's Linden Labs 'screwing around' causing the problem. ;-) More conspiracy talk? My God, you people are paranoid.

> Direct Delivery does not have the same check and balance, But who cares as long as it's faster, right?

> If no, why would you want to deliver something you haven't gotten paid for? That's up to you, of course. There are some merchants who would prefer to accomodate customers without consistent compensation rather than drag them into a problem that is essentially between Linden and the merchants. That may mean a loss of some kind, but customers and reputation can in some cases be a lot harder to replace than the item piece of merchandise. So if the customer didn't do anything wrong, just sending the item can be a way of emphasizing to customers that they are not part of the problem and shouldn't have to get involved with it unless they want to.

I am aware of at least one other request for clarification on an intellectual property matter to which LL has so far not responded. If I learn that they have responded to that one, I'll update this fact urgently.

> if you sort the whole marketplace by price low to high you get a huge list of the items that are problematic. I suppose we might want to thank ralph for persuading the Lindens to finally do something about it being too easy to buy cheap items.

> I have deleted them manually - took over an hour yesterday - and they are ALL BACK! Am I missing something??? You're not missing anything. Even objects that no longer exist anywhere in your inventory, in or out of a magic box, or saved under any name will continue to reappear, no matter how many times you delete them, individually or in cluster. This problem has been mentioned before.

>How updating search should affect this is a bit of a mystery I don't find it mysterious at all.

Just making the MP go slower seems to be the default bork when LL doesn't have any fresh way ready to try to push merchants back to the grid.

That's a little unnecessarily insulting. When have used such a tone with you? I understand that people disagree with me encouraging merchants to "game the system". But the system is already gaming them. If, by LL constantly ignoring or trying to rewrite the same rules on which they ostensibly rely, LL still can't get the right merchants to lose, maybe those merchants actually deserve to win. Really, why not?

Now I'm confused. Why is 15xxxxx mentioned as borked in the above thread if it's not borked?

The specific prediction was that the borkage would progress into 15xxxxx. If you care to dig, you can see who predicted it. Has that happened or not happened?

Preliminary reports suggest that, yes.

>As a regular visitor of this forum you cannot have missed the complaints from customers about keyword spam on the market place. It's a regular issue for customers. That's exactly why I think it's wrong for LL to set an example by trying to license a select group of merchants to use a proprietary spam keyword. "Madstyle" is not in any academic dictionary, was not originated or registered by Linden Labs and remains in broader public use, despite the fact that it remains essentially undefined. The only rights that LL really asserts by attempting to control how merchants use this word are: 1) LL's right to ambiguously infringe trademarks of other companies without uninvited competition and 2) LL's right to covertly construct an artificial English-based language for their users in which words are to be defined however LL may choose to define them in context, at its own convenience.

>Yes something is very strange...I have had the lowest sales ever the past 3 days..almost nothing. Well sales have been just way, way up for at least some people. What do you imagine a lot of them have in common?

>Perhaps its that I didn't carpet-bomb my listings with "madstyle." Well, nothing was stopping you, really. The word has no legal status or legal meaning which is specific to Linden Labs.

>Mine isn't a "drop" in sales - it's no sales whatsoever for a period of time, then back to what is normal for my shop. OK, I agree that's weird. Have their been lag or latency issues recently in other online services? (Hey... I'm trying to be fair here).

Please post the file number and the approximate date it was listed. I'm guessing it's around 15xxxx to 16xxxx and you listed it in October or early November 2010. Am I right?

I still don't know why people keep acting surprised at events that have been predicted.

>Linden Labs is very good at screwing things up when they make changes. Everyone here must know by now that I'm the last possible person to disagree with that. But I don't see that there's a change they've made this time that would have more explanatory value than the tax day thing. From here, it actually appears that the market is working as well as it has for at least a week, possibly because of the reduced traffic.