Wayfinder Wishbringer

Bree: "I don't see LL ever attempting to infringe in any unseemly manner as the user backlash could potentially put them out of business." Ordinarily Bree I would agree with you. However in this particular case... this is Linden Lab. They've done insane things before that cost both them and their customers millions of dollars. This is an interesting post that is good for keeping one up at night: Ulterior Motives? http://inworldz.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=140046#p140046

"The license agreement for Daz Models (at least the one I have) is very explicit on what can and cannot be done with them. And I'm sure that Daz'll be watching SL like a hawk... lol." I'm not sure Daz or any other company (including Second Life, if anyone should challenge it in court) has the legal right to state what is done with intellectual property created using their program. They do have the legal right to specify what is done with their program, their code, or proprietary data resulting therefrom. But any efforts to limit the right of a creator to use his creations as he sees fit... might backfire with far more damage than any imagined damage from the act itself. I think LL can consider itself very lucky some user-with-guts hasn't decided to take them to court over their backup-restriction policies. If they did, LL might find itself backpeddaling very quickly. Some companies put things in their licenses hoping such will never be challenged in court. Others think they have legal basis for such restrictions-- but find out the hard way that isn't the case. When it comes to copyright law-- companies have to be very careful what they try to restrict, lest they find themselves on the receiving end of a major lawsuit.

I have to agree with Nalates in this. While I am the last person in the world to defend Linden Lab-- and am very aware they have repeatedly crossed the copyright line in the past as well as other lines of legality (I won't bore with details)-- in this case they are merely pulling in a convenient complicated mesh for testing. They're not distributing it, they're not selling it, they're not massively reproducing it and giving it away. It is being used as a limited test subject on a non-commercial beta grid. It's not the main grid. As such, I'm not aware of any copyright law they're breaking. They are not selling the item for profit. They are not distributing. They are not depriving the author of expected gain. About the only thing they MIGHT be guilty of is using an item for purpose not intended by the owner... but that's a very gray area. So myself, I don't really see the harm or impropriety in this particular thing. Now bait-and-switch pricing... stomping on user copyrights and preventing us backing up our own work... palagiaraizing customer documents and items for their own use without even asking the author-- and hiding behind their TOS while committing outright copyright fraud... that's a whole nother matter and people certainly have a right to complain there. But this particular thing... no harm done to the creator that I can see... thus no copyright breach as far as I can see. However I will say that for a company that is so stickly about supposed copyrights that they won't let us back up our own creations because they contain full perm, public domain textures... yeah... that's a little two-faced.

How do we STOP subscribing to this flippin post? ;D Seriously.. .where's the UNSUBSCRIBE button?

Loniki, there are so very many reasons why Linden Lab is bleeding sims... but I'm not sure the economy is part of it. Now mind you, elements of the economy sure. For example: failure of the SEARCH engine both in-world and on SL Marketplace has caused a lot of people to just throw up their hands in frustration. But our group shut down 7 of 8 sims... and none of those shutdowns have to do with marketing or the economy; they had to do with LL policies. From failed group chat, to severe lag, to Viewer 2.slop to issues too numerous to count, imo SL is simply being mismanaged. Rather than listening to their customers and paying attention to our needs (after all, we are the ones paying the bills)... they seem to have this god-complex in the form of they believe they know the direction Second Life needs to head... and hang customer opinion. That's why I objected to this post. We've heard it before, it's the same old song and dance-- they claim to want to listen-- but they don't listen. If they want to improve communications, the first step is to open management ears and minds. Other than that, no matter what new gimmicks and concepts and software they put into place-- it won't work. Customes have been screaming until they're red in the face-- for years-- and Linden Lab hasn't listened. No new "tool" is going to change that. So perhaps the way they're influencing the economy is partly to blame... but that is just one brick in a huge wall of crumbling bricks. As one astute customer summarized a while back: We can all see this... why can't they? I think that's the question of the decade. Bottom line, unless they change corporate management attitude and lose the "we know better, we say so" complex... they will not succeed no matter what "communications tools" they use. They will continue to fail not only at communications, but ultimately as a business. They've been stagnant for two years+ now, yet they still follow the same management path. If they want business to change and grow, they are going to have to change and grow.

Loniki: "I don't care, pay me." Loniki, I have to say you hit it pretty much right on the head. I think that simple phrase is the sum-all statement of Linden Lab management since I've been a member-- and that's been over 6 years now. It's not that individual employees don't care (some of them cared a lot-- Blue Linden-- Torley-- Robin-- several others I could name but will not bore others on this post). Management has been the problem... and their attitude has been exactly as you described in that simple statement. "I don't care, pay me." This is a company that has consistently put $$$ ahead of customer interest and welfare, apparently totally blind to the business reality that customer welfare and satisfaction increases $$$... and that failing to satisfy customers has long-term repercussions and consequences. In 2010 their user hours decreased by 11%. Their concurrency (the number of people online at any time) decreased 12%. This company has had a two year+ stagnancy (to be truthful: decline) yet I'm seeing the same management method that I've seen since I joined the board. And you summed that management method up in one accurate sentance: "I don't care. Pay me." I think they are going to discover (and in fact should already be discovering) that such an attitude results in a reverse response by customers. "We care. But we're not paying you any more."

Removing voting is a generally bad idea. Claiming that voting causes "confusion" or "false expectations" is it itself incorrect. If your triage "isn't looking at voting" when considering an issue... then I have to ask WHY that is the case. Does Linden Lab not care what your customers think... so that voting is deemed by your company as worthless? WATCHING a JIRA issue means we will be email spammed every time a new post is left... and every time a post is edited. Linden Lab is surely aware that people will be hesitant to negatively impact their real life email by WATCHING an issue-- and that such watching will decrease over time as people get tired of being spammed by Linden Lab systems. Your email system doesn't send out ONE announcement a day stating there are new posts on the JIRA. It sends out an email every single time a post is made, to all watchers. This is detrimental to system services, creating unnecessary batch processing. It needlessly spams user accounts (intentionally?) and causes customers frustration. When Linden Lab makes decisions such as this... do you stop to consider how customers will react? Do you ask customers ahead of time what they think about such ideas? I for one am growing very tired of the totalitarian and dictatorial method of Linden Lab's conduct of business. Does Linden Lab know what happens to customers who grow continually tired of such decisions? They cease being customers. Your user hours dropped 11% in 2010. Your grid status is stagnant. Yet your company continues to make customer-unfriendly decisions such as this, over and over. Is this what you deem smart management? REMOVING THE VOTE IS A SLAP IN THE FACE TO YOUR CUSTOMERS. Ignoring the vote is a slap in the face to your customers. That is an open admission that your company does not consider nor care about what your customers think. Is this how you believe a business should be run?

Anna Tretiak: ". How is that for arrogance, Wayfinder?" Anna, it's my experience that those who have to resort to such labeling do so because they already realize they're on shaky grounds. You divert attention and attempt to provoke to make your point-- because your point is flimsy in the first place. You ignored the definition from Dictionary.com and instead pointed to the "first" definition in a dictionary that supports your personal opinion. Where are the following definitions you've chosen to exclude? Are you presenting that you've presented the only viable definition in that dictionary... and that no other definitions support my argument? I am not impressed with propaganda: both name calling and obscuring pertinent information. You have the right to disagree with my viewpoint. I find that you disagree too vehemently. What threatens you in this conversation that you are so retalitory in your comment? Seriously, do you think my opinion that SL is a game is going to alter the existence of the grid? If not... then perhaps a bit less vitreol and a little more "chill" would be in order. ; )

Mike: "Anyway, why in God's name is LL subjecting SL residents to this idiocy (among others), without prior notice, and without allowing us to opt out?" I heard an interesting quote today that might answer that: "A civilized nation is one that feeds on its own children." The more I thought about that quote... the more and more it made sense. In the case of Linden Lab and Second Life, they don't just devour their own children; they feed off the flesh and bone of their residents. Unfortunately that is becomming more common among corporations today... but it seems to be the primary mode of operation with Linden Lab.

Actingill: For me it is my business. For others it surely is a game. Thanks. That's precisely the point I've been trying to make. Or more precisely, I've been trying to make the point that we don't really have a right to tell others it's not a game if they think it is. I do get bored with those who find it necessary to "correct" others just because someone dares to refer to SL as a game. If someone views SL as a game... then to that person, it's a game. No one else has any right to insist differently. It's really largely a matter of personal perspective, isn't it? BTW folks, I really hate to drop out of here... but I've been following just two blogs here and it's taking up way too much of my limited time. Really excellent blogs though... this one and the one on v2.5. Some of the best and most insightful discussions I've seen... on both sides of the issue. For the most part... it's been a pleasure. Best to you all.

I still consider that we were the builders of the ship. Linden Lab may have provided the shipyard and the tools... but we built it. Remember? Our world. We even provided the materials (in the form of uploads, for which we pay dearly). I will grant that to an extent we co-created it... there are a few rather neat Linden scripts still floating around to this day. However I would venture that the number of Linden builds in proportion to user builds would amount to them putting half a dozen rivets in the hull. For the most part... we built the boat.

Mike: Those of us who have been successful IT and/or business consultants in RL for decades could write a book about SL ... full of case studies on how NOT to do things. But we're still trying ... I think we probably have written a book about it... on blogs and forums. I certainly have enough blogs on the two Elf Clan blogsites to fill a book. And I'm not anywhere near the most prolific SL blogger.

LOL Rene, that YouTube video was brilliant. I can't believe how they nailed it on the head in such a limited time. Very effective. Shame it's a character like Hitler that is making the point... but... point made.

Cummere to Leal: Are you joking or just stupid hopelessly naive? Cummere, people aren't stupid and naive just because they disagree with what you believe. (only when they disagree with what I believe. kidding) We can be respectful of other users, even when disagreeing and debating their posts. It's possible to have a quite energetic and passionate debate without insulting others in the process. There is a difference between saying, "I think that viewpoint is naive because..." and saying "You are hopelessly naive." As Mike has said, let's keep it civil. : ) BTW folks, I really, really hate to drop out of here... but I've been following just two blogs here and it's taking up way too much of my limited time. Really excellent blogs though... this one and the one on Q4 2010. Some of the best and most insightful discussions I've seen... on both sides of the issue. For the most part... it's been a pleasure. Best to you all.

Rene: you can also add WoW, Habbo Hotel & Everquest too.They all managed to grow their user bases during the recession (i.e since 2008)....and Second Life didn't. Precisely Rene, and that is the real, actual bottom-line isn't it? Regardless of who, or why, or what or which genre... the others are growing and SL is actually decreasing (which was in fact the original debate of this entire thread). To be honest... I have to wonder if LL is even aware of that fact... or if they're in a state of denial? It would seem from the charts presented here, the later appears to be the case.

Luna: every person on the planet structures their reality in some way. Excellent post Luna. I posed this same question on the Elf Clan blog yesterday, "Is Second Life a Game?" One member mentioned a thought pattern that I thought was quite balanced: To some people, Second Life is a business. To others, SL is an education platform. To others, it is a social area. To others, it is a game. It takes the form of what we each individually perceive it to be. So if one person calls it a "game"... it is a game in their perception and usage. If another person decides to call it a "business" (which it most certainly is regardless of viewpoint), that's their perception and usage. In short, to each his own. They are the users. SL is to them what they make it to be. I think that reality is what keeps so many of us here when we should have left long ago; it fits to what we want and need. Unfortuantely, LL can't count on that forever. Because eventually, with enough monkey wrenches thrown into the gears... SL will cease to be what we want and need it to be. At that point it will either become something totally different and cater to a totally new (and likely non-paying) audience... or it will fail altogether.

Rene: Wrong again......I'm a Dragon! Now see, I knew there was a reason I was enjoying our chat / debate. I find dragons to be extraoridnarily fine people, by and large. I think everyone should own one! Kidding kidding. No fire! Hey! No wing-beating either! (We of course have plenty of dragons in ElvenMyst. Not to mention the little tiny ones, which are pure mischief and uncontrollable so Elves just sort of tolerate them and watch what happens next...) In truth, dragons are some of our oldest and most honored guests and members.

Mistral to Clematide: Don't worry - if you go, many, many, many residents (new and old) will not miss you. What a condescending and insulting attitude. Mistral, if the people commenting here (and others like them) did decide to leave, there just might not be a Second Life left for you to enjoy. Now for a reality check: if Second Life itself vanished tomorrow, I'd have to believe it would quickly be forgotten and people would just move on. And frankly at this point, there would be many people who wouldn't miss it either. A very large number would probably applaud its failure (LL has made a whole lot of enemies in their mismanagement of the system). In fact, if SL self-destructed, it just might open up the entire market to other companies doing the job far better, far cheaper, and on a more competitive / cooperative basis.

Vivienne: Why should Ferrari copy a bcyicle? Only cause more people ride a bicycle than a ferrari right now, at 1:15? That's actually a pretty good point Vivienne, and one I was tempted to make earlier, but refrained (for once. LOL). You're right, that the number of people using IMVU vs the number using SL is irrelevant to the healt of SL itself. If that were the case, the number of people currently using WoW would invalidate IMVU... and the number of people currently using Facebook would invalidate WoW, and the number of people currently visiting porn sites would invalidate pretty much all the rest of the Internet so let's just shut it ALL down. : ) However, at the same time the number of people currently using IMVU or WoW isn't something that should be totally ignored either. Because while that figure is irrelevant to the health of SL, it's not irrelevant to the market demographics both systems share. So it's likely something to be considered and as Cathy states, LL might want to take a look at IMVU to see if they can glean any gems. But then... we are their customers, sitting here telling them exactly what we want... and they're obviously not paying attention (nor have they for 7+ years now). So if they choose to ignore a goldmine of information that other companies would actually pay for... I don't think they're going to care much what IMVU is doing either. This is not a company that seems to care about anything beyond its own opinion.

In Elf Clan we have a popular event (rare, but popular): the Ork / Elf wars. Whenever such takes place, the Elves, though superior in number, fighting power and resoruces, always make sure the Orks "win". It makes the Orks feel better and gives them bragging rights... which is very important to the Orks. Rene: "Game, set & match! " Yup! You win! Hooooo!

BTW, how's your Sunday going... and do either of us have a real life? (snicker)

Uh, no Rene. You may want to go back and re-read... carefully. I was telling you in fact, that the presence of an on/off button does not define whether or not something is a game... and was using a reverse-logic reply to drive that point home. An on/off button has nothing to do with whether or not something is a game, and is in fact counter-argued by an older statement I made that some games don't have a specified end, but just keep going. ie... no on/off button. Knight takes bishop. Check.

Rene: Once again............ going to the Cinema to watch a Movie is a form of Entertainment.......going to the Cinema to watch a Movie is not a Game ! See the difference? Psst Rene... you're making this too easy. At the same time you can go to a golf course to play a game of golf. Going to the golf course is not entertainment. See the difference? It's that ol' reverse logic thing. Bites you every time.

In fact millions use computers at work to perform their duties....yes the same Power on;/ off button needs switching.....surely you can't classify a working enviorment a Game too?? Uh... I didn't make the original analogy. ;D To quote: Real World and Virtual World ......Real Life and Virtual Life.......would you consider the Real World/ Real Life a game? I wouldn't!.....the difference is a Power on/off button away!