Policy on Third-Party Viewers changed (TPV policy)

The policy has been changed on February 24, 2012. These points have been added:

2.a.iii : You must not provide any feature that circumvents any privacy protection option made available through a Linden Lab viewer or any Second Life service.

2.i : You must not display any information regarding the computer system, software, or network connection of any other Second Life user.

2.j : You must not include any information regarding the computer system, software, or network connection of the user in any messages sent to other viewers, except when explicitly elected by the user of your viewer.

2.k : You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab viewer.

There is a MP3 with OZ Linden who answers questions about the meaning of the implementations. It runs 1 hour and ~45 minutes. The key points from the interview i wrote down here, but please, for detailed information, listen to the MP3:

In general, the MP3 starts with that it is not touching the existing viewers right now. But all updates to those.

For 2.i:

2.i : You must not display any information regarding the computer system, software, or network connection of any other Second Life user.

The "true online status" is one of those. There are also scripts using an LSL function which shows the online status of an avatar. This function will be altered and return "False" at all times where the request refers to someone not owning the script. This means: once it is fully in place, Paul can not see with an LSL script anymore, whether Peter is online, if Peter has set so in his privacy settings. Scripts who are allowing this to do at the moment, will always return "False" (Offline?) in the future. Advertising boards who show online status might be affected from this as well delivery systems that check online status before they deliver items.(In the interview at about 7:30)

There is no timeline for that. (at ~13:00)

The next bit discusses two aforementioned changes in one go:

2.i : You must not display any information regarding the computer system, software, or network connection of any other Second Life user.

2.j : You must not include any information regarding the computer system, software, or network connection of the user in any messages sent to other viewers, except when explicitly elected by the user of your viewer.

One intend is to get rid of the viewer tags (~21:00) and after some short sidetracked discussion: "the reason is, that it is nobodies business what you are running" and further: the user is allowed still to tell what they are using, but the viewer should not do it for them. (~23:50)

Viewer tags can not be displayed in the future and the function to that is going to be broken by next week anyway.  New users have been harassed about what viewer they are running, which is not acceptable. That is the reason for this change.  (~25:00)

2.k : You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab viewer.

As example to this change, the moderator referred to the "Emerald Multiple Attachment points" (for new SL residents: a feature that has been around two years ago and no longer exists.). When one has used these, the Avatar appeared correctly only to Emerald users, but not to other users. (~35:00)

This is not about providing different kind of presentation objects. Different render engines for example are fine to use. No change to control objects. Like how to move objects or interface changes. As long as all other users with different viewers see the same that you do, you provide the same shared experience, which is perfectly ok. You can not redefine, how objects in the world behave, without doing with LL. If parcel windlight did not already exist, this would have been a good  example of violating this rule. Viewers that can not interpret this parcel windlight, will see the parcel differently and that would be a violation. Parcel windlight is a great example of something that should be done, and should be done with "us" ((Linden Lab)) . LL made region windlight. You do not have to do anything about your parcel windlight yet. Until we provide a proper implementation of parcel windlight, accessible for all viewers. Once the official parcel windlight implementation is on, one has to change the parcel settings to that. Until then, one has a free pass. (~37:50)

Later on one of the guests says that the TPV have introduced new features to SL, that have been proposed to LL and have been declined. Oz Linden replies here, that the statement is correct, but one needs to consider that this has been past, with an entirely different management. An example of what is in progress that shows that the approach of LL to suggestions is the mesh deformer which is currently under development. (~45:00)

 The reason behind is, that LL observed confusion and fragmentation about the user experience. No one should have a different SL just because they use a different viewer. (~51:00)

If viewers are not actively maintained, they will sooner or later possibly break. But viewers that are now on the grid are not being banned because of these new rules. (~53:00)

Marketplace - Ban List - Yes or No?

This blog post refers to that JIRA entry:
https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/WEB-3651

Discussed there is the option to extend bans that one has put on an avatar inworld, also to the marketplace. I have read that Jira entry and it kept me thinking for some days now. My opinion is: No.

The motivations why creators of content would want such a ban are different ones. But they all have two things in common:

1. Content creators are frustrated about the behavior of some (a minority) of shoppers, because these rate content unfairly. Either because they are not understanding what the item they are buying is for, or because they are alts of competitors that then buy an item and trash it with the rating down, or they want to put on a cheap rating in the hope that the content creator then refunds the buyer and the rating gets removed.
2. None of the above phenomenons can be really prevented with a banlist. Because, it is really simple to just set up the next alt and repeat the "trick".

Also, closing down the marketplace is not an option really. Those who say "lets focus on the inworld shops, Marketplace does us no good" forget one thing: Clients decide where they buy. And they want it easy and simple. In a world where one has always everything at ones fingertip (or mouseclick) people often want to buy an item because they are just right now, in this moment, in the mood for it. And they just want to have it. Now. At the location where they are. Effortless.

Closing down marketplace would of course drag more people into shops. But, in my opinion, an equally large group of people would then rather not buy at all. All "impulse buyers" would not be around anymore. That would weaken the SL economy. And in the end it could lead to a lot more closing down, than just the marketplace website.

In fact the marketplace has everything that a merchant needs. Easy listing procedures, easy to set up shops, fair pricing. And the rating system that is in place, is great. 

But!

And here is a big but!

The operators of the system fail in keeping an eye of the fair use of the resources and of the rating system. While Linden Lab has published even a guide "How to write a good review" they fail to follow this guide when it comes to check the reviews.

Everyone has seen ratings about that primskirt that gets only 1 star because of one of the following reasons:

• it was not delivered
• it is too small (but has modifiy permissions)
• it is too big (but has modifiy permissions)
• it attaches at the wrong point
• it is not really what the buyer imagined (but is exactly what is shown on the picture and described in the product description)

And no, i do not make primskirts. But i had buyers who rated me poorly because my item did not do something.. which i never said it would do... or because my item behaved *exactly* as described. I offer free demo objects for one of my products, and get an IM "I want a refund, the HUD is not what i imagined" and to my response "why did you not try out the free demo?" i get "money back or you get 1 star". Yes. no kidding.

What is missing, is a review-operating team that removes each and every single rating which is less than 5 stars, as long as it is not reasoned out exactly why that rating has been given. On valid grounds. Like "Product picture showed a primskirt but the prims were not texture properly, which only showed when looking from a different angle than the product picture suggests" or something like that.

Yes that is work. But pushed through consequently, it would dry out pretty fast unfair competition.

For now, as long as that is not in place, i publish screenshots with the names of the 1-star culprits, in my blog, so they are known as deliberate freeloaders and report them then to LL. In most cases, the reviews are removed then. But yes, it is work. Fortunately, this does not occur so very often. But it is annoying each time. A more pro active action, rather than a reaction, of the marketplace team would bring a lot of peace.

As for pushing up inworld stores, the solution can also be simple:

All of you have seen the issue that one searches for example a primskirt with a certain keyword and then gets 10 pages of listings of the same creator with a primskirt that has the keywords, in 180 different colors, each skirt, one marketplace entry. How about installing a guideline or a rule, that is like "place only 1 item and a fat pack with all variations for sale ,the other variations can be bought inworld" ?

That is just a rough drat, and needs a better wording, certainly.

But it would drag more traffic to the shops - if i know, someone has it in their store, then i am more willing to TP there, rather than using the inworld search and walk through 50 shops till i find what i want.

LL has then more land rented out to merchants and merchants have more customers in their inworld malls and all are happy.

Salma continues

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/products/1554912/reviews/3243288

Don't we love it?

Some days i wake up and am amazed by the .. behaviour of some people.. today for example:

Normally, i try to contact customers and see what made them unhappy, but this.. is just too much and one of the rare cases where i think, SL, or any society with a touch of civilization is not for them.
I fail to even find any will to contact this customer.