In Name Changes: $40 per change(?), some thoughts and a poll (December 17th, 2019), I offered some thoughts on the proposed US $40.00 fee for name changes, together with a (very) rough-and-ready poll on how people feel about the capability and the fee (so rough-and-ready that on reflection, I should have structured it a little differently and used Google Forms for the poll for greater flexibility rather than the tools provided by Automattic for WordPress.com users, which are perhaps a little too basic).
As I noted in that piece, since last names were eliminated in 2010 in favour of “Resident” and the use of Display Names, there have been frequent calls for them to be “returned” to SL. These calls started almost immediately after “Resident” was introduced, through both forum threads and via Jira feature requests. Such was the demand, that by late 2011, LL were actively looking into bringing last names back, although ultimately they gave up on that attempt.
However, I also noted that the fee itself might be a limiting factor (together with the fact that the option will be limited to Premium members), and whilst admittedly a small sampling, the results of my very straw man poll would seem to support this. Just under 61.5% of respondents indicated that they probably won’t use the service, whilst over 80% of those responding the the question on the fee indicated that they felt it was too high.
Given that most people will naturally be opposed to paying almost any kind of fee for anything (even the L$10 upload fee for textures / sounds / animations is a source of grumbles), then opposition to the Name Change fee is to be expected. But the volume of negative responses, together with the level of disinterest expressed in the capability, would seem to point to the fact that – again allowing for the fact it is limited to Premium members, and the responses to the poll likely came from Basic members as well – the $39.99 fee may will be a limiting factor for users after Name Changes go live beyond the natural pause LL hope it will provide against too-frequent changes that might otherwise impact services – and might in time prove counter to the degree of effort LL have had to put into implementing the service.
Fee aside, comments that followed my December 17th article and made through the likes of Twitter and direct IM, suggest that Premium members who are eligible for the service may well be put off from using it due to what they perceive as a another potential shortfall: the inability to re-use last names previously made available by LL. Those who wish to take their partner’s last name, for example, are effectively unable to do so except by continuing to use Display Names, while those who have a favourite last name that has previously been offered by by the Lab will similarly be out of luck.
Again, this is only a small sampling, and one that uses a very basic poll to gather feedback. Nevertheless, it does suggest that Name Changes may well face a very mixed reaction once deployed, the former interest among users to have a last names make a return to SL notwithstanding.
Inara Pey: Living in a Modemworld 
– New accounts should have a One Time opportunity to select a last name other than resident for free.
– Accounts with the .resident last name should be seen as a special case. They should be able to get a last name with minimal charge. Perhaps Premium accounts for free (which means basic accounts can go Premium for a month, a very small cost. Who knows they might stay Premium.)
– New names need to be added (and old ones removed) frequently, at least initially. The contest to pick 5 is ridiculous!
LikeLike
“– New accounts should have a One Time opportunity to select a last name other than resident for free.”
The problem here is that most users sign-up as Basic while the Name Changes capability is flagged for use by Premium subscribers, and only after they have actually completed the sign-up process and logged-in to their account dashboard.
So this idea creates a further layer of technical complexity where Basic accounts are concerned: a means to tag new accounts, a means to try to encourage them to take advantage of the name change capability (not everyone might want to), a means then of restricting those who do to being unable to apply for a further change without upgrading to Premium whilst also continuing to identify those who have not updated to allow them the option to do so in the future (or implementing some form of time-out on the “free” ability), and so on.
Something of a similar layer of complexity would also be added to the “Resident” account idea as well. Not saying neither could be done – but the question is: would the effort in adding such complexity actually see a genuine return to make it worthwhile? Again, “Resident” users can always use Display Names as they do now.
“– New names need to be added (and old ones removed) frequently, at least initially. The contest to pick 5 is ridiculous!”
Not sure I’m completely understanding this comment, but I think you might be misunderstanding the contest. The Lab has already stated that the list of names will be rotated / updated on some form of time frame (not so far indicated). Also, this list isn’t limited to 5 names – it is simply that five users will see one of their suggested names included in the first batch of last names to be listed.
LikeLike
New accounts get an (at least weekly) email promoting SL in general and premium accounts specifically, would it be so difficult to include a one time voucher for a last name change. If this confuses LL, they should consult Casper.
LikeLike
Giving a voucher doesn’t actually answer the basics of how the system would work, what the changes to the account management system would need to be, and so on, as noted in my original reply. It’s not a question of “confusion”, it’s a question of practical implementation to make it work & the hard benefits it would bring if implemented.
LikeLike
I was originally in favour of and excited about the name change feature and despite the somewhat high fee I probably would have paid it. For the name I want. However I found the one I want on the Old list. So the subject has lost interest. I can understand it probably makes it simpler to start with a new list, but it may indeed put people (
,such as couples in your example, or myself that are keen on a particular name off. I know with the name I want unavailable they won’t be getting my 40 dollars (plus VAT probably).
LikeLike
I think for the reduced services and increases in pricing the name changes should not be a fee paid option. For the most part I see participation in SecondLife dropping. I think Linden Labs needs to be more inviting and less greedy. Service is terrible, the viewer is terrible and issues that have been inworld from day one have never been corrected (ie search). I think LL needs to rethink many things, not just name changes. And, no I would never pay $40 to change my name. That is insane.
LikeLike
They’re up against a problem: they have promised people since the very start that once a name is retired it will never be offered again. People like the exclusivity of the old names, from the days when only a very limited number of people got to take a name before it was retired. (It was around 250 when I came in; even earlier it was 150.) If LL ever breaks that promise they will have a user revolt on their hands.
But at the same time, a lot of people who want to change their names either want a specific name because their partner has it, or because they just happen to like a name that was previously offered. It’s impossible to satisfy both constituencies.
LikeLiked by 1 person