Tag: SL News

40 Groups – a little update

Posted on by Inara Pey

Back at the end of last year, I questioned whether the new 40-Group limit would apply to 1.23.5-based TPVs such as Phoenix and Imprudence. Innula Zenovka posted a comment indicating that Phoenix may already have such support.

….So I did some digging and found out that it does indeed. The code can be enabled via a Debug Setting (PHOENIX40GROUPSUPPORT).

However, before you get too excited over this, bear in mind that in order to actually work, a server-side change still needs to be implemented by Linden Lab, and the nearest to a date we have for this is “sometime” in January 2011 (if other matters don’t intervene) – and until this change has been rolled out, enabling the 40-Group limit on your Viewer will not actually change a thing! Your limit may say “40” – but you won’t be able to subscribe to more than 25…

Indeed, such are the rumours about the 40-Group Debug Setting in Phoenix that Selene Gregoire from the Phoenix Dev Team has stated in the Phoenix Support Group: Re: Rumor about 40 groups support in phoenix…To be clear, while Phoenix does have a debug setting to enable 40 groups this is NOT enabled server side! We added the debug setting for when LL DOES enable it server side some time in the new year. Currently enabling 40 groups in Phoenix will do nothing! It will not work.

All, this does (for the time being) is confirm that once the server-side code is rolled-out by LL, Phoenix will be able to support up to 40 Groups.

Hopefully, the code will also be available in Imprudence and elsewhere as well. Again, as Innula informed me, Henri will be providing a patch for his Viewer – so doubtless this will be ported (if it hasn’t been already).

We have a newsletter?

Posted on by Inara Pey

So… I’m sitting here, hiding from family as January 1st drones on to a wealth of movie repeats on the one-eyed monster in the lounge, when this drops into my e-mail.

Now, firstly, in four years of continuous activity in SL, I have to say I didn’t even know we had a newsletter – I’ve never, ever received a copy in the past. Secondly, I have to ask why what is clearly intended to be largely a marketing tool being sent – a-la coal to Newcastle – to existing users who are certainly savvy enough to know the majority (if not all) of the contents? Thirdly, I also have to ask why no adult roleplay?

Obviously, the third question is easy to answer: the newsletter is going out to *all* of SL’s residents, including 16 and 17 year olds, so we can’t mention the “a” word in front of them. So while it may (for all its multitudinous faults) be a valid form of role-play, Gor cannot be mentioned. Nor can we even have a perfectly vanilla overview of the “adult” rp sims out there. By vanilla, I simply mean a broad, PG-outline, no pictures of nudity and just a series of Surls – given that minors technically cannot access said sims, this really shouldn’t cause upset anywhere – especially if such a section is headlined with a reminder that Second Life is used by adults who are – and will most likely remain – its largest user-base, many of whom do come here for adult-related activities.

However, this issue of “Sandbox” isn’t really intended for the adult users of SL. It is aimed squarely at the teen market, and has been timed to coincide with the transfer of teen accounts to the main grid. As such, it is the second of two causes for concern this issue of “Sandbox” presents – and I’ll explain why in just a moment.

The first item of concern is that it again demonstrates how LL fail to grasp their own platform. For nigh-on two years they’ve pushed and pushed and pushed the idea that SL is primarily a “social networking platform” – right up to shunting users towards Facebook on a number of occasions. During this time, the idea that SL was also an immersive, creative, playful environment seems totally foreign to The Powers That Be. Now everything is canted entirely the other way: SL is just a “game” (hence the appointment of a recognised “gamer” as CEO) – and “social” and “network” now seem to be banned from being linked in the Linden vocabulary. Rather than recognising – as their users largely do – that SL is in fact both a gaming environment and a social networking platform, LL seem only able to pendulum between the extremes of both viewpoints.

The second item of concern is that in focusing on teens to almost the exclusion of everyone else, LL are once again falling into a familiar pattern of “if we build it, they will come” – almost as if the lessons of the past two years haven’t been taken to heart at all. Let’s face it, we’ve seen it all before; witness the New User Experience and Viewer 2 – both of which were supposed to see adults arriving in SL by the truckload. Witness the SLE product and the promotion of SL as a “serious” business tool that was supposed to see corporations the world over flocking to SL to run their collaborative apps, hold virtual meetings and generally put their business to rights.

In each of these cases, LL have repeatedly turned their collective backs on their established user-base, resolutely convinced they’re on to something “big” for SL – and LL as a whole – only to see it all go somewhat pear-shaped within a few months. I seriously doubt that trying to woo-in the teens will go any differently; we’ll see a mild upward swing in the short-term, but overall very little will change numbers-wise. The initial interest will fade and those at the lab will start scrambling around looking for the Next Big Thing that will “turn SL around” – and we’ll be right back (to use a quote from television this time) feeling that “all this has happened before; all this will happen again”.

So, if there is one thing  – OK, TWO things, given I’ve already written to him on one of them – Rod Humble can do when he arrives full-time as the new CEO, it is to get the company to start regarding its existing user-base as an asset, rather than a hindrance.

We – as much as anyone else – have made SL what it is today (and given the staff turnover at LL, possibly moreso than anyone there); we have made the investments in terms of time, effort. It really would be nice to see the new CEO recognise this and take steps to make sure the company actually engages with its users once more, rather than repeatedly patronising us.

Be he ever so Humble…

Posted on by Inara Pey

So I was wrong. I’d been expecting Bob Komin to be a shoo-in for the post of CEO at Linden Research. Seems not, as the job has in fact gone to Rod Humble.

This is an interesting piece of news. Firstly, it keeps Komin out of the firing line (unlike Kingdon). Secondly, and far more importantly, it brings someone into LL who – for the first time – a) isn’t “home-grown” from the company itself but b) actually has gaming / virtual world experience. In this latter regard, Humble is perhaps best known for his input into The Sims 2 and the Sims 3 – and even has his own non-player character in one of the expansion packs for the former.

His credentials, games-wise are impressive – at least to my untutored eyes (I make no secret of the fact that I don’t play computer and video games, other than an occasional fling on a Wii). This in itself could indicate interesting times are ahead for LL and SL as a whole. He’s certainly very hands-on and is a self-confessed “games hobbyist” – hopefully, this will mean he’ll not easily succumb to the Ivory Towers Syndrome that has otherwise infected 98% of staff at Linden Lab and forced them to withdraw from almost all forms of positive interaction with the users of their platform…

…On the other hand, his own “designer games”, such as The Marriage, which interprets marriage as a series of interdependent geometric shapes moving around a colourful box –  tend to suggest that he is someone who perhaps needs to simply leave the computer screen every once in a while and get out a bit more.

Mr. Humble doesn’t take on his new role officially until some time in “mid-January”. However, he is already spending time in-world, where (to quote BK Linden) he is exploring and experimenting inworld to familiarize himself with the pluses and minuses of our product and the successes and challenges faced by our Residents.  If so, then it is going to be interesting to hear his views on things, should he chose (and one would hope he does) to air them.

In the meantime, and with an eye to the future, I’ll add my greetings to Mr. Humble as he joins the Second Life fold. And as a piece of small, humorous advice, Rod, I think the perfect avatar name for yourself might be Humble Linden – it would strike chords for so many and on so many different levels!

Hit the road, Jack…

Posted on by Inara Pey

Jack Linden finally bows out of Linden Lab, and many are sad to see him go. I confess to being somewhat lukewarm in my response to the news.

Jack started out in customer support where he was noted for having a “sexy” accent (or more usually, a “sexy British” accent), and enjoyed a somewhat meteoric rise through the ranks. Which has been both good and bad – and occasionally ugly.

The good is that, despite everything else, he at least made the effort (mostly) to engage with users through his office hours – something that put him in the minority within the Lab. The bad was that all too frequently, this engagement actually came in the form of obfuscation, denial or near-to misrepresentation.

Jack was also the front man for some of LL’s most unpopular actions over the last few years: he took charge of Mainland, and promptly oversaw a massive dumping of sims into the environment that ravaged the market; he was “lead” on the OpenSpace  / Homestead fiasco that bordered on a bait-and-switch policy; he was very much involved in the Adult Changes; more recently he has been “heading up” the commerce side of things and also had input into the ongoing Search debacle. His office hours were frequently mired by accusations of behind-closed-doors deals and outright favouritism towards certain LL “clients” (aka estate owners).

Now, it would be unfair to blame Jack solely for all of these woes: at the end of the day, all of these policies originated far higher up the management chain than good ol’ Jack. But what isn’t so forgivable is the manner in which Jack all-too-frequently went about his work – for which many of those now wishing him a fond farewell in the comments following his final blog post seem all too keen to forget; which is odd given many of them were often driven to distraction by his antics. The way in which he often seemed to delight in creating upset, confusion and outright disbelief always suggested to me that he was not that concerned with assuaging the worries of residents. In this, I’ve always felt that he took on these unpopular polices simply because he saw them as a means of furthering his career within LL, and that dealing with resident anger and genuine concerns was simply not, at any time, on his agenda – other than the rare occasions when it suited him to give the impression he was trying to help.

So… I find it hard to shed a tear and wave goodbye as he goes; although I’m not exactly gleefully waving a finger or two at his departing back. Jack played the residents as much as he engaged with them – but at least he *did* engage with us.

With his departure, I rather fear that all we’re going to face now is a resounding wall of silence.

TOSing out the changes

Posted on by Inara Pey

“Ringing in the changes” is a term that goes back centuries. Originally used in terms of campanology – where it is indeed still used – it entered English slang in the mid-1800s to mean “changing bad money for good; in respectable society the phrase is sometimes employed to denote that the aggressor has been paid back in his own coin, as in practical joking, when the laugh is turned against the jester.” Nowadays we take it to simply mean “employing alternative methods”.

One of the common uses of the term in western society is around the New Year period where we face the opening of another year and are acknowledging we’re going to perhaps do things a little differently (a-la New Year resolutions). So, given we’re fast approaching that time of year, and accepting that broad changes are afoot, it’s no surprise that Linden Lab have thrown out a revised Terms of Service – and once again left it to residents to work out what, precisely, has changed rather than simply highlighting the changed section up front, or even producing a blog posting to explain the new ToS.

So what has changed?

Well, the core of the changes are around the upcoming merger (aka “absorption”) of TSL into the Main Grid and the throwing open of the doors to anyone aged thirteen or older. Here’s what has changed:

Section 2.1 Age Requirements now reads:

By accepting this Agreement in connection with an Account, you represent that you are at least 13 years of age and you have the legal authority to enter into this Agreement.

Clarification is then given that those below 18 years of age must have a) received parental / guardian approval for them to have joined the service, and b) their parent / guardian has read the ToS.

Section 2.2 Age Requirements for Use of Areas of Service (formerly Age Requirements for Teen Second Life)

Sets out the requirements / limitations of under-18s using Second Life, which fall into line with what has already been released by Linden Lab, namely:

  • 13-15 year-olds will be restricted to estates (called “Teen Estates”) operated by Sponsoring Organisations (which are in turn defined in Section 2.4 of the ToS) and which must comply with Linden Lab’s General Maturity Rating in terms of both content and activities
  • 16-17-year-olds will be restricted to Mainland and private estate sims operating under the General Maturity Rating and, at the discretion of the Sponsoring organisation, may continue to access any “Teen Estate” they have been affiliated with prior to turning 16.

Section 2.4 Requirements for Corporate Users now has “and Sponsoring Organisations” tacked on to the end and has the following statement glued on to the end of the original Section 2.4:

If you are a Sponsoring Organization, you agree that (i) you will maintain your Teen Estate in compliance with the General Maturity Rating; (ii) you will comply with the the API Terms of Use; (iii) you will limit the access of Affiliated Accounts of users between 13 and 16 to your Teen Estate; (iv) you are solely responsible for all Content and activities that take place on your Teen Estate, and (iv) you will comply with such guidelines as Linden Lab may issue from time to time with respect to Teen Estates.

This comes across as a lot of waffle that doesn’t actually say much – other than attempting to absolve Linden Lab of any blame should anything go “wrong” on such sponsored estates. Who or what actually qualifies as a “sponsoring organisation”? According to the revised Section 2.2, the new Section 2.4 is supposed to provide such a definition – but it doesn’t.

Elsewhere in the ToS Section 8, Conduct of Users of Second Life has seen some toughening-up   of the wording in respect of minors accessing the Main Grid, namely:

  • Section 8.2 (ii) now requires that adults will not impersonate a minor for the purpose of interacting with a minor using the Service
  • A new Section 8.2 (iii) has been added, stating users of Second Life will not Stalk, harass, or engage in any sexual, suggestive, lewd, lascivious, or otherwise inappropriate conduct with minors on the Service
  • Section 8.2 (iv) (formerly 8.2 (iii)) clarifies and improves the wording of how matters relating to age play will be handled.

Similarly Section 11.4, dealing with the suspension / termination of accounts has been updated to read:

We may suspend or terminate your Account(s) if we learn, or in good faith believe, that you are a Registered Sex Offender, that accessing Second Life may violate a condition of parole or probation, that you have engaged in, or attempted to engage in conduct with minors on the Service that violates this agreement. [my emphasis for clarity].

Outside of the age changes to the ToS, there is one incongruous change to the ToS that has been thrown in, relating to the taking of snapshots / making of Machinema in “publicly accessible areas” (section 7.4). The inclusion of the phrasing in the ToS when it first appeared back in April of this year caused much gnashing of teeth. It’ll be interesting to see if its removal will be noted in any way…

Overall, these are not in and of themselves major changes. The main area of concern is that, in typical fashion for these kinds of documents, the ToS is more about protecting Linden Lab against any perceived wrongdoing with the upcoming changes that it is about anything else. As such, people (assuming they read the new ToS prior to agreeing to it) will continue to rend cloth and scatter ashes ahead of the upcoming changes. And while is it true that a part of me is concerned at the one-way flow of things here (it would be nice to have some kind of visual indicator, for example that the individual you’ve bumped into in a store is actually a minor rather than, say, an adult operating a below “average height” avatar that looks like a minor), I’m still not convinced that the arrival of Teens onto the Main Grid will be the God-awful disaster many seem to believe. And in truth, outside of the sheer woollyness of Section 2.4, it’s hard to see how else things could have been worded.

Casper, Apez, clarifications and the future

Posted on by Inara Pey

With the reported closure of Apez, rumours started circulating to the effect that CasperVend, which had produced a means of helping content creators utilising the Apez iVend system to migrate to Casper’s own systems, were in fact Apez  rebranded.

Such were the scale of these rumours, that Casper Warden, head of CasperVend, issued a strongly-worded and entirely open rebuttal to the claims – and full marks to him for doing so.  While there are still issues surrounding Apez itself none of them have anything to do with CasperVend, which has provided an extraordinary opportunity to ease the pain of existing Apez customers – and has done so with the minimum of additional headaches.

So, kudos again to Casper.

In the meantime, Apez have sold their land holdings in Second Life, with the monies raised being put towards honouring outstanding withdrawal requests – which is also good news.

However, as of today, Weds. 8th December 2010, account balances that have not had a withdrawal ticket posted against them have apparently been voided. It is unclear as to how many accounts are affected, but again, given that Apez was not operating as a bank, nor – I understand – were monies deposited via in-world ATMS or pending withdrawal by merchants intended to be used in support of other aspects of the Apez business, it still seems extraordinary that they are now apparently baulking at honouring all outstanding accounts by introducing an entirely arbitrary deadline by which account withdrawal tickets must be submitted.

If it remains the case that Apex are unable to honour all account holders with a full repayment of funds deposited (less the obvious commission, in the case of deposits via vendor sales). then it is hard to see how any potential purchaser will benefit in taking on the Apez brand.