replacement for DI system

I sit and if memory serves me right DI was meant to reward those that are creative and bring that creative idea out in SL. Why don't we just do a thing like that of the old rating system?

Every week ALL players get XX amount of "votes" as they go from place to place to place they go and give a vote, or two, or 20 to a spot they like for what ever reason be it event, awesome items for sale, etc. THen calculate who has the highest as normal like dwell at the end of the week/month as needed. THere would be no negative posting system because if you don't like the place..don't give them a vote.

This would allow more then land barons and clubs to join in and would require more active seeking to get votes or have dedicated people that really love your place. I know on a personal basis about 90% of the people in the DI monthly list I have never visited or visit thier locations less then once a month.

Anything else to add, change, etc? What do you all think?

Sounds like the old rating system, which got canned. (Though limiting # of rates was one idea I remember that got kicked around.)

I think LL needs to have its employees seek out cool projects, accept ideas, and use their own judgement on which people to invest in.

Sounds even more like the voting system in 1.0 that was canned.

Yeah I got the idea from the voting system but will admit I was not around till 1.6 so was not aware if it was kicked around or not. But this is a same idea/new system reason that I am kicking this around. Maybe it could work better for DI?

To play the Devils Advocate here

Do we need a DI system at all?

If a business has overextended themselves to the point where they need DI to make tier and stay in business whos responsibility is this? The Lindens? or the Business Owners?

This brings up the issue of projects that are not businesses and that is a very different thing. Neverland was a fantastic project built by amazingly creative people using a Linden land grant (not DI). It was never for profit.

Perhaps a land grant or tier cost reduction plan for not for profit builds would be a wise course.

DI is fatally flawed someone will find some way to game it regardless of what new system is put in place.

In the end Players of SL choose how much they are willing to pay Linden Labs for the priveledge of building in this world. Some choose wisely and some don't.

I'm assuming that the choice is we are going with DI still. maybe another thread should be started to talk about if DI should exsist anymore.

That's fascinating, and futureretro. What might this sort of thing be called, if it had a name?

I forsee a problem here. An employee will say: "where should i start? Oh I know lets go to dupty-doos they always have good stuff"

I gotta agree here.

I think with no DI, it is going to force the bad event organizers out of the business. The good ones will find revenue streams to sustain and grow their business. How will they do this? They'll give people a reason to come back. With no DI, that will mean giving people a good time, not a trickle of L$ through a money chair.

It could cause a consolidation of power in the events field. If Person A knows how to run one profitable events-centric business, it's not that much work to expand that out to 10 or 20 profitable events-centreic businesses.

Whelp, that would depend on which Linden, they can't all possibly have the same tastes, and some might as well be prone to seeking out the obscure and upcoming.

Without DI, Linden Lab is just leeching off their users.

The SL experiment has always been about a symbiotic relationship between LL and its users. LL provides a "blank canvas", the users fill it with compelling content, and in return for making things to entertain its other users LL pays the creators of the most visited places a fraction of its revenues. By cutting out the third leg of the relationship, LL is trying to get something for nothing. Now, if people are happy with that, then good luck. However, in my opinion it just underscores the degree to which LL has been taking its customers for granted.

Now, the question of how DI is allocated and distributed is up for debate, but the complete elimination of the "quo" in quid pro quo seems like a way for LL to get a free ride -- interesting content without having to expend any capital to get it.

Is Adobe Leaching off its paying customers because they provide a platform for others to create art? This art then becomes and Add for Adobe and others buy into it. Seems like simple good business to me not leaching.

LL provides a platform what we do with it is up to us. They do not owe us anything except the service we pay for (ie the platform in which to create).