Lindens are gonna buy back telehub land at L$10/m -- Fair?

Ha ha! Hope this clears up any confusion, Infinite.

I must be missing something here.

This is a business for LL. As such, they have to run it like a business.
The way I see it:
land owner=premium account=monthly income

Some content creators have has stated numerous times how they are not premium members so therefore:

content creator=basic account=no monthly income

Its that simple.

Also, how many people is this REALLY going to be affected by this change? You had to purchase the land between 1 August and 8 December. One resident has had a lock on telehub land since way before 1 August so will there be that much of a profit for them?

It's 100% a-ok because they'd be completely nuts not to have CYA clauses like that in the TOS. Otherwise a serious bug could cause them to get sued out of existence. Those types of clauses are only threatening if you expect that LL won't act in good faith. It's ironic that when they try to go the extra mile and demonstrate that they care about their users investments in time and money (inconsistent as it may be), they get trounced for it.

If history teaches us anything it's that LL will act when the metrics are simple. Dwell was rewarded because it was easy to objectively measure. More subjective types of rewards haven't materialized because there is no easy objective metric to measure. Figuring out a compensation for people who bought land that turned out to be misrepresented due to impending feature changes is pretty easy. Figuring out how to compensate someone for lost inventory items that were intended to be sold in perpetuity is much more difficult. Hell, items I think will be a big hit sometimes never sell at all and ones I consider to be hack jobs sell like mad. If I can't determine the value of one of my own items, how should I expect LL to? Comparing this land compesation to compensation for borked permissions or inventory loss is apples and oranges.

What?

Take it as whatever you want. You are desperate to put this all into a light that serves you and Aimee and whoever is crying this week. Let it go, you all sound so desperate.

Exactly.

Yup.

And you sound like you either roll over and spread pretty easily, or you own telehub land.

I suspect this decision was reached by LL after somebody's lawyers contacted them and, shall we say, suggested that some sort of reparations would be the prudent thing for LL to do (I think katy hinted at this too, in one of her posts in this thread).

I certainly feel for content creators and scripters who have lost permission control on their items due to bugs. It's only by chance that I wasn't selling stuff at the time, as well, due to my taking an extended break from SL commerce. However, Aimee, I suspect that some savvy legal counsel would be necessary to get LL to agree to compensate content creators the same way they're going to compensate telehub land owners. In the long run, I'm not sure the rewards would be worth it based upon the legal fees you'd have to pay.

I'd be willing to bet LL likes this as little as we do, but they doubtless would want to avoid being dragged through some sort of lawsuit. Perhaps this will step up any plans they have to complete the technical development of their metaverse and hand off the actual day-to-day running and operations of it to independent folk who want to purchase a license to buy servers and run their own little pieces of SL.

So when nothing else works you hurl insults.

Sorry I don't own telehub land and I am not involved as anything other than a spectator to this train wreck.

A business knowing where its investment lies and finding resolution for that faction neither shocks nor moves me to vulgarities. As indicated by my earlier post, land values seems to be the one area in which LL has actively intervened. This is not the first time they have instituted a system of reimbursement for losses which resulted from changes they had made.

I sure hadn't expected P2P to be reimplemented and am very pleased that it has been. That LL acted on one hand to enable a feature that many wanted and are pleased with while on the other hand they are striving to find resolution for their major investors is a perception that is unacceptable to you? It's a rather boring viewpoint and void of the drama which is part of proper forum posting but I can see an attempt for balance in their actions as well as historical consistency.

I agree with you. That's why I'm wondering why Aimee was threatening all-out rioting the next time a bug (or intentional intervention) causes content creators to lose control of their creations.

Rioting? Sorry if you got that impression. I was talking about a media campaign, much like Anshe's only more fun and with 80% more bums....

I can't speak for Aimee, but I think the concern is that this is a dangerous precedent that can be seen as rewarding people for complaining when plenty of other things have happened that caused content creators to lose money who didn't really fuss too much about it (but might have if they'd known sufficient complaining would cause LL to capitulate). It's a legitimate observation.

Then I guess I know which option it is.

Some of us sound desperate, and some of us sound like we have no qualms with being screwed. I guess neither of us are coming off like we'd hoped.

You have no problem with LL, who always insisted there would be no compensation any other time their decisions adversely affected residents, deciding that just this one group does deserve some compensation. Got it.

I do have a problem with them cow-towing to the highest tier holders and telling us, by way of their actions, that their inconvenience and loss is more important than our inconvenience and loss.

I didn't buy into the 'stakeholders' stuff until this decision came down, and now I wonder how I could have possibly been naive enough to tell people Philip & Friends wouldn't bow down to $$$.

Btw, did your friend let that land issue go or did LL make reparations for her? I'm referring to the issue which you posted repeatedly in the hotline about.

That's not entirely true. They did offer to buy out GOM even if it was a paltry sum.

I wonder how much they're compensating people who had made taxi services and the like. How much are the ROAM people getting?

Probably nothing... all of which reinforces why this kind of compensation isn't a particularly good idea since it can never be applied equally. This is a different type of thing though. They sold land as hub land then turned it into plain ol' non-hub land. Products becoming obsolete due to new features isn't really the same thing at all.

the funny thing about all this whining is that the person you are all whining about doesn't benefit much from this compensation as it the majority of her hub land holdings must certainly predate august 2005. that is where her malls are - in the old continents.

get real guys. this is about LL doing their best to not directly rip off players by selling them hub land after they had already privately made the decision to implement p2p.

I forgot the taxi services! When I take out the ads in MM and SL Herald I will include them.

The telehubs became obsolete due to a new, er, old feature. The land is still land, still fully usable. It is the same land barons whining about this who are also setting the price on what that land is now worth. Yes, it is a different situation, but financial loss is the common demoninator. What about when Schwanson lost more than half his inventory? They would not compensate him at all for it. The same for others.

There is a laundry list of people who have suffered financial losses due to LL's negligence and bugs, and no assistance was provided at all. We have all had to deal with financial risk and reward to be invested in SL in any real way. That is the bottom line in all of this - you have one group of people being compensated for their loss, but others are supposed to just suck it up and say oh well. I could respect the position of not providing any financial compensation regardless of the situation - this half assed favoritism brought on by lobbying and whining is just pathetic.

LL was quite possibly protecting their ass from litigation. the TOS does not necessarily protect them from having sold hub land to players (in bad faith) after the coding for p2p had already begun. this was asserted by a player who is a RL lawyer.

OMG FIC! (sorry, had to do it)