Alts & SL Free Trial Accounts

For over a year (probably more) people have shared their experiences, thoughts and feelings regarding hostile neg. rates received from free trial accounts.

Many software companies disable some features of their software during the free trial - and Linden Lab could do the same. There is simply no reason to give a free trial account the same PRIVILEGES as a paid account, especially when so many free accounts were set up to neg. rate others. Disabling some features would also serves as a tease and encourage the "tester" to pay for the account to get all the features and benefits of SL.

Doing this would also make SL a better place.


Discussion?

Doesn't this belong in feature suggestions?

I think it has been proposed before in the feature suggestions forum, along with numerous other possible solutions.

Agreed. Add to that the ability to use push-script objects or other griefing tools.

Keep the free market. Avoid LL government interference.

I'd go further and extend it to 'basic' accounts too...

It's a discussion blaze - not a specific feature request.

Add something or move on.

I agree with blaze on this thread, But everyone makes mistakes.

I agree with you Merwan that the trail accounts should be limited.

This has zip, zero, nothing to do with the market.

You're going to remove my ability to rate people? Why? What possible reason could there be?

As for the whole trial account neg rating thing, if they don't pay their 9.95, the neg rates go away.

So your feature suggestion is already implimented. Boy, ain't LL fast?

Actually, I'd prefer to do away with rates altogether.

Eh, they do serve a purpose, well, they would if they kinda worked right.....and it had from the beginning...and.....and.....

pbbbt...I need my L$500 extra each week so I can fund my clothing habit!

Feature Suggestions is for discussion of requested changes in functionality.

This is bogus

Your opinion is noted.

i think we should all be bound by a earned rating system. let us assign negative ratings based on the number of positive ratings we have. it doesn't matter how old i am, or what kind of account i have. it matters that enough people believe that i'm a positive influence to the community to grant me the priviledge of assigning a few negative ratings when i deem them necessary.

if we're gonna play this little community game, we should do it properly.

when my club debates a point, some people voice opinions and everybody listens and respects what they have to say. others speak and nobody cares what they think because they're viewed as being generally apathetic, or openly destructive, toward the health of the club and its members. that's what second life ratings are (should be) to me.

Someone here doesn't seem to know how ratings work

Um, no. That would be silly. There is nothing wrong with basic accounts, or the people that use them. I say this because I am biased - I hold a basic account and not a premium one. Surprised?

-AP

I agree Khamon.

Should the free trial accounts have the privilege of full participation in our community without actually being a paid member of the community?




_/_/

Yeah. Let's give them crippleware, that'll entice them to stay.

Hah! I knew it! You're an ALT!
Ban TAGGY!

Well, you've failed to establish that the free trial accounts DO have the same priveleges that full accounts have. Their impact (with regard to ratings) is fleeting. If they don't purchase an account, then their ratings are meaningless.

I don't see how gimping the accounts benefits anyone. LL loses potential customers, the trial users miss out on the experience, and in the end we all lose out when interest dwindles.

Ooops, I have been found out!

OK I admit: My main is an AV by the name of Laggy McGriefer.

Please dont ban me, LL!

When I started my SL trial in September 2003, the rules for the two-week trial were:

* You couldn't go beyond a handful of sims near the Welcome Area or go to any Mature sims.

* You could accumulate L$ but couldn't spend them on objects or pay other avatars.

Even with those restrictions, I signed up halfway through my trial. I think that a few restrictions won't hurt the sign-up rate, and would probably reduce fraud.

no. but they should have to accumulate a number of positive ratings before they can assign negative ones just like everybody else.

then even gaming the trial accounts to neg people would cost a good number of lindens to accumulate enough positive ratings to assign the negative ones.

i should clarify the point that i think, at this point, ll should just cut the bonuses to zero and write the rating system out of the code entirely. we're all adults here and well capable of maintaing our own reputation systems without magic numbers. we do it in real life without even thinking about it.

I wonder how many others behaved similarly. I know that I probably would not have joined if I'd been forced to endure such harsh restrictions. When I first joined, I wandered the world and saw a lot of interesting things. I purchased interesting vehicles, and tasted a little bit of everything. If my first experience were limited to a small area, and I were forbidden from tasting the fruits of the world, then I doubt that I would have ever wanted to join.

Though there are many things which could be done to cut down on fraud (of GOM, ratings, and whatnot), we must balance the desire to protect against malice with a desire to see the world grow.

Honestly, I have a hard time believing lacking the ability to rate a person would be such a huge hardship that people wouldn't sign up.

Hell, I don't think I rated anyone for my first week or so in game anyhow... I was too new to really rate fairly.