Poll: Should LL End Dwell Payments

Most folks are absolutely horrid at business. That's why.

For the record, I voted to keep dwell in place, if only because it marginally rewards people for putting in hard work/advertising/whatever in order to get their place to the top.

A word to the wise, though.. keep your dwell payments to yourself instead of your audience in the form of money balls, money trees, money pants, whatever. People need to be snapped ofthe mentality that they should be paid for being entertained.

If you want to be paid, make something.

If you just want to hang out and have a good time... why should I pay you?

LF

It's not so much as they dont see that correlation, it's that your definitions aren't quite right. Those you're calling 'coders' are more commonly called 'developers' - as in 'software developers'. The monthly cheques that the Lindens send out were (are?) called the 'Developer Incentives'. This is a misnomer, as it rewards dwell, not developers. Hence the coining of the phrase 'dwelloper' - a corruption of the word meant to emphasize the dwell aspect of the incentives and clarify the misleading nature of the phrase. I should know; I was one of the first folks to coin the phrase.

As for 'Scripterati'...that's about as offensive as calling someone FIC. Big frickin' deal. It's a term meant to be used in a spiteful way, but has no particular weight or meaning behind it. It's probably more offensive to the person spitting the term than it would be to anyone labelled one.

- Newfie

Agreed.

I respectfully disagree, Newfie. You're placing the word 'developer' into a context that I don't believe it was intended to be in.

I believe its misleading to you, because you are a software developer, and when someone uses that word, that (understandibly) is the first thing that comes to mind... to you. However, if I were to ask Anshe what the world developer means to her, I'd wager it would mean something different to her.

Yes, the term 'developer' can apply to 'software developer'. However, the incentive award is not termed 'software developer award'.

If I may quote an excellent post made earlier:

Also have to agree. The only excuse i can see in the club sense is dwell is to offset the inability to sell food and drinks.

Once in a while paying for the winner of a contest as a promotional .. sure

Paying people to visit a club? Bad idea.

Of course they have to. Becuase the other clubs will do it anyway. Kinda of a vicous cycle.

But realisticly the only way that I can see a club having long term sucess is to get people to have a reason to go there and spend a little money.

Actually you've just reinforced my statement there, in that there was a great amount of misunderstanding what the term 'Developer' Incentives meant. The phrase 'developer' has many meanings depending on the context, and SL introduced two of those which are primary concepts - 'software developer' and 'land developer'. Even in that light, what was happening was more like real estate/land brokerage than genuine 'land development'.

No matter which way the term was interpreted, there was far too much confusion about how the 'developer incentives' were awarded, hence the phrase 'dwelloper'. The intent of the word was still to clarify the award was given to those who succeeded in dwell, rather than in development - no matter if it was the software or the land kind.


- Newfie

1. Well, I don't think you are paying anybody, because I don't think you have a club or a game show, do you?

Since I want to be paid, yes - I am making something. I have learned building, and have made a number of things - furniture and so forth - to sell (and have made some money from it), and am fairly well along in my first of houses, this one being the deluxe model.

(Next, I have to master scripting. I like building, but I haven't been able to figure out scripting, but I will have to, in order that my details - opening trunk lids and the like - will work.)

So what did this game lose by forcing me into building?

Well, it lost the world's best online game show host, that's what. You probably think I'm just bragging about that. I'm not. I never met anyone better, in terms of hosting, longevity, popularity, studio build, you name it. I've met equally good hosts, but no one with the detailed games I offered, twice a week, for over a year. Can't afford to do that here. At least not without some successful clothing or house line or whatever, with the game shows being a mere sideline.

Although some people do manage to do quizzes and the like and pay prizes for, say, the right answer to the trivia question, I'm not far enough along in my game to even be able to do that. (But I'm glad they can and do, cause I love them.) As for having a long-term Game Show Channel - I see NO way.

2. Nickolaii said: "The only way that I can see a club having long term sucess is to get people to have a reason to go there and spend a little money."

You can't give anyone a reason to go there and spend a little money. There is nothing to spend money ON. A cover charge for a club? Doesn't work. Nobody will spend money to go into a building to do nothing more than dance and meet people.

3. Another reason clubs, casinos and the like jump on the prize money bandwagon is because there is a huge demand for it. The reason there is a huge demand for it is because the only way to make money in the game is to build or script. Very circular, see. So the clubs and so forth provide what there is a huge demand for, and hope to make up their losses in dwell.

These are some of the reasons why it would be a bad idea to take away dwell. Already the subsidies are gone. (The new events calendar limitation is being worked on, so I have new hopes for it.)

coco

I didn't say that, Colette did.

But I do agree.

Oops...

coco

Okay .. I can see basically two sorts of Club Business plans out there.

-------------------------------
One is the "Big Business" concept .. they want DWELL, as much as the possibly can. They offer cash incentives for people to show up, The cuttest Av contests and Money Balls, etc.

The Theory being with enough Dwell they will make enough money to offset operating costs, and maybe make a buck or two more.

To make it work they need lots of land, and lots of emplyees to run events, this is all huge overhead.

This was discussed last month, most Big Clubs lose money. Any Business that loses a lot of money is not sustainable long term.

-------------------------------
The second is the "Small Club" Concept .. where smaller clubs on much smaller land are run by groups of friends.

They dont get very much Dwell, they dont make very much money.

But operating costs are low, Tier is low, Employees are all working for a share of proffits only. Barring huge drama this is sustainable.

-------------------------------------------------------

When Dwell Payments end (Logic says it will eventually reguardless) ,

the Big Clubs will struggle even worse then they are now with Event funding removed. More will fold.

The Small clubs will probably keep going pretty much like they are.

I think there will always be clubs. Dwell or no Dwell. People enjoy Night Clubbing.

There will always be sex clubs too , long as there is freedom as far as cyber goes.

People in the game who look to be paid to Party - will need to start Partying for free .. or heaven forbid pay a small amount.

Cover charges wont work now , becuase other clubs pay people to visit. If all clubs had cover charges you can bet people would pay them if they were resonable.

Newfie - good point. You're right that the term is ambiguous. I suppose I just take issue with using condecending phrases to paint the effort that anyone puts into Second Life as trivial. I understand that wasn't your intention in coining the phrase - but over time, I believe its devolved into that by others.

A couple other points I want to make: (Colette, forgive me for taking your points out of order)



I disagree. If you run your buisness like a broadcast television network (which I subscribe to that notion), it's not neccesary to force your patrons to pay to be entertained. Providing you offload your costs to advertisers & sponsors, its possible to at least break even, if not make a profit. Dwell doesn't even need to come into it.



I couldn't agree more, except in the case of doing something that specifically helps out newbies only. Moneyballs in general are a huge burden, and I agree, sets up a viscious circle that's very difficult to escape from. Unfortunately, the first folks that agree to drop their moneyballs will be the short-term losers, while the last ones to hang on to it will be the short-term winners.

I see no escape from it, other than someone selecting to take a martyr stance on it and dealing with the short-term consequences for the good of the community. Dropping dwell payments - which - I agree... it is inevitable - won't change that - because I don't think moneyballs are being primarily funded by dwell *today*.

In the end though - If you mess with dwell payments, and just keep the "numbers" - or, some close facsimile thereof - you probably wont hear a peep outta me. I fit more of the "small club" model you mentioned - and I think you're right - changes in dwell would affect me a ton less than it would the larger clubs.

Why is dropping dwell payments inevitable?

coco

Dwell ammounts to a subsidy

It adds to inflation

Eventually the goal must be for LL not to Subsidize content.

therefore , its end is inevitable.

-----------------------------------------

Travis makes a good point .. Advertizing could offset people spending money in a club, since they will spend money at the clubs sponsors .. etc.

We have Advertisng at Tiger Lilly's it adds a bit to the bottom line , and isnt too intrustive.

Our goal money wise is to merely a bit of spending money, we dont cover tier at all. were on about a 2k plot so wed definitely be a small club also.



PS - I did vote to keep Dwell , BTW.

I think Philip said in a town meeting that all these stipends and dwell payments and so on were just a kind of "oiling the machine" or "greasing the wheels" or whatever to get the cyber economy in his metaverse thingie to start working. It had to start with something. But I think his intention was to withdraw this as time went on because it's the kind of socialist subsidy that prevents an economy from growing and becoming "real," i.e. a liberla market economy. So gradually they reduced ratings stipends payouts, they have talked about removing dwell.

Most countries even of the capitalist sort still have various incentive programs and I think dwell is one of them. And it will be hard for them to justify removing the pay packet because what will happen is that everyone will just quit without at least a symbolic spending money to use in a game they feel is entertainment mainly, not a life they have to construct with "making a living" in it as one of its hardships just like RL.

For the life of me, Coco, I don't get this "forced into building" stuff. I've seen a very new player come into the game -- Foolish Frost -- and make a scripted riddle word game that is compelling, pays out a bit, keeps dwell on his land, and so on. Now, to be sure, he is a programmer and could script his own thingies. But if you wanted a scripted game show like that, couldn't you hire a programmer, even for as little as 10k? Could you buy a Slingo for 14k and run a lot to get a reputation and some dwell while you work on your reputation, dwell, and game show plans? I just don't get why you can't do the same thing you did in TSO even without scripted items, using just regular notecard givers, IMs, whatever. I think you'd have more of a sense of empowerment and purpose if you could get started on even some kind of game. Since building -- "the studio look" -- is part of it it makes sense maybe to spend time on building. It just seems to me that you could take a lot as small as 4096 (rent or finally buckle and buy the premium account and get land on the auction) to start these ideas up. Rent in PG would cost you $1000-1200 or less, to purchase 4096 in PG these days is a song - $3/meter or less. 4096 is just $25/month tier fee to the Lindens.

Let me take another side-track on the "scripterati" as a term. I'm starting to realize to my horror that people being so offended as this term simply may not be familiar with the term "the literati". "The literati" is not a perjorative term. It is a term that has a bit of archness, a bit of a sage, hmm, they think they're something hot, but we know better, kind of usage to it, but it is not the slam and the perjorative term some seem to image. The term is used normally in all the press of the world. Next to it you'll find a similar, coined word -- the glitterati. These are the glittery showbiz people, and that term, in the tabloid press, is normal or humorous, not "perjorative" or "mean".

So "scripterati" means just those who are vaunted above the rest with their scripting ability -- learning this very arcane and difficult (and annoying even for programmers of RL computer languages) Linden Scripting Language to work this game's moveable parts. It's just one of those terms that is part humor, part sarcasm, but it doesn't have the "perjorative" cast that has been ascribed to it, evidently in ignorance. Go and google "literati" and "glitterati" and you'll see they have no hugely negative connotation. Is it somehow "vitriol" just because I used it? No, that's just the "received wisdom" of the slathering forum jackals.

Now...back on topic? Yes, we need dwell. Lots of it! But in a different form! Read my proposition thread to change dwell!

I disagree with the idea that people will quit the game without Dwell Payments.

Some who hoped to earn money with Dwell might, just as some who hoped to make money with Event funding Im sure did.

-for the club owners-
the business model where you try to make money without your customers spending any money at all - is basically flawed. *shrugs*

-As to the customers-
for people to expect to consistantly make more then their stipend in a game you can play for free, without doing something resembling "WORK" (content creation or service related) - is kind of silly.

A club's service is entertainment. It should at least be worthwhile/entertaining enough people will attend for free. Hopefully will be entertaining enough they will spend a few L$'s

Prokofy Neva on the "scripterati" and the other mysterious groups that are holding back the progress of SL.

Sounds pretty perjorative to me. I think people are taking "scripterati" as an allusion to "Illuminati". The "Illuminati", as we have seen in print and on TV, is not a desirable element of society for most folks, especially those who believe it exists. I think that the above quote shows that you don't think the "scripterati" is a desirable element of SL. I didn't even have to pretend to read your mind, all I did was actually read what you said.

I agree with Colette, "everyone" will not quit. Prokofy, have you tried selling your mind reading skills to the DoD?

Introducing drama, especially when you see fit to speak for 1000s of other people, to try and bolster support for personal goals is a bad idea.

uh huh...



LOL, you're the only person I know who can completely contradict themselves in two subsequent sentences.

1. I just noticed that proposition, but haven't read it yet.

2. As for "scripterati" - yes - anyone offended by this term just doesn't have a good background on its entymology (sp?) (correct word even?).

3. As for your suggestions, what do you mean, "as little as 14k" or "as little as 10k"? What you mean "as little as" anything, kimosabi?

4. As for "forced into building," I am telling you I can (eventually) MAKE MONEY from selling things. I can't MAKE MONEY from doing games right now (except maybe something I'm working on with another guy for at his place maybe).

My major point is: A person can make stuff and sell it and make money. A person can script for other people and make money. The free prims are subsidies already. It doesn't cost you any money to script something. And you can build things in the sandbox (theoretically, anyway). You can copy all the things you design as many times as you want and sell them over and over again. Entertainment - it has to be planned, different each time, and you have to BE THERE for it, hosting it and controlling it.

A person can also buy and sell land and make money, though generally that costs more rl money to start out with at least, and requires taking the risk of losses in real-life money. But the 412 first lands are also pretty much subsidies already, like prims are.

Land is IN this game and is a visible commodity. The tools for making things are IN this game and those things are visible commodities. Entertainment is NOT already in this game; it's not a visible commodity; and you can't sell it. There are no tools that give entertainment places any advantage or benefit except for dwell. There are no subsidies and no reason to charge for entertainment built into the game.

For the most part, in online games, person can't charge for entertainment and make money. You can't sell food and drinks. Many of those places need to offer prizes because that is the nature of their entertainment; others like to give some prizes more or less as party favors. People need prize money because only scripters and builders can make money. Plus, money balls are fun - and help the worker bee AV dance a little longer and enjoy themselves because they know they just might even get some Lindens, so they don't need to feel quite so guilty about not being home working on a project.

I don't think the SL society could EVER evolve to a point where people pay to dance, or to go to a club or a game show, or aren't attracted by prizes, unless everybody in the dang game were rich, which would mean the Linden would already be devalued far worse than giving subsidies or dwell could ever devalue it.

That's what I copped to right away as an entertainer. Let's face it, making stuff, scripting stuff, and occupying land is the entire end all and be all of the whole game.

5. LL may think they are going to get the economy oiled for once and for all and then be able to give up all forms of subsidy, but this never holds true for the new player, unskilled in scripting and building, like me, who comes in.

The entry to the game for the regular person - and I think we have already gotten most of the scripting and coding and 3-D people out there who want to do it in a game, minus one or two I've met lately - is a matter of having to learn scripting and building from scratch. And for everyone, it's a matter of starting from scratch given the amount of Lindens you can get from your dwell and/or whatever you offer.

Why should new players at any stage of the game be expected to survive without the dwell and stipend? They are just as new as the first players were new in the beginning of the game.

And it's not like these older players are gonna provide jobs and incomes for the newer players to the extent LL seems to think they are going to. It's not like you can come in and find actual JOBS. Most of the jobs offered are from players asking for - what? For scripters and builders!!!

6. My personal guess is that cutting out all support will never go in the direction of a thriving capaitalistic society like they think it will. Truth is, even capitalism doesn't work without some central support and subsidies.

I think the support that has been cut so far is already causing it to head in the direction of the rich and established getting richer and the underpaid average Joes getting disgusted and leaving for something more fun. Tell me I'm wrong - tell me you don't have acquaintances who left because there was nothing for them to do unless they could manage that scripting and building learning curve. There has to be a way for the average Jane to make a few Lindens for herself. And there needs to be support encouraging the entertainment and service industries, or the game will start to look like all work and no play.

I don't know about you, but my idea of fun is not trying to sell all my stuff to others who are making the same stuff and trying to sell it to me. We need people to BUY our stuff, and they need Lindens to buy it. Entertainers need people to ENTERTAIN, and they need to be able to do that at a profit.

All this draconian economy crap just takes the fun out of everything.

7. Having said all this, let me stress that my fondest hope is that they don't EVER MAKE US PAY FOR PRIMS AGAIN, or I swear I will QUIT then, as there will then be NO FUN FOR ME AT ALL. Outside of going "oooh" at other people's stuff, which gets old if that's all you can do.

coco

I hope I don't tumble this thread off-topic by doing this - but Prokofy - your statement reminds me of a college course I took years ago, on communication. The professor sucked, and I got a C-... but all these years later, there's one item I took away from it.

The Johari Window. If you're interersted, check out the link for it. It colored the way I communicate for the rest of my life.

Basically - (and I may be oversimplifying) - There are 4 elements to communication. Two of them, are "what we are attempting to communicate" - and "what the listener perceives as being communicated."

At the end of the day, according to the "Johari Window" theory, its what is perceived as being communicated that counts. No matter how correct I am in my viewpoint, if my listener misinterprets what I'm saying - (in their world), what they perceived me communicating is what I said (from their view).

I'm saying this - because I think the usage of the term "Scripterati" is one where you may have had one meaning by it - but it was interpreted by others as something else. Which in turn caused the goal (communicating your point) to be lost. Is this the fault of the communicator or the listener? Maybe both

No offence intended to anyone by bringing this up - I just thought it was interesting. In fact, although I hated the class in college, today I find the whole study of communication in general fascinating.

"Illuminati" is not perjorative either, Nolan. It's said in that same kind of arch manner as "scripterati".

And for the life of me, I don't see what is wrong with describing people who jam the central core of the game and prevent it from growing propertly. This is my perception. I articulate it in the ardent believe that if people only see that, they will stop doing it, because who'd want to be doing that? It's just that simple. And I think if they can come to see they are doing it, not only will they be moved to stop doing it, but they will be helped on their way to stopping that by others enlightened as to how that has become a problem.

What is the jaming at the central core? I've summed it up many times.

o hatred of non-technical people and derision of their inability to master arcane knowledge in the game
o demands that the Lindens cater to them as the talented glass actually developing the game's software and content
o calls to throttle the game and prevent more basic accounts, or more mass log-ins from Tringo players, or more mass anything -- a frank and unabashed call to keep the game the sandbox of the very highly-skilled technocrat
o symbiotic relationships with old players who become Lindens to help keep the AR system flowing to their benefit
o product and service placement to keep their businesses on top, which they identify as the "enlightened" and "low-impact" and "non-mass" and "aesthetic" businesses ("Bobos in Paradise".

Etc.

So in my exposure of some of that attitude -- and no one denies it exists -- I put forth arguments like "but the masses are your customers, let them in, you'll make more money" or "but you can't grow if you have a system of favouritism because the ordinary public will have higher demands for impartiality than you are willing to concede" or " but economies die if they are just boutiques for you and your friends" or "you'll kill initiative if you flood the market with your non-mod freebies.

Far from thinking that those doing this blockage are going to keep hanging on for dear life and killing off those who expose and challenge them, I always figured that in this debate, they'd relent and say, oh, yes, you're right, we need customers, we should be a little less brash and offputting on the forums. Or "oh, yes, you're right we need to preserve at least the appearance of fairness on equal TOS enforcement".

Honestly, it all seems self-evident: criticism is a legitimate activity and helps something you care about and participate in improve to become better.

In your world, though Nolan, there is only "the enemy" and "the loyalists" and "the government" and you just can't let it go.

Um, you're one of the many I know here, Chip, who has no sense of humor and takes everything literally and flatly. "They think they're something hot, but we know better" is arch and humorous. It isn't nasty and perjorative. Really, these nuances are important and have to be felt.

When you use the terms "literati" and "illuminati" you do first recognize theyhave some ability or power above the norm of the average person, but with the "ati" end you add a certain filip of "but even though they are hot stuff, we don't think they are THAT hot as to not give them a come-uppance now and then."

LOL. Nope, there's SLers, Lindens, and a small contingent who think that they have all the answers for perceived shortcomings of SL. There is not one system in place within SL that you haven't dissed in some manner, usually by claiming some mysterious groups influenced the Lindens into setting things up as they are.

"I" can't let it go? AM I the one inventing terms to try and illustrate what I think are the bad elements in SL? No. I am not the one posting 12 times a day how I think SL should be. I am not the one being suspended and then returning with alts to continue haraguing the Lindens and SLers who frequent the boards. Now, tell me again; who can't "let go"? As long as you harangue, I will be here to point out your gross hypocrisy, and short-sighteness which is driven by your personal interest.

Semantics aside, you have illustrated the feelings that motivate you to coin these terms quite sufficiently. They are disgust and derision. You can deny that until you are blue in the face, no amount of long-ass posts to the contrary will change that, so get used to it.

One can co-opt practically any word to convey contempt, which you have illustrated again and again.

It was a nice dance, thanks.

Actually that sounds like a more apt description of your world, but you left out the scripterati, the techi-wiki, the fuck-you hedonists, the FIC, the hectoring 20 year olds, the neo-isolationists, and others I'm sure I'm forgetting Seems to me that you're the one who sees "the enemy" behind every tree and under every rock. I'm sure there are a handful of people who vaguely resemble each of your condescending labels but the claim that they're prevailing attitudes or widespread problems to the point of actually hindering progress is simply wrong and come off as crackpot paranoia and intolerance. I'm guessing that your ideas aren't gaining any traction and in fact end up being lampooned because almost no one agrees with them. Constant repetition won't change that.

This thread has dissolved into an inflammatory personal discussion and as such is being closed. Please refrain from posting personal attacks or discussions in the SL Forums.