Group Investment/ Monitary Donation/

I would be nice to allow group members to donate money for a group. Or to allow group fundraising. This would provide for a group to beable to quckly purchase land assets

Nick,

I think it's important that someone reasonable should say something before one of the more unreasonable among us does...

I believe that you have some good ideas, but the method you've used to present them to the community was fairly er, tactless. It is somewhat likely that you'll get flamed for your posts, or at least have them ignored, for the following reasons:

1) Your join date of May 2005 is working against you here. On public forums, people listen the most to the people with the most credibility. There are others here who have taken the time to build up this credibility, but you haven't yet had this opportunity. There's a little bit of the "seek first to understand" mechanism working here - by making good comments on other topics, you develop repore and are able to come from a more substantial position when it's time to make your own suggestions. My suggestion: lurk awhile. See what SL is all about. THEN, measure your ideas against what you see already and make your suggestions.

2) Anytime you post a pile of suggestions all at once in separate posts (filling most of a page in this forum) you're going to lose some points for style in addition to peoples' attention. By trickling your ideas out one at a time you give ample time for commentary and will generate better discussion.

3) I think it's marvellous to bring in ideas from other environments, i.e. Half Life 2 and Maya. In fact, I made a feature suggestion today that basically said to rip off Trillian's contact list mechanisms and UI. However, keep in mind that SL is as much a community as it is a game, and many people may take your suggestions as saying that "such and such is better than SL". Not that I believe that, but just a warning that some may.

4) You really ought to have researched your ideas a little further. For example, you're "PositionME consent" concept already does exist in SL to some extent in the form of animation permissions. Again, this goes along with lurking...you need to stick around long enough to sound like you know what you're talking about. When you suggest things that are already there (although perhaps in a slightly different form than you envisioned), it will be hard for people to take you seriously.

5) The 'one-liner' format you chose for your suggestions doesn't really help your case(s) much. Generally speaking, you should provide some backup to your suggestions for two reasons. First, it helps validate the need for that feature and is more persuasive. Second, it allows for deeper, more meaningful discussion on the topic. I suggested trickling out your ideas, but if you really like the one-liners, you might consider aggregating all the ideas into a single, "Here are a few things that SL needs" post.

I hope that others reading this don't see this as a derogatory post regarding your person. It's obvious that you're a clever guy, having seen some of the deficiencies we have in the system, and I really hope that you can contribute to SL on the whole. Just keep the above in mind, and I think it will help you make some friends here...friends who will listen

Morse, I imagine you're trying to be helpful but you're awfully close to the usual oldbie/FIC hectoring mode, "Let me tell you how it's going to be, son."

I haven't read all this fellow's post, but he's said the obvious thing many of us have said about the group tools for months, also being new, just a little less new.

The previous generations of players didn't like group land projects or if they did, had all the land in the world to go on with them, either with prim tax waivers, or subsidies from the Lindens, or the free 4096 -- as you well know.

It's different now, and you have to respect that, rather than filling up people with lectures about how they have to be.

Nick has said the obvious thing, again: groups need a way to collect money better than the idiotic circulating of everything that comes in instantly in a round-robin dividing it up among all members.

So Nick put your suggest down more coherently in FEATUREs.

i used to do it all the time just set a object to group ownwer ship and sell for a certain price that should give you your desired effect

tisks tisks tisks all he ask was a simple question

New to SL maybe in the industry 12 years. I like seeing things move forward. As each idea is a seaprate idea, I made separate posts. I'm not a very young man so I'll forgive your style.

I just want to make sure that this is not considered a flame or putdown of the exellent work of Linden Labs. Any examples given of other product behavior is only inteded as examples to illustrate the concepts I wish to discuss. They are intended to remind the reader of something they may have noticed in another product themselves or to spur an interested party to investigate. Thank you for your respect and patience.
Nick

Yeah, Morse, nothing personal but

STFU.

Ignoring the bad grammar, here is a list of features that SL could use:

Group Treasury: instead of the money being payed out to the players, have to collect.
Group Treasurer: Someone who can spend the money in the group treasury. The Treasurer would also be able to grant PERMISSION_DEBIT to scripts
Treasury Books: Detailed record of what the money was spent on; could be configured viewable by group members or open to the general public.

New function:
integer llGroupRank(key id)
returns:
FALSE
GROUP_MEMBER
GROUP_OFFICER
GROUP_TREASURER

This way the script could detected the rank and ask the right permission question.

WTF? How am I supposed to reply to something like this? Oh ok, wait I'll just let YOU pick one, I think these are fairly appropriate given the tone of your comment:

1) "I know you are, but what am I?"

2) "I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you!"

3) "Blaze is a Ner-rd, Blaze is a Ner-rd, Blaze is a Ner-rd..."

4) <insert snide comment about Blaze's mom here>

And honestly, that's about all I have to say about that.

Morse, I thought your remarks were helpful and well-intentioned. They seemed to echo the common nettiquette of most online communities I've been part of. (And though I've been in many such groups over the past 15 years, I'm hardly an "oldbie" or "FIC" in SL.)

NickArthur, by now you're probably wondering what the heck FIC stands for. If the suspense is really getting to you, search the General forum on Feted Inner Core, but only if you've got a lot of time to kill.

All that being said, I agree with the general suggestion. Here's a good summary thread that discussed it recently. The proposal that goes with this thread is here, in case NickArthur (or anyone else) wants to vote for it.

neko

GREAT idea

And here I was all this time thinking that FIC was Friends.........In.........Commerce. Show's how much I know eh. Post away NickArthur. It's always nice to see those feature suggestions roll by again. We could dispense with the whole voting poll fiasco, if we haven't already, by simply scriptping a count of the number of times items have been mentioned here.

Group code revision, despite previous comments, have been on the top of the FIC list since I joined. There have been countless threads, inworld discussions, and emails on the subject. Unfortunately, the Lindens have never rated the need very highly and, according to the voting page, they've been wise to do so because the non-FIC community at large could apparently not care less about group considerations.

Oh wait, that doesn't support the theory does it. Where'd I put that blast helmet. It's a pain in the butt when everything you own is green. It just all blend together.