Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

Promised Linden response at over 500 votes

Cliff Commons
Registered User
Join date: 28 Apr 2006
Posts: 7
05-02-2006 08:12
I was just looking at all of the name change capability proposals, and one of them, Proposal #231, which goes back over a year, has well more than 500 votes with no Acknowledgement. If you combined this with the half dozen other proposals on the same subject (the newest already having over 300 votes), I think you find that it's one of the most voted upon proposals in SL. It would be nice to get some kind of response to these multiple proposals. I understand that this may be difficult to do, as there would have to be some way of changing ownerships from the old name to the new name, which I suppose could be quite cumbersome. I would be happy if adding an additional avatar to my account for the one time $9.95 fee would do the job..ie...the new avatar would share the inventory and ownership rights with the account holder name, and if this is already the case that information should be noted somewhere easier to find, then all of those name change proposals could be marked as completed and the votes returned to the residents.

I also like the "alias" proposal for allowing a first name change without changing the underlying account name, tied into the account name database to avoid duplicate names. This looks like it might be easier and quicker to accomplish than all of the updating necessary to change the property ownerships that would be required for a name change. This is discussed earlier in this forum.
Angel Fluffy
Very Helpful
Join date: 3 Mar 2006
Posts: 810
I agree, we need more progress on the voting system.
05-02-2006 10:09
I'm just going to respond to ideas about changing the voting system (like getting more Linden response to proposals, giving people more votes, etc).... to try to encourage thought on this topic.

Old vote aimed at making the Lindens respond more readily to votes, including a promise by LL to review all votes with over 500 votes :
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=477

Proposal to get more people involved in the voting process, by redirecting them to the feature voting page whenever the grid is down but the feature voting page is up :

Votes aimed at enabling us to vote on more propositions :
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=984
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=132

Another excellent idea is to get more people to actually VOTE, and to take some of the stress off Lindens when they're dealing with grid maintenance :

http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=1349

I agree, the voting system needs reform.
Specifically :
1) We need to encourage more people to vote.
2) We need to let people vote on more proposals (there are so many good ones, and ones which overlap each other, that it's hard to fairly allocate votes).
3) We need to know that LL will pay attention to the feature voting system.
4) We need to have a system where any proposal with less than 10 votes for more than 24 hours is deleted. This would cut down on votes which are proposed by one person and which nobody else supports - so that we could focus attention on the proposals which really do deserve more attention. Really, anyone if they care about a proposal can get a friend with 10 free votes to place their 10 on that proposal, so this would only cut out votes that nobody cares about.

The basic problems are :
1) LL don't respond to proposals when they have plenty of votes.
2) Not enough votes to apply votes to everything that deserves a vote.
3) Hard to find the good proposals amongst the bad ones.
4) Not enough people vote.

The feature voting system is a great idea, but it needs some reform to make it more useful.
Angel Fluffy
Very Helpful
Join date: 3 Mar 2006
Posts: 810
05-02-2006 10:24
Specifically, the following proposals are duplicates of existing ones which have been responded to by LL, and thus, should also be responded to by LL.
For example, there are a lots of proposals related to groups which I know are being considered for implementation becuase identical proposals elsewhere have been marked as "in development", but which don't have any Linden comments on them.

Some examples of proposals the Lindens really should close and release votes from :

Already implemented/completed, using paypal as identity confirmation for signup : http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=1110

Implementation in progress, more control over groups :
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=1274
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=1261

Possibly redundant, more group stuff :
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=567

Possibly already implement / being looked into as part of groups :
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=448
http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=344