You Do Need Land To Enjoy SL

I don't understand all of this hatred...
Personally I appreciate Prok's post.
It seems it's hard for people to freely express themselves on these forums without being attacked. Don't hate me for this, but I think that's immature?

That may be true, but I'd wager that your enjoyment is possible only because others do own land and create content FOR your enjoyment. Cheers!

Prok is playing a game of conflict and opposition on the forums, and the responses he/she/they gets are exactly what he wants. Headbutting has been the favorite game on these forums since before Prok jumped in the pool, and will likely continue long after the FIC retires the Prok alt and props up a new puppet-enemy. In the meantime, the pro-Prok and anti-Prok players have a symbiotic relationship, each increasing the other's prominence with every spume of vitriol.

Is it immature? No moreso than playing House on the internet or making cartoon images schtup.

These are all lies or...

...you have me mixed up with someone else?

Because I've never talked to you in the game. If I've talked to your alt, the same still holds true, I haven't said what you claim, in public, in local chat/say. Sorry, but you're just plain wrong, and I don't understand why you need to pursue this?

I'm not interested in "gaming the forums".

In any event, you need to be aware that if something is not written on an avatar's Second Life profile, it is not to be disclosed. We've had a crystal-clear interpretation of that on the forums here from Pathfinder. I'm not sure what part of that you don't understand, that you need to persist with what you *think* you know or what you imagine you heard.\

The reality is, you're unable to come up with viable arguments against what I say on the merits, so you're reaching and grasping for all kinds of straws. It just reveals the paucity of your arguments.

True -- perhaps I misunderstood the topic of the thread.

Yes, Secondlife would be very odd if nobody owned land.

Content? I can create content without owning land, it just can't be laying around anywhere.

However, you can be very happy in SL without owning any land yourself.

Aimee Weber: I've mentioned before but for those just tuning in... I have never owned land in Second Life and I doubt I ever well. There is too much stuff to see to get tied down to a plot.

But it's all a matter of preference. Your fun may vary.

si Money
I agree. I have a 4096m^2 land allocation that I haven't used in almost 2 years now. I quite enjoy SL without owning any land.

Philo Hatfield: That may be true, but I'd wager that your enjoyment is possible only because others do own land and create content FOR your enjoyment. Cheers!

Prokofy Neva: 9. When you buy land, you tend to become more responsible in the game. You are grounded, literally. You tend to grief less. You tend to fly around aimlessly less. You tend to nest more, build, invite friends over more, etc. You are then part of a greater building block of civilization that makes the world a better place. When you have land, you begin to care about how a sim looks.

So I think this was the best part of the post as well, someone else quoted it.

This, I can agree with!

Well yes. People all over SL do. I wasn't trying to say buying land wasn't fun. I was trying to say that NOT buying land isn't NOT fun.



Not that you were referring to me, Prok, but on the off chance that you were...

grief less I never grief, ever. I don't even retaliate, I just file abuse reports.

fly around aimlessly less I really don't do this. I go to sites recommended by friends.

build OOF yes. I build. I build a LOT.

invite friends over more I normally have a sizable entourage wherever I go.

...building block of civilization... I contribute in a LOT of non-land related ways, but when it comes to land I built a large chunk of Hawthorne and made considerable contributions to Umber.

But like I said...it's all a matter of preference. I don't want to say owning land isn't fun. I just want to say that the Aimee Weber model of SL play has its advantages

pfft! you grief me all the time.

Emotional grief doesn't count.

I think the main problem is the differance between NEED and WANT.

You can have a lot of fun here without having land. Owning land is not a requirement to socialize, build, or explore.

Personally owning an island sim makes my SL life more fun. I WANT to own land, but I don't expect other people to pay for my fun, nor am I irresponsible in spending money $L or $US that I don't have and can't afford. I live within my means, and someday if my means don't support land, I will have fun in SL regardless.

To help clarify something mentioned earlier: based on the total number of winners of the April Developers Bonus (73; 2-percent) there are approximately 3,650 residents paying US$5 or more in tier fees at present. Please note that's not the total number of players that own land, just those paying tier fees above and beyond their monthly premium.
--

If I'm a new player and I've paid U$10 for a Lifetime Basic account a jump to almost $120/year simply for the "right" to own land might seem steep. The classic example for overcoming this cost is for the player to convert their increased weekly stipend to US$ and pay for it that way. That's a L$2,500 monthly nut to crack for rich, creamy Premium play. Less than L$84 a day. If the player increases their total parcel size to 1024sq.m they now need to come up with L$3,750 monthly (and probably expend their entire stipend). That's L$125 a day (US fifty-cents). [Yeah, it's actually _slightly_ more when you include GOM and PayPal transaction fees, the point is to show a person how _cheap_ it is to own a small parcel in SL.]

However, if the player uses their parcel for commercial purposes, then they _shouldn't_ subsidize their business using their stipend. The goal (hopefully) is to have a profitable business that makes enough of a profit to cover the player's monthly premium (and tier fees, if any). A resident can build a very nice store on a 512sq.m parcel with 117-prims. Whether they grow and expand their business or run it into ruination is up to them. The daily net for either a 512m or 1024m parcel remains the same respectively, L$84 or L$125.

L$84 a day to hang on to your L$512/512sq.m First Land parcel and premium "status" is as low as it goes. Based on this level of risk-reduction _any_ resident that would like to own land can (and any resident that doesn't want to own land, doesn't have to). One aspect of SL is that any player can "bootstrap" from a Basic account to a Premium membership and higher tier fees using their own pluck and determination.

Well I pay forty bucks a month to have 8k of land, I use about 6k, and I have no business, no club, or no discernable source of SL income. I just like to build stuff. But then for me SL is entertainment, and for forty bucks a month I get hours of entertainment. Cheap.

Not only that but I perform a public service: I own land so Aimee doesn't have to. Since you have to own land to ahve fun in sl, its a good arrangement. Aimee has the fun, and I have the land. I'm sure there are a few others who can piggy back their fun on to my land. Maybe I shoud rent fun out for $10linden a Sqr. Meter? I could be SL's first fun baron!

No, you don't need land to enjoy SL. But it helps.

Frankly I rather enjoy the freedom of not having land at all. If I get the urge to build I can always go to one of the many sandboxes - meet interesting creative people, their builds , AND you don't have to hardly care what you do or even clean up.

3650 / 28471* = 12.8% of sl population owns land

* from http://secondlife.com/

Seems like monkey-math to me.

People who have premium accounts with the 512 for free don't pay tier. Yet they own land. People who own those free 4096s from the beta/charters era (what you call it doesn't matter, please, let's just call it "feted" -- they don't pay tier. Yet they all own land.

So please, re=do your numbers.

When you refer to "monkey-math" you unwittingly insult the whole of monkey culture, and help to perpetuate an anti-simian mindset which is pervasive and virulent. Rather than viewing these young monkeys as capable beings filled with potential to achieve whatever they desire, you instead brand them as idiotic and incapable of even the most basic arithmetic. It *is* racist and it *is* evil because it's small-minded, insular, provincial, and arrogant, and those things tend toward the evil, IMHO. If you don't think it's about those things, take a second look. It is.

volumes about your math ability

· Each month, Linden offers a $US reward to the 2% of landowners who receive the most dwell - in proportion to the dwell their properties received. In August of 2004, US$2,308 was distributed to 36 landowners.
from: /16/ff/23421/1.html

April had 73 di awards.
from: /3/82/45416/1.html

x = total number of land holders
73 / x = 2 / 100
x = 73 * ( 100 / 2 )
x = 3650

total population = 28471
from: http://secondlife.com/

3560 / 28471 = .128201 - 12.8201 %

ookook

Careful, Comrade StoneSelf! Algebra is the tool of the TechiWiki Scripterati! You could get shot by the Komitet! Have you forgotten that it is Prokofy Stalin who has saved us from the excesses of the feted bourgeois?

Jarod Godel: What do the Lindens think of the "techie/wiki" community? Or the Feted/Fetid Inner Core?
Robin Linden: I think it's an interesting myth.

volumes about your math ability

· Each month, Linden offers a $US reward to the 2% of landowners who receive the most dwell - in proportion to the dwell their properties received. In August of 2004, US$2,308 was distributed to 36 landowners.
from: /16/ff/23421/1.html

April had 73 di awards.
from: /3/82/45416/1.html

x = total number of land holders
73 / x = 2 / 100
x = 73 * ( 100 / 2 )
x = 3650

total population = 28471
from: http://secondlife.com/

3560 / 28471 = .128201 - 12.8201 %

ookook

You can't fool me Stoneself! I see what happened as clear as an azure sky on a spring day!

You used your inner fetedness to get all those FIC bastards to dump their land! Thus skewing the numbers away from where they were obviously heading!

If the numbers don't change back to what they obviously SHOULD be - It will only prove my claims!

wikiwackyscritpyfaqyfartyfickytackylacky!

Siggy.

Exactly

And the same apply to many things people buy in their real lifes too. It raises the interesting question what one large part of our economy, not only Second Life, is based on by now

StoneSefl - you gotta stop confusing things with the damn facts!

Please, stop!

Each month, Linden offers a $US reward to the 2% of landowners who receive the most dwell - in proportion to the dwell their properties received

Where I have placed the emphasis is indeed how this line could be read.

I'm challenging the received wisdom because I don't buy the idea that there are only 12-15 percent of players owning land.

So I'd like to have another go at this number, and have a Linden pronounce on it, not cocky and arrogant old players.

It's my right to challenge the status quo. Why can't we just get the number stated explicitly, rather than backing into it from an ambiguous statement like "Each month, Linden offers a $US reward to the 2% of landowners who receive the most dwell - in proportion to the dwell their properties received".

I really think the Lindens do not intend to say "We give awards to just 2 percent of all landowners."

I think they mean to say "we give dwell to just the 2 percent of all landowners who receive the most dwell."

They take the list of those who receive a lot of dwell, as they can pull it up, the top 100 or whatever, then draw 2 percent of that. Makes sense to me. Otherwise they'd pay out a lot more.

If I'm wrong, so what? That doesn't mean I"m some math retard. It just means I questioned something that was ambiguous because I didn't believe it at face value.

You all would benefit from doing that more often yourselves.