Fraudlent Legallinden sploders NON payment

occassionally these new legal linden sploders DO NOT pay out 100% , alot of times i have been receiveing you won 23 lindens and never payed out constantly reporting these claims to LINDEN labs with no response from Linden labs about this issue should be stopped you always run those surveys , asking why secondlife is worst or better then previous years well one answer to that problem is you allow the fraudlent system to operate when its clearly a scam.
You also allow bots- campers that is why you are having so many problems with your databases are clearly over congested
Your vison has gone completely down hill since 2005.. by allowing free accounts , letting anyone that has a email join , therefore allowing minors on the main grid when they should legally be age verfied by YOU Linden labs . its your servers your game you are legally responsable for age verfication not your customers , since you maintain and operate your own TEEN GRID FOR UNDERAGE YOU SHOULD BE HELD LIABLE FOR AGE VERFICATION!

Ah, but you see, LL only has to make a reasonable token effort in dealing with minors on the grid. Which includes us reporting the ones we happen to find.

And if a 'sploder isn't paying out.. why do you keeping going there?

its a networked legal linden sploder there all over in different clubs , tmyentertainment all ran by his website , peopel buy his sploders and the scripts run it ,occasionally it doesnt pay out lindens to people that have clearly won

http://tmyentertainment.com/index.php/xploder/tracker

here is a link to the whole system its not just one area

Why not talk to the club owners when the sploder fails to pay out?

**Rubs his eyes**

Has there ever been policy on sploders, a la the gambling ban?


It seems rather fishy that these are still popular...

Here ya go...
...............................................................................
...............................................................................
...............................................................................

That oughta give you enough to last a while. Please use 'em.

Is there such a thing as a "Linden-legal" 'sploder?

I can't imagine there is, because the thing that makes a 'sploder a 'sploder is banned.

Anyway, why are you tying a whole bunch of unrelated mishmash issues together, some of which don't have anything to do with LL?

you forgot to mention banks, furries, ageplay, and Gor.

Actually there are no LL legal sploder, ar it and let the support people deal with it.

As is LL does far more for age verification than is normally required by law, the age verification system in beta exceeds all laws related to online age verification.

Have a nice day

The OP wins for the longest continuous sentence for the day.

Vampires.

It's like the police-legal marijuana. They just don't seem to take my word for it.

So, non-paying, probably illegal (regardless of being labeled otherwise) 'spolders are the fault of age players?

The Wall-o-text with minimalistic punctuation was rather hard to follow.

Or: "Officer, sometimes this weed just doesn't get me 100% high. It's a rip-off!"

I didn't say the sentence made any sense. Just that it was LONG.

I think it may even count as a 'Run-on fragment', which is a very rare thing indeed.

I thought it was the product of 1000 monkeys at 1000 keyboards.

I started to think it was the alt of another forum poster... but she's usually coherent... insane but coherent

There are legal sploders. Some of them are vote-based, others are based on some kind of skill activity, like clicking a temp-rezzed ball faster than anyone else. They eliminate the element of chance that makes it illegal.

That's what I meant, really. What makes a 'sploder in my mind IS the element of chance. Otherwise, they just aren't 'sploders; they are 'skloders or something else.

Although I would have to argue that clicking on a temp-rezzed ball has a similar order of magnitude for randomness as any PRNG. LOTS of random factors involved there. As such, those would also could be considered illegal under the ban.

Tal, I admire and respect you - and, you would argue that quantum uncertainty would provide an order of randomness enough to be considered illegal.

The sploder that I make is timed - and while I have had three customers (out of hundreds) have theirs returned by Lindens, all three were appealed and reversed, meaning that they were allowed by Lindens. One of the keys (as far as the last-pay-in type) is that it apparently must display the name of the last person who paid in.

On the topic of the tmyentertainment I believe (as from what I've read from the creator and from the several hundred posts on the topic on these forums) they fall outside the law and the rules against gambling because they don't require you to pay to play (if you pay it it's a donation and doesn't enter you to win or raise your chances of winning), you can just click to enter and with the exception of a small percentage that require you to verify that your one person on the tmy website (to prevent alt abuse) there's no real condition other than to be able to click a simple object to win which oddly enough is the same criteria needed to be an adfarmer

jus today i run into guy who say, "Sir Tristram, violer d'amores, fr'over the short sea, had passencore rearrived from North Armorica on this side the scraggy isthmus of Europe Minor to wielderfight his penisolate war: nor had topsawyer's rocks by the stream Oconee exaggerated themselse to Laurens County's gorgios while they went doublin their mumper all the time: nor avoice from afire bellowsed mishe mishe to tauftauf thuartpeatrick: not yet, though venissoon after, had a kidscad buttended a bland old isaac: not yet, though all's fair in vanessy, were sosie sesthers wroth with twone nathandjoe," an i think it could be a better runon, what do u think?

P.S. Bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonnerronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthurnuk!

*shrug*

You pay money in, and participate in a selection method which involves randomness to a large degree, and you get lots more money back out.

Call me old-fashioned, but that sounds like the very definition of gambling, to me. I would tend to say Poker has more skill involved than that "legal 'sploder". However, it is still gambling, because there is risk involved in that you may not recover your wager.

Now, *I* am not opposed to gambling. Fools and their money and all that rot. However, I despise the redefinition of an activity (as well as the words used to describe it) to make it "legal" under some rule.

So, pretty much as far as I can tell, the only "legal" 'sploders either don't take wagers, or pay out in something which is not convertible to L$ (no-transfer prizes, for example), neither of which will be popular for very long.

Anyway, it isn't my rule; it is up to the Lindens to decide what is and is not "gambling" under their rule. I would only hope that they remain consistent on its enforcement, which is known to be rather spotty.