The Nanny State

Aye!

Zoning just might be a nice idea. But there's a downside too!

The prices of land may vary based on the build. Residential plots would be priced differently than Commercial, and so on.

Without the Zoning, a single plot would cost the same regardless of what you intend to build.

So yea, it's kind of a Catch 22.

Did they just form an alliance with the woman with 52 armed nukes...or the Goreans?

I think this is probably spot on. I don't think this has much to do with trying to make the mainland safe for ma and pa kettle. I think it has everything to do with the mainland losing out to private estates that are actively managed. LL has always tried to avoid any active land management, but the market has spoken and LL isn't competing very well in the landlord business. Compared to what rentals on estates offer, LL looks like a slum lord.

As far as zoning mainland and/or themes for it - even at double prims remember the phenomenal prices garnered for Bay City?

One of my favorite sims for sentimental reasons is Blumfield. Out of curiosity I went over there yesterday to see if any plots were for sale and the asking price. Yowza!!! Prices for 512 plots were insane...and not even double prims if I recall correctly.

And then I hear about other mainland plots going for $L4 sqm. In my home sim, the prices have started going back up again. One large plot was just sold for around $L18.5 sqm. And most others are in the $L13 sqm bracket.

So...mainland prices are all over the place, but my point is it seems to be the more organized/themed/neighborhood type places are commanding the higher prices.

~ ~ ~

And now for something completely different - this just floors and amuses me at the same time: There is a plot on my home sim with a rather large build on it....the land info states it is owned/not for sale...and there is STILL a huge spinning "FOR SALE" sign over it!!!!

Thank goodness someone has finally brought up the issue of how the brutual authoritarian Linden overlords are crushing the last flower of freedom in SL into dust.

It's so nice to see a really unique thread topic.

Now that this has been brought to my attention I'll try to make a point to be outraged more often.

Jack mentioned they're looking into covenants and zoning for new mainland sims, not at changing the old ones.

And I don't think the avarage covenant of new sims will be as strict as the ones I've seen on some estates. I doubt the majority of new mainland areas will have a rule like "builds must follow the x, y or z theme".

Most new mainland sims will simply be governed by restricted zoning, forming fixed 512/1024/2048/4096 sqm lots, occasionally a lot 10% bigger than one of those for groups.
Perhaps with a corner of the land assigned to some 16 sqm lots for primming, though I bet those will be few, and LL is just going to leave about 6.25-12.5% (that's a 16th to an eight of a sim) empty and put a 5% prim bonus on lots, keeping the remainder of a sims' prims for landscaping and maybe sandboxing (set auto return to 1-3 minutes pls, gov!).

In other words: if someone would want to put an advert in such a sim, they'd have to purchase at least 512 sqm. Instead of placing an add there, they might as well put down an entire shop.

As for "old" mainland.. It will have little restrictions. But people will stay away from there and move to the new land if the addfarms remain, basically killing that bussiness. Abandoned sims may be reformed to "new-standards" sims, but they might just as well turn into a REAL creativity center overtime, a place where anything goes for building, but selfregulating, since sliding down to an addfarm or the likes will mean people leave for the new areas again, killing the sim once again.

Personally, i imagine it may be a combination of reasons.. such a huge project surely is inspired from several directions.

I think it will end up being a good thing.. and i don't think we'll see any stifled imaginations or a blandscape, nothing will be stopping (especially old mainland) parcel owners from being creative... as others have pointed out, just more.. cohesive. it may take awhile for the dust to settle, but i can see this as vastly improving the world.

as anything new.. we shall see. but i suspect while it may be partially a business move, that the Lindens also would take pride in this world and look forward to increasing the attractiveness of all of the continents in the mainland, present and future.


Until after now..

You know I thought on this.

The main worry would be them trying to censor Private Islands. Since thats where most things go on these days.

The entire mainland could eventually go Zoned/PG and as long as private island were autonomous it wouldn't be unsurmountable.

Not saying I would like it. Just thinking on the practical ramifications.

Zoning for new continents would be great. I think business and residence owners would both benefit from it. However I'm not sure how well the Lindens can handle enforcement.

The thing is that, judging by all of the _previous_ initiatives, if LL instituted a "Disney PG" policy, what would happen would be

1. Sudden blog announcement out of the blue, no warning, much outrage;

2. Random removal of lots of content in a very "look we are getting tough here grrrr" way;

3. Brief pause while people work out reasons why them doing what they did before doesn't actually contradict the letter of the new policies;

4. LL ignore all ARs and do no more enforcement.

So, you see, the Grid is safe.

Ballgag

That's really the key. It'll be interesting to see how long this next round lasts...

I suspect maybe they should have set up an "near anything goes" rated continent and a PG continent so things would be simpler than they are now with being able to see stuff in the sim next door that way if people see stuff they don't like, then they are in the wrong continent and have no right to complain.

I think to some extent this is being driven from within, by the effects of the SL economy. I mean, essentially we have:

1) The content consumers who want purely to pay money for the quality items on offer;

2) The professional content creators who want to sell their content for money, and who therefore are likely to focus on making the most popular content, because it will sell best;

3) The "for-the-love-of-it" content creators who create for the joy of it, and may/may not sell their work; these are also likely to focus on making the most popular content because many enjoy the attention and, since they love creating, creating anything is just as good;

4) The "casual/dreamer" creators who create things purely for their own use, often which is way outside the mainstream, and may or may not sell it, but who divide their time between creating their content and using it.

The problem is that group 1 are much more important to the in-world economy than group 4, because group 1 are likely to be the ones who inject the most US$ into the economy. All four groups may buy land and pay tier, but group 1 is the one most likely to be paying someone _else's_ tier too.

Group 1 are accustomed to using content made by groups 2 and 3, which may well be higher quality than that produced by group 4, because group 4 does not put all of its effort into content creation. As a result, what a group 4 person might consider their own, unique, original content is just seen as an eyesore by the group 1 person on the adjoining parcel - and economically, they _must_ be given higher priority, because they bring in more US$.

I'm not sure quite what can be done about that other than trying to find a way of making the market more flexible so that the group 4's can join one of the other groups...

I think zoning is business and self seeking decision especially if they can get 100,000L per 512m lot like they did in Bay City.
Rest of mainland they just ignore, they might institute policies like they did one's in past
but they won't really have man power to enforce it.
Those who can afford more for advertising and hype about their content of course are always going to get noticed and make more over those who don't have cash, connections, mainly into just creating and they will be lost in the crowd, few will notice because they will be
busy going to in places to go.
There will still be freedom to create, do whatever it just be about themed communities and getting most dollar people will pay for them.

Depending on how the zoning options for old sims are, I think we'll see a new cycle of land deals.
Those who have land in the good parts of mainland will of course hold on to that. But those in the incoherent, cut-up mainland may start migrating towards new sims with a zoning appropriate to their tastes.
Perhaps somebody will then find a use for the cheaper, undesirable old plots. Best case would be some entrepreneur gathering them and possibly turning them into something coherent to rival the new, officially zoned mainland.

Just musing.

If they cannot police adland properly, how in heck are they going to make sure people comply with the zoning? Get other neighbours to turn them in?

Don't worry when the new Lindens start they will make sure the mainland is safe for ads!

Oh yeah, forgot about that.

'Cause right now ads are at risk, oh yep sure are

And safe for Trafficbots!

Good Grief lets not forget the TrafficBots *roll eyes*.
I don't even want safe for me! Just police the extortionists and obvious scammers and I will be happy.

We need to add a second Picks tab now too.

To keep SL safe for people renting out their Picks.

SO they can still have those "This is my BFF Mess with her and Ill cut you" Picks.

I think I feel ill now and my mouth tastes funny

I am beginning to think the day will come when search only returns bot/pick parcels and everyone is mandated to have at least one ad they do not own on their plot of land

What really scares me about zoning are three things.

Yumi, as far as the Second Life economy goes, I'm a member of Group #4. I don't want my yurt with its mural of the life cycle of a bee on it declared an eyesore. Hey it's only eight prims including ramp, platform, and back porch.

First, strip zoning is controversial in real life. Mixed use neighborhoods are more fun for walking. It's fun to walk down the street and find a store, game, club etc... My own neighborhood on Gaeta where land prices have tripled (It's Southeastern Hartley) has an unfinished furniture store, a failed country-western club (It's never open. Don't know why?) two large residences (one with ban lines), one small ban lined residence, a Zyngo parlor above endless green desert (It's no fly and way up in the air), and a whole bunch of rental units. I did my homework when I went land shopping. I looked carefully at my neighbors. Strip zoning does not keep out ad farms. Building other stuff does.

Second, what concerns me most in my neighborhood is NOT the Zyngo Parlor though I don't like the flat green desert they leave behind. Inland Gaeta is utterly featurless without some kind of build. It's the rentals. They are classicly nice housing. They are built on top of eachother. Yumi's type 1 customer should be lining up to go inside them, but I wonder...

Is a Type 1 customer a Type 4 customer who hasn't yet done the math? I can build what I need and own land and build what I need at a fraction of what the landlady is charging. 40L/week versus 100L/week or more. I was able to figure this out with a calculator and I figured it out as a newbie.

We are heading into a recession. I can justify spending $6.66/per month for land and premium membership (no tier ona 512). I can even justify it to an outsider. It's a bit more than the cost of a combo at Subway or Blimpie's, or two or three Starbucks. You get the idea. It's a lot harder to justify spending $20.00/40.00/$100.00/month for entertainment when times ar enough. Customer types 1,2,3, and 4 all live in the same real world economy.

So I look at the landlady's pretty houses (which are indeed quite pretty) and wonder "what happens if these things don't rent?" A failed business means the ad farmers could arrive. Lots of failed businesses might just mean that ad farming may be one of the few viable ways to make money in Second Life. That may be why it exists.

Third, none of us are working with accurate numbers. I could do my own rent vs. own math, but none of us knows the numbers for all of SL or the mainland. Does LL make money on every premium membership (whether they buy land, upload textures, or use their Lindens to rent or buy other people's creations)? Do they make money on 512 land owners? Do they really only make money on big spenders be they investors, deeply committed hobbyists, nonprofits, or corporations who buy huge swaths of land and pay a lot of tier?

For every big spender, how many little spenders are there? If there are a hundred 512 first home buyers for every island buyer, then it makes sense to encourage the creation of more 512 first home buyers. This also pushes out the bow in the Lawrence curve by creating a middle class (Probbly a combination of all four economic types) and makes for a good community. If 512's make money, then it makes sense for LL to let the bottom drop out of the land market to ease the cost of entry into land ownership.

If 512's don't make money (and the same is true of simple payment on file members who don't own land), then it makes sense for LL to cater to the needs of large landowners no matter what their stripe.

If only the purchase of islands really makes money, well for all the talk, the mainland can rot. We lend legitimacy to the final product. Actually, the mainland can't rot because it is currently NOT work safe. That is why corporate islands exist, but those entering through specialized portals eventually find their way to the mainland and... This makes zoned mainland attractive to give the corporate and nonprofit types a work safe place to explore.

None of us knows the economics that work behind the scenes. Without that we are all just whistling in the dark. I just hope they have a plan for what to do with my failed landlord's land as much as I hate strip zoning, and I hope it's a plan that does not make me change my yurt.

As a category 4 resident, I have to say I am not very happy with your suggestion that a lack of mercenary objective implies that my content is objectionable. Many of the worst eyesores are commercial premises, and the most abundant, huge floating spinning advertisment blocks, are entirely made and used by those seeking to take real money out of the SL economy.

I don't know whether you have data to support your assertion concerning the relative economic inputs from your resident categories, or whther it is mere conjecture. I do know that my own financial input is substantial.

For a complete analysis, I think you need to include an important component of the economy, the dealers and renters of land.

All that having been said, I would agree with the main thrust of your argument....that the future implied in Kapor's birthday address indicates reducing concern for the creative and increasing concern for the consumer masses and those who supply them.