Could the Lindens block SL from stabilising as a goldrush economy?

"Your world, your imagination."

You can indeed create anything in SL that you can imagine. How WELL you can create it, though, is limited by the tools SL provides as well as your own talents and budget. I don't think a lot of people feel betrayed by that reality.

In truth, I think that the imaginations of the greatest mass of people in SL extend no further than looking hawt for the first time in their lives, or being able to buy and wear (for 2$ US!) gorgeous designer gowns. A smaller, but still significant, percentage are delighted to finally be able to own that beachfront bungalow or mountain resort they will never have in RL. And I think all those people are better off, yes, soothed in their RL, to be able to have these experiences.

So I say, more power to SL's catchy slogan. Fraud is not such a problem in SL that it requires a clamp-down such as what you propose ... at least not yet.
.

Common sense, yes. Instantly realising all the social mores of a new world is not common sense. Especially when most virtual environments have different ones. In WoW, you don't expect to buy a dragon slaying sword and then find there are no dragons in the game. Sure, SL is not WoW, but realizing that this applies in the negative sense (ie, the experience can be incoherent) as well as the positive sense (ie, you don't have to grind) can take some time.



I don't actually know. Although I do know that I'm not seeing them scheduling any rock concerts.

You don't have to realise "all social mores" to learn about clubs before building one, or about virtual rockstar-dom before buying a prim guitar. Or even asking a basic question like, "so how does this guitar actually make me a rock star?" Take responsibility for your own actions.

I think "you can create anything, but not well" is a bit of a cop-out, really. If you have something in your imagination and can't recreate it with at least some minimum level of quality, then you effectively can't create it.

But even then, the betraying reality isn't so much in the tools and creative limits of SL, but in the _social_ limits - the same things which create the society which many people, let's be honest, come to SL to escape from. A virtual world is far, far more defined by the behavior of the people in it than the technical capabilities it offers. That's why most of them have to use their technical design to shape people's behavior.



And that's fantastic! Don't get me wrong here, SL is great when it works, and for the people it works for. The question is if we need to insulate the people whom it _doesn't_ work for. If we can do this without hurting the people it _does_ work for, then there seems to be very little reason not to.

The problem is that the very suggestion that the content might be going to waste or unintentionally misdirecting people is treated like far too much of a taboo for it to be a minor problem. I've been screamed at by creators before for daring to suggest that somebody who purchased a cheerleader uniform and animations might do it because they want to lead cheers. You only have to look at some of the excuses on this very thread. "It's ok if people buy a prim guitar thinking it'll make them a rock star because they might be the one in a million person who's inspired, by the resulting failure, into taking a totally different track." - I mean, come on, you have to admit that is reaching quite a bit!

If creators are so sure that this is such a tiny part of the economy, then why don't they say, "Hey, sorry you were disappointed, it happens, give me the item back and here's your money back?" I mean, if it really is such a tiny part of the economy, it wouldn't affect their income much, right? Right?

They may have been advised, "you can buy a guitar and outfits then find somewhere to perform." They might be told, "it lets you play music and dance to it with built-in animations." Asking questions alone is no good. The answers could be lies, or more likely, exaggerations.

Yumi, look at your statement above. You seem to be seriously suggesting that content creators shoulder the burden of compensating people who are not able to fulfill all their dreams, immediately, in SL. You can't be serious.

Plus, tell me how the content creator is to distinguish between the disappointed dreamer and the sneaky adolescent who returns everything they buy after wearing it to a party?

Well anyway, I think the bedrock of my thoughts on this is: Protecting people from themselves is not only impossible, but invariably ends up limiting people who don't need protecting. And, I think we are doomed to respectively disagree on this one. Catch you on your next thread, Yumi!
.

No, but I _do_ suggest that they should compensate people who have tried to fulfil a dream that just _can't_ be fulfilled in SL. You can't be a virtual rock star in SL. You can't be a cheerleader, either. In both cases the reason is the same: ultimately you would just be standing running canned animations, and nobody's going to enjoy that as a performance.

Now if they've tried to do it and failed even though it was possible then that's a different situation. For example, I wouldn't expect the manufacturers of firework launchers to compensate people who fail to give interesting fireworks displays, because that _is_ possible in SL.



Now, that's a fair point. It's difficult. But do you think that, if there _were_ some way of distinguishing this, then the disappointed dreamers should be compensated? I mean, I suggested one way of avoiding this - that if you take the compensation, you have to leave SL, and even if you come back you can't have another account with compensation protection.

You certainly have an interesting perspective on it all. Good luck with your campaign!

I will assume that you have never ever heard of live music in Second Life.

I have personally seen more than 110 avatars living the virtual rock star life in Second Life.

I randomly select and post this picture here as an example of one such virtual rock star in SL (though admittedly, he plays the blues, not rock and roll (at least according to one event ad: "SRV is among the foremost blues musicians in SL. He plays an incredible mix of old favorites coupled with his soulful originals."

Because when you have 15,000 items in inventory, what else do you need? My partner can mention just about anything and I will probably have a copy in inventory.

If you are playing live music, then you are not a "virtual" rock star. You have to play the music IRL.

If you are saying that I am wrong, I would be all too delighted to be proven so, so please do.

Exactly. So that number of content buyers is probably different people each time. Yet, they're churning - after spending that money, statistically it seems many leave SL.

I've done that, when someone's been disappointed with something I've made, or changed the product for them, or let pick something they liked better from my shop. And I'm not the only one. But we're talking something that's happened less than half a dozen times over the past three years... If LL was the kind of economy you're claiming it is, it wouldn't be something that happens every few months, it'd be routine.

Well, first of all, that's really good of you! It isn't really good evidence for the state of the economy though because many people might be dissatisfied and not speak up about it. I learned that lesson the hard way when I found someone warning others about a product that _I_ made - it turns out, that it didn't work properly on the Macintosh client. Not owning a Mac I hadn't known that, but - in spite of the notecard that came with the product asking people to IM or notecard me if they had any problems at all - nobody had told me they were having trouble. Once I found out, I was able to warn Mac users and raise it as a bug (it was actually a bug in the Mac client, not my item) and it was fixed shortly. So yea, since then I've been a bit paranoid about people being quietly dissatisfied. Now I know why so many companies are desperate for people to fill out surveys!

Are you searching the right places? If they write in their profile that they are a rock star, wear stupid clothing, own a prim yacht, buy a prim limo, and have sexxors with lots of groupies, are they not living like a rock star? When I think living the dream of being a rock star, giving concerts comes in pretty low on the list. But then I have no musical ability at all.

If they don't have talent in RL to perform music, then nothing is going to give them that in any virtual world. If they don't understand that, well then maybe their doctor needs to increase the meds.

Should I post that picture again? There is that guy. He is up on stage inside the virtual world of SL. There were (and here you have to believe me, or I could hunt down a crowd shot) a crowd of people watching, applauding, and throwing money at him. I've seen his name in event ads all the time. He is, in effect, a virtual rock star.

Virtual? But . . but he plays live music that he magically beams into SL!

He plays music that is heard inside second life. He has a virtual representation of himself on his computer screen, and on the screen of up to 80 other people (I've been to one concert where there were 95 avatars there). Those audience members are also virtual representations.

The guy's famous in SL, in the music circles within SL. He is a virtual rock star. Does anyone have a bloody clue who he is in real life? I don't know. I know Dexter I. was/is a real life rock star that plays in SL. Plays in SL and RL. The picture is not of Dexter though. For all I know that picture is of someone that has never ever played live music in front of a life audience in Real Life. (or, conversely, he could be a real life rock star)

SL has allowed him to "pretend" to be a rock star. To explore that world. To see if anyone would want to hear his music. He is a virtual rock star.

That depends. What did _they_ want to do in living like a rock star?



Other virtual worlds have ways of making it possible, though. For example, in Star Wars Galaxies, you could play a musician, who also played canned loops. The difference is that when you played them, others could heal their "mental damage" by listening to you; thus, they did have a genuine reason to listen, and a reason to applaud, because you were doing them good.

So it is possible for a virtual world to support these things. I'm not saying that would be a good direction for SL to go in, but saying that everyone should just intrinsically know that no virtual world can possibly allow that, isn't justified - some can.

From your description, he is a minor "Blues/rockstar" in RL. If it is the person I think it is. He has cut a couple albums and does some minor touring, like many of the live musicians in SL have.

No, it has acted as a conduit for his real life musical ability. That's great, but it's not the same as getting to play a rock star purely within the virtual world.

My SWG days are many years ago. I left in the first couple months when they let creature handlers run wild ruining the atmosphere. But SL does a much better job of allowing people to live like rockstars than SWG ever attempted.

It depends on what you mean by "living like rockstars". If you mean living the virtual high-life, then yes. But if you mean performing, then currently no (at least not in a virtual sense). That's not to say that SWG's performances were in any way satisfying either - I played a dancer there in a trial period for about two days and then quit, because it was basically equivalent to camping (and because I got mugged by a rat or something while I was travelling between towns). But at least there was the reassurance that people did have some reason to pay attention.

heh, I should have posted a picture of someone else then. You are undercutting my argument that "anyone" could test their voice in SL and try to be a "virtual rockstar".

I have no idea what you mean. He gets on a virtual stage in front of SL avatars and plays music. Truely confused here.