SLCC 2006 Feedback Survey (Even if you didn't attend)

By the way, what do you think is an acceptable amount of time to have the survey available for and/or how many responses do you think are necessary?

The reason I ask is because if we are to analyze and release the results in addition to researching the ability to make changes based on those results we will need ample time to do so. I.e. Location for SLCC 2007. Thus meaning we need to have a cut off date for the surveys.

PS I made a Survey prim thingie in world if anyone wants one IM me or go to Indigo 83,77,88 and grab a copy of the one next to the SLB Atm.

The SLCC is reliant solely on sponsorship money and t-shirt sales and ticket sales. These costs allow us to pay for the convention spaces, catering, printed programs, banners, t-shirts and other schwag etc. Everyone who runs the convention does it voluntariliy and is unpaid. At best, you may get a free dinner and some drinks out of it as a reward.

I really hope that in the future we can move towards a structure of having some paid organizers/volunteers. Earlier this year, The Future United group was formed as the non-profit organization behind the SLCC. Being a non-profit organization granted us the ability to get reduced rates on the convention space, catering etc. Now that there is a non-profit in place one of the avenues that can be explored is applying for grants so that in the future we may be able to have some paid organizers and volunteers.

Currently, we are working on the infastructure because we know that things need to be done differently. We know what works and what doesn't and where we have room for improvement.



It is a lot of very hard word and can be exhausting and frustrating at times. When you deal with a team solely comprised of volunteers you have to deal with varying levels of committment.



We understand that the in-world aspect really needs to be reworked to accomodate for technical glitches and just a better performance.



Flip has explained what happened in other responses. It came down to a judgement call having to have been made and not enough in-world resources to disseminate this information.



The responses in the survey have helped us garner the importance of the in-world survey and have provided us with several suggestions in moving forward.

I just posted the link and a little information about it as a news article on http://sl.stratics.com and it'll be listed all over Stratics Central until other game news bumps it down. Hope it helps!

Broccoli

That's an amazing statement.

Its not really a "community" convention when you fail to include the "community" nuf said.

It certainly is - I'd missed that. A fascinating insight from someone presumably privy to the priorities and concerns of the inner circle at the time. So is he saying we were all idiots when we struggled against the lag to reach little virtual tables 170 times over to listen to mediocre music from Astrin when we could have been using our RL equipment alone to listen to the best there is ? Why did we do it but for a belief in immersion ?

Maybe the in-world sponsors should get their money back ?

Next year there must be a inworld "product champion" who believes in, and is dedicated to, the concept of an immersive experience, and has the authority to make it happen. I just can't get over the superb build Eggy and team produced, never to be switched on. They must be heartbroken, though strangely silent.

Thanks so much. I keep forgetting to check out SL Stratics. There are so many external SL related websites that it gets hard to keep track of them all.

You'll have to take that up with Linden Lab, or ask an estate owner for a copy of the email. My copy was deleted long ago. Despite our best efforts, the SLCC team has little to do with the code that powers estates in SL. As for your query, no one on the SLCC team is paid in any way; for the past two years, we have been a 100% volunteer organization giving countless hours of time to pull the event off. It's been a true team effort.

As for your other concerns, I showed up personally three different times to shout out the URL stream and explain why it wasn't being shown on the screens. Sorry if you didn't catch me any of those times, but I was a little busy in RL and didn't have to time to sit in SL explaining the circumstances all day long. And as to your query about in-world sponsors getting money back... there were no solely in-world sponsors this year. All had a presence at the RL Convention, on the web site, on printed materials, and an in-world plot.

As to Coco's (and others) comments on our involvement next year, I don't believe I've given a blanket statement anywhere. I've just said that if I am involved it will be in a smaller support role. I still haven't made a final decision as I wanted some time to decompress before making a full decision.

Newfie: please grow up already. You're opera is REALLY tired.

Next year, I think it is fairly clear that it will be up to the in-world community who isn't attending in RL to self organize SLCC viewing parties. Lewis did a great job with this as an example this year, as did Transylvania, and to scale the event to the number of in-world viewers, it will have to be distributed throughout the grid. Estate sims, even with their maximum of 100 avatars per sim, simply won't be enough.

And wow - Cat's back! I'm stunned!

Regards,

-Flip

That may have been my fault. I said something recently to the extent of "its no secret that Flipper and I are not going to be involved next year, at least not to the extent that we were. Also that I doubt that we would be completely uninvolved." All that said it would be fairly shitty of us to have just said convention done and walked away without wrapping up loose ends and laying the groundwork for next year.

That's a great idea coco! Seeing them live, that's cool, but I'd be happier seeing them canned and played later as opposed to not at all.

I also really like the idea of having "viewing parties" such as what Lewis Nerd did, as opposed to a central location. Like Jennyfur said, with over 500,000 people that can be really tricky. I was at Lewis Nerd's to view, and it was done wonderfully. Imagine if there had been four or five folks doing the same thing... Of course, if it was recorded with video cameras and not streamed live this wouldn't be as important. Heck, maybe we should try to do both

If you do not like my opinions on the matter, then you are free to exercise your right to the /mute button. Then again, seems like after reading the last dozen points or so, it seems I'm not the only person making the statement.

Please stick to the facts, not belittlements and dismissals, and you might actually get somewhere.


- Newfie

Some quick comments:

1. If you want to guarantee a survey is seen by all, I personally recommend making one yourself. Just because the organizers made a survey doesn't mean it's the end-all be-all. As we see in the forums many times, having a survey made by anyone can make a powerful statement. There are a number of free survey places on the web. Make one to your liking and I'll help you promote it.

2. The in-world build being where it was and with the gardens was entirely Linden Lab's idea. You ask them if you have questions. After submitting a lengthy bid with IVM (at the time we had not yet merged), we were informed that Linden Lab had those four sims picked out and they couldn't be modified. I personally wrote Philip and Robin on this one, because I felt the in-world build of SLCC was so critical to the success of the event. I got no reply.

I can empathize with how busy the Lindens are on a day-to-day basis, certainly. But honestly, why every major Linden-run large event (3rd anniversary, flea markets, Burning Life, etc) are run on blank, flat sims, and why Linden Lab felt that SLCC be put on a sim with a crapload of particle and waterfall scripts and limited prims? I'm personally baffled.

My best guess is that Linden Lab, this year, felt that SLCC should be majorly run and funded by the community.

3. Non-profit rates for sim rentals are what? $3/sim/day? 4 sims @ 1 week = $84

Its not a matter of not liking your opinions - it is how you deliver those opinion in a nasty and trolling manner. You would probably be taken more seriously if you learned some basic manners and didn't come across in such an unpleasant manner. You can get your point across without having to be an asshole about it. Flipper and myself both are responsive to constructive criticism even though we might not come right out and say it publically. However, we are not as responsive to those people who use their criticisms to launch personal attacks, make up blatant lies, defame our character and who use said criticisms as an excuse for repetitive trolling. If you want me to cut my lawn come over and ask me to do it instead of setting it on fire to prove a point.

If we weren't responsive to any criticism why would we have bothered taking the time to make a survey and analyze the results? If we were the cruel uncaring monsters you claim us to be, We would have just ignored you and everyone else all the same, right? Sometimes it is impossible to be immediately or retroactive responsive to criticisms. Sure, it would have been nice if we polled everyone for the location for the last convention, but since this was brought up after the decision way made to hold it in San Fran there wasn't much we could do. Unless we started from scratch and threw away a few months of planning. Yes, we know that there were tech issues for the in-world steaming video this year and we had to make a shitty decision. It was made. It was done and the best we can do is learn from our mistakes in planning for next year. But, somehow none of that is good enough for you. Continuing to attack us for these things is stupid plain and simple. The criticism has been dually noted. You are so comfortable in your assertions of crucifying us for what we have done wrong yet you offer very little in the opinion of what we could do to make it better. This is why you are not taken seriously at times.

Anyways, I really do not want to let you hijack yet another thread and turn it into multiple pages of yada yada yada trolling.

Thanks and have a nice day.

Hahah, he's *still* harping about it?

Like, waaaaay after its all done? Hey Newfie, we're waiting for YOUR poll, YOUR planning...I mean, hey dude, its the POWER of the INTERNET - get your website up, your plan ready, the POLL OF POLLS activated!!

Every time you bring this SLCC != community, I tell you -- okay, put up or shutup, but damn, the only thing you seem good at organizing is how many ways you can type "Its not FAAAAAAIIIIIRRRRRR".

Dude, plan a convention already, I'd really like to see you make the effort, instead of this endless cruise on the U.S.S. WOE-IS-ME.

But we all know where this is going to end, don't we

Hey, prove me wrong!

lol

Ah - Hiro - with new perspectives and inside knowledge to improve the picture.

Can you help me understand what you are saying, please ?
The unnecessary waterfalls and garden I get. But "blank, flat sims" I don't understand. At least one sim wasn't flat, and wouldn't any custom build start out blank ?

What would be the nature of the better alternative you are indicating ? Is it that you know of existing locations/builds you think should have been integrated in ?

Can you throw any light on this question of why what was built (which looked pretty good to me) was never switched on ? To me that is what killed it - all attempt at immersion was effectively abandoned right at the eleventh hour on Saturday morning, with no-one being told.

If the videoscreens had worked, and a max-occupancy crowd had watched them, wouldn't it have been just about ok ?

My problem is, however hard I try to believe Flip/Jen's technical explanation of why the screens were never switched on to the very successful stream - It just doesn't ring true with what I know.

Am I being cynical ? Am I wrong ? Are you Hiro, able to confirm that a circular from the Lindens about a bug with estate media streaming made it unavoidable for the organisers to have to pull this aspect at the last minute? You know of this bug ? Of the estate sims crashing at that time in a way other sims were not ? Of stream servers being damaged (??) if too many people started up at once, rather than just giving a few temporary glitches ?

Why does this (against my will) sound like garbage to me ? Someone uninvolved and knowledgeable put me straight, please.

I hate appearing as such a cynic and antagonising people if I am simply wrong. I'll happily apologise if someone can convince me that the video was pulled for sound and unavoidable technical reasons.

Is that someone you, Hiro ?

If there was good reason, and the technology did fail us so totally that not even an attempt to stream was possible, then we need it thoroughly explained and understood, as it is very threatening to any future big streaming event.

But Lewis did it no problem It really does not make sense.

This has to do with the terraforming. Most sims are flat meaning unterraformed and square in shape. This is how the sims we had last year were, meaning that we could keep them flat to allow for maximum building space or terraform them to our liking. This year we had sims that we could not terraform that were semicircular ( the 4 sims put together formed a circle) so we lost land mass to water and in addition to that we had further lost land mass for building due to the gardens, mountains and waterfalls.



Well you have legitimate questions. Flipper has explained what happened in his responses. I suppose we could have one of the Lindens explain it in further detail. I get the crux of the problem, while I don't particular understand all of technological whys and wherefores of them. I understand why the decision was made, yah it was the proverbial between a rock and a hard place decision, even if I don't understand the technological details of it.

What is frustrating from the POV of the organizers is that it the reasons have been explained as best as they could be yet somehow it becomes this big conspiracy theory. As I have said before and so has Flipper is that if fixing the stream was as easy as everyone seems to think it was, why would we not have done that? The success of the in-world convention reflects on the success of the convention as a whole. Why would we just ignore that? We know that the in-world aspect needs to be thought out better for the future, but we wouldn't just abandon it with a fuck-all attitude. I hope you at least understand and accept that. We're sorry things didn't work out as successfully as we hoped they would.

Regards,
Jennyfur

Not officially insider, per se. I didn't organize this year.


Right. Normally events are given flat, empty sims to work with. The sims *started* out laggy, and only could get worse from there.


A little bit about our proposal that we would have built had the funding and space be made. Our build proposal was for a build that spanned hundreds of meters vertically, spacing out the parts of the build and putting sponsors with each part of the build. In that way we could have left the sim untouched below.

Yeah, the sims are gorgeous. No, the sims made no sense for the context of SLCC.


No idea. Sounds like SLCC organizers were busy with the other stuff and there was no "in charge of the in-world build" person.


I disagreed with the concept of a centralized screen. Last year we had four, spaced out, for that very reason. This year, the organizers knew that we'd be beyond capacity, so IVM / Out of Bounds Software wound up making 3 sized portable builds that Flipper gave to Torley to distribute. It wasn't a perfect solution, but at least it reached out to involve more of the community, knowing our technical limitations.


I have no idea.

What I do know is that last year I worked very, very hard and still wound up running around the day of SLCC smoothing over technical glitches. It's the part of the production that most people don't see, because they're not supposed to.


I got no clue about this "bug".


I wish it could be.

In any event, Flipper and JennyFur have stated on a number of occaisions that this would likely be their last year for organizing with SLCC. I suppose that leaves a big hole to be filled, and an excellent opportunity for people who want to get involved.

Of course noone will actually GET involved.

It's much easier to bitch about not being involved

Probably not heartbroken, if they got paid real life cash money.

Which makes me think . . . I ought to go look for the financials of this whole thing.

coco

Edit: I see now that Flipper has said no one gets paid.

At best the organizers and volunteers might get a free meal and drinks on-site and discounted entry passes. I think everyone even pays for their own hotel and air travel. The only things we have been reimbursed via the SLCC for are expenses we paid up front out of our own pocket. All of our revenue comes from Sponsorships, Ticket sales and T-shirt Sales. The latter being unknowns throughout the planning process.

I think this is probably why I am quick to defend myself and the SLCC as a whole to people who continually bash our efforts. We are doing something for free in our spare time so yah its not gonna be perfect. We still try our best. Its been a labor of love and something we all have cared about and to see it shat upon repetitively by the same people is tiring and downright frustrating.

Tell ya what, I loved seeing this at Lewis's and never even TRIED seeing it at the official build.

But I did think to myself, hmmm, wonder what I'm missing.

I knew I was missing something, see! (Or thought I was.) I wanted to be with the 40 other people at the OFFICIAL place! I can't even articulate how that is different, but it is. My own computer set-up is rotten enough, though, to not even try, and Lewis's was going so smoothly for me, despite having 17 or so people there.

So I disagree that you should forget about having the official four-sim thing. That is important. Then, having the other places is good, too.

If you abandon the official build and presentation, you will be abandoning the community, really. It won't matter if people are having their own viewings, it will still be like y'all didn't care enough or something, and view everyone else as second class citizens. Do you?

UNLESS you make strong attempts to involve in-world with SLCC (and I do mean strong), it will become ever less relevant.

Maybe some people would like that, preferring instead a sort of little think-tank of like-minded buddies with the means to attend these things. But I doubt that is what you want.

Fact of the matter is, the in-world aspect is actually more important than the real world meet-up because, as I said, without it, SLCC will become irrelevant as people stop caring.

Or - just disregard everything I've said, as you seem to have already decided that next year you won't bother with the in-world people.

coco

Its more about issues of scalability than abandoning the community. How is it fair to use the same resources given the massive population growth. It then becomes an issue of exclusiveness. So for example. 500 people can attend the RL convention and 400 people can attend the official SLCC convention. The population has grown so much and is continuing to grow at a rapid pace.

We'd love to be able to do something with the in-world SLCC as far as it having an official space, but without the full support of Linden Lab's resources it is unfortunately undoable. Four sims barely cut it last year when we had a population of 80,000 and we had four sims again this year with a population of 500,000. If this is something that everyone feels strongly about then maybe you should petition Linden Lab on the matter. We can only do what is possible within reason and within the limitations.

Regards,
Jennyfur

I wish to add to my last post.

Ok, upon reflection, the idea of leaving the in-world part to various in-world individuals strikes me as extraordinarly analogous to the closing of the forums.

Think about it. Need I go on? (I'm tired of typing and thinking, been working all day, lol.)

Ok, I will go on. The forums were closed. That more or less told us:

"We don't really need to provide a forums for you. We will have our blog, where we will tell you what WE think, and you can then talk about it among yourselves, wherever, we don't really care. It's just not worth the bother it causes us."

(Actually, it states a lot more than that, but for the purposes of this analogy, that's what it states.)

Similar thing here. One can get the same exact impression:

"We're having our own thing, and you are welcome to listen, on your own lot, but don't expect us to provide an official place for you to do it with others or a build or anything else. Talk about it among yourselves, wherever, we don't really care. It's just not worth the bother it causes us."

Of course that isn't what you are really thinking (nor necessarily the primary attitude of LL regarding the forums). But that is what the actions state.

Maybe you have lost touch with in-world, and don't realize how really cool this is for people. I remember when they had the TSO convention, bunches of us sat around the game and watched the convention on webcam.

Now needless to say, that convention was a far smaller deal, and much more informal. It was a lot of fun for those who went (one person won a life-sized Simmy!), but those of us left behind, so to speak, really got off on feeling like we were there. Even when nobody was in front of the cam and we were just watching a blank wall!

Ditto with the museum builds in TSO, correlating with real-life museum events spotlighting TSO. Do you think we would have cared at all if it weren't for the in-world part?

As with my critique of the show-biz aspects of what we saw of the SLCC (in another thread, linked here; I hope you read it), I am looking at this - as I do all things - from a growth/PR point of view.

LL makes a mistake from walling themselves off from the populace and sequestering themselves behind a safe blog that is THEIRS, not ours. People like things to be about themselves. They like to feel involved, not brushed aside. When they get the idea they aren't important, they stop supporting the thing.

SLCC will make a similar mistake if they brush aside the in-world component. SLCC needs to be an official presence in world. It adds excitement. It makes people care.

coco

P.S. Don't tell me about "scalability." That's already taken care of with the "sim full" thing, and people will wait their turn if they want to get in bad enough.

I added the P.S. above BEFORE I read this, lol.

Anyway, no - it's not undo-able, because your point is not to get everyone in the sims. The point is merely to have it. You could even have a list at the edges of the sims, a notecard giver or something, that would say where else they could go if they couldn't get into the official sims.

It is not about exclusivity or fairness. For one thing, the same could be said of Town Halls, yet people get there hours early, so eager are they to participate. Those who don't get there early don't expect to get in. They go to a repeater.

Moreover, the SLCC lasts two days. That's time for plenty of churn on the official sims.

The answer is not to say, "We can't do this unless we get more than four sims."

I'm saying, have it only on four sims, but have it. Then also others, like Lewis, will take care of the overflow.

It's important, for PR purposes, for community involvement, for residents' perception, and for the future of the SLCC, I believe.

coco

And while my attention is on this - having read a bit further - DID Eggy et. al get paid for their build?