Does anyone feel ...

Maybe for oldbies... but fortunately, nOObs continue to pour into this wonderful world, eager to take the place of any oldbie that leaves.

I already did, and i saw nothing that granted this kind of hysterical reaction. Which was the reason i asked you to point out specifically what was so upsetting to you. Looks you have as much difficulty with it as i do though, if that's the best answer you can give me.

My netspeak tells me someone who goes as far as "THESE PEOPLE AREN'T GRIEFING ON THE FORUMS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!!!!!" with caps and exclamation marks, communicates pretty clear they're too wound up at that moment to think coherently, much less post such thoughts on public forum and expect to be taken seriously. As it goes well beyond emphasis and into equivalent of a 3 year old jumping up and down and screaming in fury, spit and tears flying all around.

But your mileage may vary, of course.

I see the events so far as part of the fuse, not the explosion.

Oh no, we've disagreed and now I can't log into SL, something about the grid being down. Conicidence? I think not.

Look, when you want to have an "hysterical" reaction, I'm not going to get in your way. I reacted this way because I thought I was talking to a peer, and it turned out that I was talking to someone who was speaking down to me from on high.

If you can't read that in his post, then that is your problem. It was obvious to me and it is to others.

My comment you quoted above about griefers is absolutely correct. It is not negated or in any way made incoherent by the use of caps and exclamation points to emphasize it, motivated though they were by my indignance over Cristiano's plight.

Now, if you want me to take YOU seriously, you might try reading a bit more critically and carefully, rather than paying undue attention to PUNCTUATION MARKS.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

coco

P.S. I had a wonderful friend from TSO, who was my co-officer here, then disappeared one day . . . sigh . . . who used to always make fun of my exclamation marks! He'd say anything! like this!!

Because, see, that's how I am in the game and EVERYWHERE! About everything!

Awww, I like your exclamation marks, Miss Coco.

I know at first you'll be like will f them if t hey can't figure it out.. But maybe just maybe if you were to tone it down they would see exactly what you are saying :/
goes with communication, when they aren't getting the point sometimes you have to try another way.. :/

Well, if it helps explain it any, I have to be awfully mighty angry to do THAT much with the punctuation and caps. And that isn't a daily occurrence.

coco

thank gawd, i was starting to feel the need to dose you with some val's..
jk jk jk

True. I suppose if the number of concurrent logins levels off before the asset system jams completely, there'll be a core community that'll remain inworld indefinitely. The question is not one of money though.

My fear is that they'll push the downtime too far. There's much talk of turning the corner to profitability; but that works both ways. The corner can also turn down the toilet if the grid becomes practically usuable. The system is breaking under the current pressure and I have no reason to believe that LL will be able to continue propping it up.

I hope they give me a reason to believe they can.

It's too late to throw cash at the problem. We need implementations of the "millions of users" architecture they've been developing over the past four years. Sadly, we've been steadily told that most of it has been impossible to integrate. If they're willing to flush months of work on dozens of components, e.g. Havok2, down the drain, I fear they'll do the same with the grid when it begins to cost more per quarter than it can ever possibly make.

Oh, Khamon.

According to SLStats.com, there are 3100 simulators online.

Let us assume that 50 sims' worth of land in the grid is Linden owned - a high number, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

3050 simulators times $USD 195 a month (the minimum a sim makes LLab) = $594,750 USD.

This is, of course, assuming that all 3050 sims were running under only one owner. However, a mere glance over the main grid can see that it is indeed fragmented beyond belief. Meaning, of course, that more money is going to LLab than what I predicted.

let's round this off for more easy thinking.

$600,000 a month times 12 months = $7.2 million USD annual revenue.

I dunno how much colocation fees are, but they can't be $7.2 million a year.

If they aren't profitable, they damn well should be soon. If not, well... explains why I'm not a business major.

But Khamon, you've been here as long as I have. The grid has been straining for years under the load of inventories and logins. Remember about 1.5 years ago, when the Asset server was literally at 100% load all the time? Until Phoenix Linden spent a week hacking away at it and found a way to alleviate it.

Necessity is the mother of invention, I guess.

I have no idea what the avge wage is in the states, whether LL positions are comparable to that avge, or how many staff are on the books, etc, but I bet that's the biggest outgoing by far.

Oh LFeleventy

Thanks for the encouraging figures. The sucking noise you hear is the geometrically expanding liason payroll needed to contain the children. Still, it is hard to imagine that the project could cost more than $600kUS a month to operate. Surely they'll make a huge triumphant noise when the accountant tells them they've made an actual profit. I listen closely every quarter.

And you're right. We really aren't experiencing any more downtime, inventory loss or quirky bugs than we ever have. As long as we remember that we're voluntarily chucking money at this development in the hopes of something useful being produced in the future, it's all good.

Thank You

Are you Philips alt? lol


I applaud Selador Cellardoor ! well said and well done. I am sure that LL is experiencing severe growing pains about now..but that is the time when management can make huge mistakes. First and foremost the customer base must be held in highest regard. They are the ones that make the rent and payroll, and soon hopefully your profits. Yes proceedures must go in place, but good well thought out ones. This is the core of your company, never misunderstand that bells and whistles will make your customers happy, if the company as a whole can't handle customer day to day needs and problems..such as lag as one example.
This is the most amazing product, but i agree its at a crossroads..

I've bookmarked this thread to read soon.

I want to listen.

I personally think they've said everything after this point it just becomes redundent.. You should just ban them all for being crybabies.. me on the otherhand should get a higher stripend

She didn't just imply it; she out and out told Strife, personally, to get rid of the rule, in no uncertain terms.

I hate to jump in the middle of these things, but you were very much in the wrong, Coco, and ripping viciously into people for saying they can't do what you just asked them to do is not going to help our cause, which (I think) is drawing attention to recent negative developments within SL.

In my personal opinion, the best way to do this is with calm civility. There are real issues to be addressed, and that's where the focus should remain.

And again, I hate to do this, but I refuse to allow even the possibility that I could be lumped in with "others."

My response to this: No. It was not obvious to me at all. I think you're in the wrong, and I will not back down from saying so now. I think it needs to be said, regardless of what anyone here thinks of Strife.

I have no intention of lumping you in with others.

If I did, I would have said, "It is obvious to me and it is to all others."

coco

None of these phrases show up in my Buzz-Word Bingo charts. Am I being cheated?

I understand that, Cocoanut, but what I'm really saying is that the nebulous "others" implies potentially almost anyone (save the person you're addressing with it), and I feel it's important for people to realize that at least some "others" saw how glaringly you demanded something from a specific person, then threw a fit when the (honest) response from that person was, "I can't do that."

More, I feel it's important to take a firm stand against that sort of thing precisely because it only damages the message we should be trying to send here. It turns us from legitimately concerned customers into petulant, grown-up children.

I'm sorry. I know what I'm saying is harsh, and I know I'm probably walking a thin line here given how we know each other in-game, but I'll stand by what I'm saying because I believe that even Mistress, if She saw this in its entirity, would have to agree in the end.

For Pete's sake. Strife has no place to appear to take on such airs, and that's all there is to it.

I wasn't viciously ripping into anybody. I was reacting to his whole attitude to ME. Which I get to do! Anyway, later I read the word "my" and that ameliorated it some, but my criticism still stands. And yes, I do get VERY VERY ruffled when somebody who is just a resident like me starts talking to me like he's a Linden. To heck with that!

He later IM'd me, about what he is trying to accomplish and what he wants for the forums, and yes, I am taking some time to think about his sincere thoughts there, and will react of course with calm civility. If he ever talks down to me again, though, you will get the same response you got the first time, just a little more muted. If that kept on forever, eventually I would just write him off, with NO emotion whatsoever.

Anyway, I'm tired of explaining to you why I am not you, or you, or you.

Of course I didn't out and out tell him personally to get rid of the rule. Anybody would know that. He's been around a while, and I've been around a while, and I've been speaking about this rule for over a year now, and unless he's been living in a paper bag, he knows I know he can't change it and it is ridiculous to suggest I think so, and he knows that, too.

But - that is BECAUSE - I was talking to him as a peer. If he did know that I know he can't change the rule (and surely he does, not to mention within the context of the conversation it could be taken as the general imperative that was intended), then it was insulting. If he didn't, then he has been living in a paper bag.

And if he hasn't been living in a paper bag, and if you hadn't, you would know that I've popped in at every available opportunity to say none of the forum problems are the resmods' faults; that they have been chosen to do something difficult, without pay, and are trying their best.

Now don't just keep dragging this on, please, because you are not going to get me to pipe down and shush up when some resmod talks to people like this. I get over stuff and go on and see what can be accomplished by it that is positive, and that's the stage I'm at now - thinking about what it is Strife wants to accomplish - so I suggest you move on from this whole thing, too.

He probably didn't mean to sound like that, I objected, now let it be over. You all may have the last word.

coco

P.S. Don't worry about it Alex; we all have different opinions and should not be afraid to say them. Differing opinions needn't affect me and you ingame at all.

And Coco's statement could be read to mean she was telling Strife the rule should be gotten rid of, not changed via a compromise.

Whether or not this is good or not is irrelevant for this particular post. What is more important is to remember how easy it is to misconstrue a poster's meanings, and we'd all be better off by giving a poster the benefit of the doubt.

I only know Coco from the boards, and even then just barely. But I know her posts well enough to see that her all caps and !!! insertions were out of charachter for her, so its reasonable to assume she might be a clear as she thought she was.

The same goes for Strife with his choice of the word compromise.

And to be clear here, I do agree that Coco's posts were not as effective as they would have been if there was less emotion in them, but lets face it, we all get emotional on boards at some point in time.

Oh really?





I can't make it any clearer than this. It's right there in black and white. Yes, you told him personally to get rid of the rule. You even used those exact words.

So at the very least, you snapped at him for saying that he can't do something you very specifically told him to do. I don't know which "others" feel that was right, but you can sure count me out. What I would like to know is what he did say that was so offensive. No, it's not "obvious" -- not to me, and I'm not the only one. More, I notice that you yourself really haven't been able to explain it. That's telling.

Ok, lets look at the quote.




It could mean two things.
a) Strife, I want you to get rid of the rule
or
b) Strife, this rule should be eliminated.

When I first read the post in question, I also read it as implying that Strife had the authority to change the rule. But rereading it, it comes across more as the comment being directed to Strife.

Coco's post could have been clearer, but so could 99% of all posts here.

I don't see "b" at all. Grammatically speaking, Coco's statement cannot mean what you are suggesting in "b," ever, in any interpretation. It is an imperative sentence, issuing a command. And the moment we start allowing people's statements to mean anything, even things they could not possibly mean, is the moment all communication breaks down.

Maybe Coco made a mistake, but if that's the case, the proper thing to do would be to admit the mistake.