Ratings to cost L$25

Here are the preliminary release notes:

Second Life 1.5.13 Preview Jan 10, 2004
=======================================

- Rating a user now costs L$25 rather than L$1.

/120/c4/32453/1.html

I think this is an extremely short-sided idea.

Now, people who have a lot of money will be the only ones who can afford to abuse ratings:
- mass rate
- pay noobs to rate them
- grief rate with alts

Our rating system has been fairly ineffective. It has been a popularity contest of who goes to clubs most often.

Now our rating system will become all about how much L$ you own.

I don't think the consequences of this change has been thoroughly examined.

I thought the idea of $100L per neg rate and $10 per positive rate was a decent idea. I don't see how $25 will server as much of a deterrent against grief-inspired neg rating.

I think someone has been to the Tory/Republican economic training school - AND ACTUALLY BELIEVES!

My god. I expect lots of positive comments from those who have large linden balances. Normal players won't know what's hit them.

This will dramatically reduce rate farming. If a triple positive rating costs L$75, people will be likely to give them out only when they're justified.

It would be nice, though, if negative ratings cost much, much more.

They should make that the welcome message for the first week or so and have a popup when you log in the first time to .13. Can you imagine some poor clubber spending their entire stipend in 2 minutes?

Good.. That'll help take even more L$ out of the economy... Yeah!!!! Bring down that L$160,000,000 to L$80,000,000 float and we'll be rock'n...

Yes! Greed good, right Alby? Us folks with 100kL banked will make out like bandits, then dump our L$ on the GOM market, and reinflate the market that LL just tried to deflate.

This is not going to work as intended!

Rich players will be able to get big stipends easier and the poor won't. Wealth gap = bad idea.

I wonder who gave the Lindens crack to smoke. They are killing a lot of the fun in SL for people who aren't rich enough to go to GOM on a regular basis.

WTF is up with THAT? Why does EVERY single online game company screw up their economies with short-term fixes rather then well-thought-out longterm plans?! This is not good now, and it never will be. Only the rich will rate. Yeah, that's... uh... fair.

People take the ratings system too seriously, it's expected that you must give everyone full positive ratings or come across as antisocial or even hostile, and if someone puts a sh*tty build next to your property you don't dare neg-rate them or they'll flame you on the boards or get all their friends and alts to triple neg-rate you.

Maybe this change will fix the problem with positive ratings, or make it even more irritating. It's bad enough having to find somebody at a party who rated you and rate them back, but having it cost a lot of money to rate them back makes it even more of a headache.

It cannot fix the problem with negative ratings, anyway. If you neg-rate someone, no matter how valid you feel it is, they will see it as an attack and will probably try to get even with you in some way, perhaps by spreading vicious rumors in SL or the boards, or griefing you, or whatever. Since positive ratings will be so much harder to come by, they will be even more pissed from this point forward. They're not going to put it in perspective and think 'Gee, they just paid L$25 to try and tell me something...'

Ratings just help spur conflict and irritate people, and I can't see multiplying the cost by 25 fixing anything. A lot of people like to compete on the leaderboards, I'd be sorry their fun is spoiled if the ratings system is taken out altogether, but what this cost increase will do is mean you can only compete if you have rich acquaintences or a whole lot of very good friends.

People who can spare the money will be able to buy popularity and knock other people down a peg by throwing it around in this new, Linden-provided way. Meanwhile, the true purpose of the ratings system to flag helpful folks and griefers is going to be =completely= left by the wayside. I'm going to pull a number out of my arse and say 98% of ratings will be from people with tons of L$ to waste, making them a very vocal minority in this manner.

i want LL to clear all ratings! let's start from scratch.

............... better not to have a rate system at all if it has to be like this, i liked visiting new places, and rate buildings, pffff and than, this change will take place, if we like or discuss abouth it or not.

Yes! It was a pleasure to see your class-conscious comment on the new costly rating system. So few people consider the effect that SL and RL buying power has on the SL economy and society.

I believe the Lindens would benefit from adding an economics consultant to their staff, to address some of the second-order consequences of removing sources of income from their economy (events) and having a regressive land-tier system.

~Ulrika~

Dude, I'm already making bank with the masses running to GOM and buying up L$ like it was the last L$ on the block. Volume is up and valuations are up before the 48hours is here.. Its gang busters..

Chris Rock has this fantastic routine on raising the cost of bullets to solve the epidemic of shooting crimes...

This soooo reminds me of that... now when I get tripple negged I can smile as I know they just wasted 75 bucks.

And that, for me, will make it so much sweeter

Siggy.

As another person pointed out, it wouldn't be so bad if neg ratings were expensive, but positive ratings were less expensive.

The only fair way is no ratings. We can discuss x amount for pos rates and y amount for neg until the 'Cows' come home.

What good is a TSO like system here anyway? It's so subjective. This, although some view it as a game, is non-linear, so I really just dont get the whole 'ratings'/'top ten' concept. I suppose its roots lie in marketability. With the freedom afforded here, it's remarkable that it hasn't spiraled out of control already at a $1L per rating. Some may argue it has. Personally, ratings mean nothing to me. I could live without them.

At any given moment person 'A' will fly off the handle about what person 'B' builds, says, or does. The outcome frequently being this impersonal one of negs given, and usually negs returned. It's just an excuse for not talking to people and in my opinion needs to go the way of Atlantis.

Is this the 'ratings fix' we have all been invited to discuss? Seems like the easy way out to me, dressed in Greenspan speak.

Here's the bizarre thing.

We have this HUGE, long thread in the Feature Feedback forum about ratings:
/20/d9/17689/1.html

I don't see where these type of changes are discussed and backed by the community at large. Did this thread get ignored or am I missing something?

This is so fucking amazing! Out of all the discussions of our wishes on just getting rid of the rating system...now they are going to charge 25L a rate!!! FTS!!! No offense to anyone I have not rated yet, but I will no longer be rating nor will I expect to be rated.

Damn...the more post I read the more shocked I am I'm very dissapointed LL!!!

We'll im sure most ppl wont be flying around rating random ppl. Rates now will be justified, I'd have to really be pleased with someone to rate the pos, and really pissed if i neg rate. No longer will a rate be given without second thought

lol come to Le Cadre we are rating everyone while we still can, rofl...

Hello??? Did you even read what i said!! I was for getting rid of it altogether. Not increasing the cost per rate! Gawd forbid i piss off a person with tons of L$! You think they will give a second thought to giving a neg rating?

Huge party, total abuse of the rating system. It is anarchy.

I am loving it!

If the Lindens aren't going to make any serious reforms to the rating system, we all might as well have fun with it.

Hell, I have been building and selling things for 7 months and I finally got my building rating over 100 tonight.

And, Siggy, I was thinking about the $5000 bullet joke when I heard about the rating cost increase, but couldn't remember who said it. Thanks!

In theory, yes. In reality, no. Those who would abuse the rate system will not be hindered by this. They aren't usually saving their money to spend on the next gadget or nice outfit, and are alts a good portion of the time. Alts they can transfer $ to easily. The rich or networked will now control rating. Great.