First off, I'd like to get it answered once and for all - how prim allocations in a sim are handled. My understanding at this point is that each parcel gets a prim allocation, which anyone can use, and which cut into the owner's allocation regardless of who put them there. Thus a person is still free to use all the prims in the sim if they want, up to the cap on a particular owner's parcels. So even if you do not own land in a sim you are not limited in what you build that way. The other effect of this is to limit prim density. No one can build more on a given owner's parcels than what those parcels allow.
Second, the allocation is tallied as a total of all the parcels a particular person has in a sim. So all of the prims can be placed (by anyone) in a single parcel and will subtract from the total parcel count, so a person can get around the density limits that way.
DO I HAVE IT RIGHT FINALLY?
If so, a few suggestions made elsewhere no longer apply. It also turns out having group owned land is not all that useful, unless you really want to get the whole group's resources concentrated in a single spot.
Prims and Parcels Mystery
will groups get a land allotment?
There's a lot that still do! And a few left over from long ago, but still very useful. I was delighted to discover how many previous suggestions were implemented. Thank you! Here's the one's I'm still interested in:
1. Get rid of prim deeding. This is a boobytrap. There are a few features such as vendors and donation boxes that are useful, but that could be replaced with an expanded money script function that allows the owner to redirect cash to a group if they wish. (I know, potential boobytrap there, too. Allow it only for groups the owner is a part of.)
2. Allow groups to set up a variety of group money awarding options. Right now group accounts automatically dump all cash equally to all members, regardless of their activity level. What I'd like to see is an incremental slider; one end would be equal distribution, the other would award based on the amount of land donated to the group, and there would be a couple of mixes in between.
Perhaps there could be a second option to distribute different proportions based on level of membership (member, officer, or more - see below).
3. Allow groups to carry a land debt for up to a month. The danger in carrying group land no longer is taxes, but instead that it will be hit by a bill for land if a member pulls out land he had donated. Give the group longer than a day to resolve this, because it is unrealistic to expect a group to carry excess allocations in the amount a single lifetimer could walk off with. Land and prim allocations are meant to be used, not banked.
4. Only officers should suffer any penalties. Only officers are allowed to deed land and manage the group allocations, so if they do it badly, only they should pay the consequences.
5. Award Developer Credits to groups. Or a similarly generous contribution in $Lindens.
6. Extend permissions for groups on land:
-Allow Group Build Only. All group members could build there but no one else.
-Allow Group Land Edit. All group members could modify the terrain and place trees and grass, but on one else could.
7. Full-fledged Grant Modify Permissions. This would go beyond the current settings and allow one person to act totally as another's agent, with the sole exception of ability to buy and sell land. In other words, you could give this right to a specific person you trust, and then they would be able to edit, copy, move your objects or anything in their inventories, and they would be able to terraform and landscape on your property. In particular, they would be able to lock/unlock your objects and make inworld copies that remain in your ownership. This would allow close collaboration without the constant hassle over setting permissions exactly right.
8. Group IM Broadcast - this would be a feature different from the conferencing mode, that would replace the current Instant Message All Users (on and offline). It would be a single message to all group members whether offline or not, that would NOT send replies offline. This would avoid spamming group members that like to set their IM's to go to email.
9. Group distribution - this feature would allow you to send an item or a cash amount equally to all group members without having to open up each of their cards individually.
Here's a few more that have been collected:
10. Allow 2-person groups.
11. Have more levels of membership - and more titles to go with them.
12. Allow groups that own more than say 5/8 of a sim to set conditions for the sim, such as rating, or environment, or theme - or name! I don't recommend giving local enforcement rights, just a theme name as a reminder of what the sim is all about. By environment I would mean the opportunity to get increased land and sky controls, such as desert, beach, snow, or jungle terrain textures, and options for different sky colors and weather conditions (always sunny, massive clouds and rain, etc.)
13. Set up a greater variety of sim types.
-Sims with different terrain textures and weather conditions.
-Multiple low-object-count sims on a single server. This would allow the six servers being used for the vehicle sims to be consolidated, or (my preference) they could be greatly expanded to offer a lot more terrain and new areas, such as...
-Expansive sea sims, for sailing between far flung islands, and from one continental area to another.
-Giant mountain sims, for snow recreation and with tiny village and lodge spaces scattered here and there.
-Much bigger vehicle and battlefield areas, with low latency border crossing.
14. Special high-density sims, with separate indoor spaces. This would take a major rethinking, but basically it would be the "mini-sim" concept that Catherine Omega had. Create a massive downtown area full of buildings and storefronts, and allow owners to set an "inside" teleporter in doorways. This would take someone who walked through it to a separate server space where the owner could display a much larger array of goods or have a big detailed interior. And it would have the added benefit of taking that av out of the main server for that time. Basically the main server would be a dense collection of empty towers, and it could pass off the interiors to separate servers and place the client into a less straining space as well. An owner could buy such a gateway to a separate piece of land, essentially, which would cost the same amount and take the same allocation as ordinary land, but potentially could have a much higher prim count per square meter. You could also "stack" land vertically, simply by having doors at different levels in the main sim.
This approach might also work for stadium type events with huge numbers of avs (farther in the future).
). Grouping should be easier and in some instances beneficial, not convoluted and detrimental.
