More groups, please.

10 groups is not enough.

10 isn't even a round number (well, to us geeks)

16 sounds good. 32 would be great. Unlimited would be optimal. Even if I joined every group in SL, it'd probably still take less storage in the database than if I uploaded a single average-sized texture (thanks Trimming for that insight).

So how about it?

What's stopping this from happening?

Why was 10 chosen anyway?

Please respond if you support this idea or have any speculation in the matter. Let's keep this thread alive until we can get some kind of official response

Well, I'm certainly for a larger limit, or at least a rationale statement for the existing limit.

I endorse this product and/or service!

Same here. At least a convincing argument for the limit of 10.

I endorse this product and/or service!


PS: yes I"m lazy and just cut and pasted, but I honestly do support this idea a great deal!

PPS: see, it took longer for me to explain something than if I had just used my own words to begin with.

PPPS: No one cares Pen. Put down the wine.

64 or 128 sound more like it.

Ok, so maybe 32, but still, WHY 10?

ANYTHING more than 10. (and 11 )

16, or more, anything, please.

I highly endorse this feature/idea.

Given the underwhelming response to this thread, it may seem I was mistaken. Perhaps the majority of people do not think the increase on the group limit is justified.

I hope I'm wrong. If I am, I think this thread could use a little more support =)

I happen to disagree. The more groups you can be in the less meaning each one has. If I can be in 100 groups then I will be in a bunch of little groups that I care relatively little about. However if I'm limited to 10 then I will have to choose the ones that I most identify with.

I think groups lose their significance or 'groupicance' the more of them you can be in.

Then again, I have never been overly inclined to be in a lot of groups.

Is there another reason for more groups? Is there some feature of a group in particular that makes you want to be in more of them, that makes it useful to be in more of them?

I'm only in one group and the most I've been in simultaneously is two. You can have some of my other nine allowed groups if you want.

I have two groups for official linden events (instructors and mentors), two for sharing land, three for contributing to projects, and the rest are groups of friends.

As the world grows and as our demands for sharing land and projects increases, so does the need for additional groups.

The group system encourages us to stay in close-knit cliques instead of sharing our talent and resources with a large variety of interests.

Perhaps my problem is I make friends with too diverse a number of people.

Though I support more groups - 15-20 would be great, I wonder if LLs have any plans to fix the broken features:

When groups go beyond a certain number of members, and I'm not sure if its 40 or 50 but somewhere in the neighborhood, the following happens:

* The Find window does not list members beyond 40/50, or whatever the max. allowable.

* No effective way to communicate with all members of the group (there are manual work around if all group calling cards are in a folder, then you can manually drop nc on each member, but) (Using Group IM has several problems, some members don't like it (spam), not all IM are saved when members are offLine, etc. etc)

* Voting functions are limited

It would be wonderful if LL would power-Up the group features, then make it so we can have more than 10.

Exactly... The world is getting bigger, with more things in it. More groups is a necessity. Everyone I know is full up on groups. My game dev team members had to drop groups to join the team's.

Me me, I think it would be good. I support Kex

I'd like to suggest that the ability to set custom titles independent of groups (maybe for a small fee, say, $10 each time you change your title) would solve a lot of the problem. In my experience, a lot of groups exist only for a fun title and no other purpose.

Admittedly, this was a "problem" for me a *long* time ago. Also a long time ago I was forced to purge all frivolous "title" groups as I began to hit the group limit, and was joining more practical groups.

More recently, I have to weigh the benefits of being in groups for practical purposes, and I've had to shuffle them on several occasions (leave group A to join group B temporarily to do some work, then change back from B to A).

I'm not proposing this for groups that exist only to have frivolous titles (as fun as they may be); I need the ability to join more projects without having to give up old ones temporarily or permanently.

What i can see reasonable is the Lindens charging us for extra groups (in Lindens of course *get your hands of my wallet*) Say 50Linden$ per week per extra group. I am in the same situation as Kex, too many groups that i can't leave.

I think this is my new #1 feature request. It seems like it should be fairly easy to implement.

As I've been in SL longer, I've weeded out all of the frivolous groups, and now I'm completely out of room. I'm at the point now where I can't join any other projects or share out any more land from my allotment to a group without giving up one of my existing groups, all of which are now important to me, and any of which will be hard to sacrifice.

I don't thing the Lindens want to nickle and dime us to death. It's not like paying them L$ for things actually makes them any REAL money. Large L$ transactions, like land auctions, may help balance the economy, but L$10 is nothing, even multiplied by the number of players that would pay it to have more groups. The fluxuations in supported event pay-outs is more of a slush than this would be.

A L$ fee would only be called for if they needed to prevent players from doing something flippantly. The land listing registration fee of L$30 is an example. If everyone listed every plot they had, the listings would be too cluttered to be usefull. A fee, even a small one, limits the listings to land parcels that the owners deem L$30 worthy of posting.

So if increasing the number of groups each player is allowed to join causes some sort of slow-down in the game's servers, then truthfully, I'd rather stick with a max of 10 instead of paying for more. If there's no technical limit, it shoud just be raised and be done with it.


No matter what, though... Ten is JUST NOT ENOUGH anymore. Either it stays broken or gets fixed, but ten is not enough.

I fully support this idea. I've only been here a couple of months and have had to leave groups already. When I put things for sale in Galatica I had to join a group so that the owners of the land could edit my objects if needed. This kind of thing is getting to be pretty common. I think people with diverse interests could use more than 10 groups.

Or to phonecians.