Public Land

Linden Lab's web site says this:



Why is this not happening? Did Linden Lab simply never invision the scenerio ever occuring? Should Linden Lab comply with their promise to residents, to release all unbid auction lots as public land? I think so. I bet a lot of people would buy this land for L$1 per meter if it were made available as promised, even though the land isn't worth what Linden Lab is asking for it on their auction.

Well if it didn't get a bid, then I guess it isn't worth the starting price, simple as that. Public land seems like the next best way to shift it. What's happening to it now? Does it go up for auction again, or does it lie fallow?

I thought public land was an efficent way for scraps to be dealt with. Tier starts getting paid, a resident deals with the re-selling.

I think they should sell it if the auction fails but not at 1L$ per m². Split land that does not get sold on auction in 512m² parcels and sell those at 3L$ per m². It's a good sink and an acceptable price. They can also do it for everything except new sims. There's no real reason to have full sims split up like this.

I voted yes
Even 99% say yes; they simply cant do this
You can create another poll:
"Should mercedes sell their cars for free?" you can get 99% yes to this poll too
meaningless.

The new sims don't go without bids, because they don't start the auction until there is one. This is what LL SAYS they do with all those old lots they've already sold once and reposessed, if the lot doesn't resell on the auction.

As far as I know, Mercedes never promised to sell cars for free, so I would never expect them to honor a commitment that they never made to their customers. However, LL did promise to release as public land all auction plots which expire with no bid. Please see my quote above. The promise comes right from LL's own land auction FAQ.

I think they should release it for general sale at approximately the starting auction price or just slightly less and break it up into the size pieces people generally like to buy (pieces of 1024 size are fine for most people)
3 L$ per square meter sounds good.

The problem with 1 L$ per square meter is its undervalued so Linden Labs will be taking a loss and it will be giving too much of a benefit to the guys with the land scanners or those with nothing better to to all day than watch for 1L$ land released in the find.
You know they will imediately buy it, mark up the price and put it up for sale. This action proves its undervalued and I would prefer linden labs to gain the profit rather than that one lucky guy who snaps up the land then sells it.

The absolute best way would be they release at a high price, then it gets automatically reduced by 1 L$ per square meter each week after the release date, until its sold or reaches 1 L$ per square meter where it stays at that price.
They could try different starting numbers for example starting at 10 or 7 or 5 per square meter.
Providing it has been broken up into sizes the general public will buy this method will work very well.

But none of this is in question. They've already committed publicly via their own auction faq to release any unbid lots as public land, and allowing any resident to purchase as much of it as they want for L$1/m2. The question that this thread is attempting to answer is, specifically, do you feel that Linden Lab should honor the promises that it makes to it's customers?

So, should Linden Lab honor publicly stated commitments? Why or why not?

I was trying to tell: the poll is meaningless, you already knew the result of it read my post again please

The poll is NOT meaningless. It is part of a series of upcomming polls designed to measure consumer confidence. I want to better understand the average consumer of Second Life.

More specifically, I'm interested in learning more about the attitudes of an average platform user towards a platform provider. Feel free to substitute the word "game" where appropriate for your perticular viewpoints. What I'm interested in with this poll in perticular, is to what degree platform users expect platform providers to honor their policies.

So if you'd like to elaborate on your postion, please. Tell me to what degree you expect Linden Lab to honor its own publicly documented commitments to you.

No need to create the polls then, if you cant see some of their results i can tell you:
"Should LL comply with their promise to release all unbid auction lots as public land? "
At least 70% yes, 30% no. Create another poll:
"Should primary accounts be free?"
At least 80% yes, 20% no.
I am not trying to tell it should happen or not, the poll is meaningless because its result is already known so you could open a discussion without a poll.
Well, it is your choice, and trying to not understand me is your choice too.

Well in a normal environment, I would expect people to be OUTRAGED that the provider is blatently ignoring their own long term policies. That's not the case with this policy, and I'm curious as to why. I think the discussion will be as interesting as the poll results as an indicator of consumer confidence. There are already some "yes BUT" type posts emerging, in response to this intentionally black and white poll.

Presumably LL have already spent money on the hardware which is sitting in the data centre giving no income whatsoever.

So what's the big deal about selling some bargain land? It's better to make some money rather than none, which is why you see $400 airline seats going for $50 at the last minute, it's better to make $50 than $0 if you can get someone's butt on that seat. It's no extra cost to the airline (or LL).

I think what should happen is that groups/individuals should put in bids for what they wish to do with the land, and the best applications get given it at L$1/m2. So no malls, laggy clubs, camping chair sinks - or land barons - can get their hands on some cheap land so they can benefit the community generally. I'd certainly be happy to see some "not for profit" uses given a bonus than some greedy landseller buying land for L$1/m2 and immediately slicing it up and reselling it.

Come on LL, let's see the real side of the potential of SL and what people can do, without everything being based around money.

Lewis

Considering the 'liberal' enforcement of so many of LL's policies, I'm not entirely surprised that they aren't honouring this policy either.

But then again, when decisions are made based by the amount of love flowing round the office, it's a miracle anything ever happens.

Despite the fact I enjoy playing their game, I have to say that I have very little confidence in the ability of the senior LL management.

Lewis

Which is it? Is it based on money, or based on love?

Shaun, I think if the question was asked without reference to a particular example, the results might differ slightly. As long as a particular issue is linked, some responses will be based in all or in part by the feelings one might have towards the issue, hence some of the qualifications.

My own opinion, I wouldn't be outraged. I would think it a good idea if there had been a change of policy, to announce it along with reasons for the change. Currently stated policy is not a promise forever, but changes should be announced or explained. There'll probably be some ill feelings either way, but the perception of LL ignoring their own policy is bound to cause resentment/dissatisfaction.

I voted no. Your poll question is phrased around the policy not honoring their policies. Yes LL policies should be in clear and followed. While I think if you asked should LL keep their policies current and follow them you'd get a 100% yes vote, when you asked about specific policies you open it up to disagreement on the policy. There are alot of outdated laws on US books that thankfully aren't enforced. Optimally policies should be followed then changed when needed. But placed between ignoring the policy and enforcement sometimes ignoring it is the lesser of 2 evils. In the case of this specific policy I think it should be changed to.

What if no one bids on a parcel?
The land will be returned to auction at a starting bid of L$1 or per meter or US$1 for US denominated auctions.

Instead of creating more reason for breaking the map up into 16m plots return it to auction and find the real price people will pay for it.

If Linden said they'd do it, they should do it. Simple as that.

Maybe they should run a mini-auction for the land among adjacent landowners first... it's worth more to them, but most of them probably never noticed it was up for auction because they don't bother even checking. The land sharks always get any decent land first anyway.

I agree that if it is a policy then they should follow it. If it is in writing that it will be released to public land they should release it...however this is dangerous. If they release it at $1L/sq.m. then the land barons will stop buying sims though auction and start buying all their plots as public land and LL will be at quite a loss. With all the land scanners out there the simple person looking to get a reasonably priced plot of land this way would never stand a chance.

Personally I think the policy should be that if a sim doesn't sell, it shouldn't go on the grid. There is WAY too much land as it is and an older player who wants to sell their plot will probably wait a long time to break even with what they paid for it. Maybe I'm wrong but there is soooooo much land for sale, it doesn't really seem to be very much in demand right now.

It is clearly no longer policy. I vote that they update the information in the SL Auction FAQ.

The dynamics of SL change. Policies should change.

Keeping info current should be a goal of SL. I'm not sure it is, but my confidence is not shaken by their having dropped the ball on this.

I wouldn't be surprised if it is currently being released as public land... And then immediately taken back by Linden Labs automated systems.

Their policy in regard to public land has changed since that FAQ was written. They made it clear a few updates ago, that there will no longer be public land. If you abandon land, it gets assigned to LL for future auction.

The only thing wrong here, is that the FAQ hasn't been updated.

yep, this is my take on it, too.