Have Lindens Removed Dreamland Citizens' Right to Sell Their Land?

As far as I understand, because Linden Lab changed the software.

Just to avoid misunderstanding: Linden Lab is not (yet) part of ANSHECHUNG.COM.

There's my chuckle for the day! Cheers

This happened 9 months ago. Are you saying this person bought this land nine months ago and you never mentioned the change? Come on Anshe, I was in Dreamland when th change went into affect and you called meeting after meeting to alert people to this change. You dropped notecards on everyone. This is a new person who was not properly informed when they brought in Ansheland. Let's not be coy about the issues.

This happened 9 months ago. Are you saying this person bought this land nine months ago and you never mentioned the change? Come on Anshe, I was in Dreamland when th change went into affect and you called meeting after meeting to alert people to this change. You dropped notecards on everyone. This is a new person who was not properly informed when they brought in Ansheland. Let's not be coy about the issues.

Actually Linden Lab removed Dreamland land from the land finder less than 6 months ago. It was more than 9 months ago when we started the ANSHECHUNG.COM land ownership system in Midge.

Anyway...:

You could never click buy to initiate the deed transfer. Why is this person even saying this?

How could he/she not know about the changes? Her account was started since the changes took place.

It still is about educating the consumer.

Can we all be clear, please ? This is absolutely and totally wrong. This was never possible. The "buy" button has never done anything in a private sim, not even initiate the transfer of a "deed".

Isn't it astonishing how people will remember things which never happened, once they develop a suitable mindset ?

The ability to advertise these rentals or "leases" as if they were sales has been removed. That is all. It was a mistake that it was possible. It is gone. Only to be expected. A reduction in the advertising options, to prevent people being misled. Nothing more.

Remember the email sent to all private sim owners at purchase, which clearly stated that it was neither possible nor allowed to subdivide into plots and set them for sale.

The original business model was based on selling land to more people per sim than the servers can run well? Interesting.

I guess now pictures are newly allowed in sigs, I have no choice but to turn them off entirely. Pity, but I can't stomach what is beginning to happen.

It'll become a sort of treasure hunt - "find the posting amongst the blinking jerking rubbish". In there somewhere.

I spose I could make a huge rotating, flashing, animated picture-sig of my own, as a protest. I wouldn't even have to see it myself. Might get the darned pictures turned off if enough of us do it.

We care Ellie. We care.

Actually you're wrong. It used to be there. I bought a plot on a private sim right after deeding to groups was introduced for private sim owners. The money went to them and the land was instantly deeded to your group.

That feature was only available for a few days though cause of bugs, abuse, or some other reason. The "feature" itself might have been a bug, hence its removal, as well.

This a good reason to actually read an entire thread before throwing in your two cents. You are repeating stuff that was established way way early in the thread. Catch up before you chime in.

I can't see how this could happen. For a land to be deeded, the owner would have to be a member of your group. Where did your tier go? Because the tier would have to go to the owner via a paypal account, not your Linden tier.

If this did happen, it was definitely a bug because they would have gotten tier and it would have been unfair to the landowner because they would have been paying your tier. You can't own land without pay tier and somewhere tier would have been paid.

I am sorry Aaron, but I find it hard to believe this happened.

Can you tell me how the tier was paid?

It didn't affect tier, it transferred ownership from one group to another, and I could only buy the land for my group. My tier was not affected, my group's was.

But if it was a private sim that you brough land for, the owner of the sim was paying the tier for the whole island. Your group land tier had nothing to do with it. Maybe it was a mainland sim that you were thinking of.

Here's how it works Aaron, when you "buy" land on a private sim, before you even pay the fee for the land, you have to set up a paypal account to pay the tier to the Private land owner. If you did do as you stated, then the Private Sim owner was getting hosed because even if your group had tier, that tier was going to the Lindens, not to the Private sim owner. Each sim is costing the Private Sim Owner $195 a month just for tier. The owner pays that to the Lindens. The only way the Private Sime Owner can recoup that money is throught a direct payment. The Private Sim Owner would not get a dime from your group tier. Do you understand?

So if it did happen that way, it was a very big bad bug that would cost the Private Sim Owner hundreds of real US dollars. Do you see?

Just happening in on this last here, having not read this thread. Just a small correction for something I noticed on that last post:

It is not true that you always have to set up a pay-pal account. I "bought" land in Azure Islands from Nexus Nash, and I didn't have to set up a pay-pal account to buy it. I've never paid him anything but Lindens, as a matter of fact.

It may be different in other places, but that's how it works where I live.

coco <---- pleads guilty to not having read entire thread

It's always good to read the whole thread. I'll recap for you. This person said he purchase land via the land sales tab. You probably paid tier in Lindens, this person did not. He says his group covered the tier. Any group tier goes to Lindens. This person says he didn't pay the Private Sim Owner any tier.

Yes, I did pay tier - do pay it - in Lindens.

Thanks for clearing this up for me!

coco

My Pleasure Coco, I will always be here for you when you need me.

I'm not arguing with LL, I'm just making a comment about the use of the word, because I'm seeing people acting as if the land they "own" in SL is somehow fundamentally different from land they "rent" in SL, in the same way that owning a house in real life differs from renting one.

The only practical difference is that LL enforces ownership transfers, and people trust them to do that. If the large "landowners" got together and set up some kind of exchange for rental property in SL, similar to the exchanges that have been set up for Lindens, the difference would become purely academic instead of being mostly academic.
Ah, so I need to stop saying "SF" or "Science Fiction" and switch back to "Scientifiction".

No, really, language just doesn't work the way you seem to think it does. Even the Academie Francais has been unable to wipe out Anglicisms creeping in to the French language, and English? The only rule in English is that there are no rules.

Again, we shouldn't be arguing about semantics. It doesn't matter what the "theoretical differences" are. What matters is what constitutes actual experience here in SL.

This problem continues to arise due to misrepresentation of what actually goes on in an interaction with Private Sim Owners and "buying" such land. It doesn't matter who you want to blame or what you want to call it. What matters is what happens when someone "buys", or attempts to "buy" the land right now as it stands, and what happens after someone decides to "sell" the land. This is what brings it to the Forums over and over and over again.

The experience of "buying and/or selling" this land at this moment is not the same as buyiing or selling on the mainland and this will always be or should always be the focus. Because of the many factors involved, making a group, transfering land, rules inherent that can affect continued occupancy and the difficulty in selling, the experience is different and can and has caused anguish among the uninformed.

We can all agree there are benefits. No one is denying that.

We can all agree there might be a better way or a better system could be created in the future.

But as it stands, at this moment in time, the mechanism currently in place imposes limitations that have to be spelled out to any potential "buyer". Other options are available and one should not want gain profit by ensnaring the uninformed.

When said uninformed comes to the Forums to vent, this should be a time to educate others. Accentuate the positive aspects of Private Sim Ownership but also educate towards the downfalls.

This is a win win situation. Once a person is aware of the options and makes a decision, then the resulting situation, whether good or bad is on their shoulders and they have to live with it.

Running to the Forums and posting misconceptions and rewriting history won't help. If there are features that should be implement, post them in the appropriate Forums, in the Voting section, campaign for them. But don't use them to cloud the current situation.

By putting the word "buying" in quote marks you ARE arguing about semantics.
What do "votes" have to do with my suggestion for a private exchange run by the landowners that doesn't require any action on the part of Linden Labs to implement?

Sorry, I was just trying to steer the subject back to the Original Posters problem and how to help others from the same fate.

With the greatest respect, Aaron, I don't believe this for a second. You must be misremembering. To achieve it would have required a very substantial new programming effort from LL, to connect the "buy" button up to an entirely different part of the database, to which it has never been connected before or since. I think you may be confused with the "deed" button. Which is , incidentally, named after an action, not an object.

But I am glad, Aaron, that you seem to agree with me that the action or otherwise of the "buy" button is central to the argument. If, as I assert, it never worked in a private sim, then many people's stance in this thread is seriously undermined.

All that has been withdrawn is the ability to advertise land for rent as if it met LL's chosen definition of, and technical criteria for, a "land sale" - which it clearly does not.

Absolutely, April. The one significant question is
Are these two types of landholding sufficiently different in practice to need two different names ?

I think everyone can see from looking at the steps involved in transferring land, that the answer must be "yes".

That decided, they could be assigned any names you like. But LL has priority when naming things, and "buy" and "own" belongs to them. The newcomer should have chosen some other distinctively different name if they didn't like what LL assigned (ie "rent".

I don't understand why everyone pussyfoots round it - the reason they tried to use the same word is absolutely obvious. Confusion is in their hard commercial interest, whether as landbaron, or tenant trying to exit.

Confusion helps "sales".

Or at least, certainly did so at the beginning, as the thing took off. Hugely so, in my opinion.