Economy and the newbie2: a suggestion

Games Prototype... you claim it's greedy noobs causing the problem, but
I would not say I'm "greedy". I AM a newbie who's interested in getting
started making a small amount of cash so I can support my in-world
spending habits. Eventually I will sell my own items, but until then I've
been given 500 items of free clothes! Some I like, some I don't.
I should be able to try and sell them for what I can. It's not about
greed, but rather a learning experience in finding a vendor, making it
work, finding a shop or space to set up, making the right contacts, etc.

Some people want to sell things I have no idea how many of these
things I was given were intended to be free, or if the nice person who
gave them to me paid for them, and then was done with them herself.
I am NOT going to look up the creator of 500 items and write them
all an IM hoping for a response in... uh... how many days/weeks?
to see if I can sell something I now "own".

There was a recent post about some girl who gave a chair away and
found someone was selling it. She was giving it away for the good
of the community ... (???) ... If she's really interested in the GOOD
of the community then why is she upset that some in the community
are succeeding (making profit) from this item she created? I think
it's more likely that she's selfishly upset that money was made off
her item, and it wasn't her. There's a slight chance that she doesn't
care about the fact that someone made money off her item, but
rather than a newbie has a lower bank balance than they needed to
have due to buying her chair.


There IS a bigger issue of what the newbie may feel after they've
paid for an item... and a few days later realize they could have gotten
it for free. However, I'm not too sure we need to worry about this
all that much. If someone wants to play Salvation Army they are
welcome to it... and I am actually part of an idea working on that.
But let's relate it to the real world... If you buy a new TV for $1000
some place... and then see an ad for it onsale at some other store
for $500. How do you feel? MAYBE you feel ripped off, but more
than likely you slap yourself for paying such a high price while you
realize there are always better bargins out there if you spend time
to do some price shopping!

Hopefully anyone over 18yrs old knows the value of shopping around
for good prices before they buy. If people do this in-world, then it's
likely they will FIND the free version, and get it! If a newbie pays for
an item they could have gotten for free, then they are no more stupid
then you for paying $1000 for the TV you could have gotten at the
other store for $500... and we don't need baby sitters to look out for
common sense shopping habits, do we?

Now, to HELP the Newbies get all the free items for free (like you people
really want) I have made a great proposal, which Pratyeka Muromachi
is working to get started. It's a vending machine where all the free content
providers can put their items and dispensed to newbies.

Once this system is in place, it should be a common thing that mentors
in the newbie welcome area would say "Have you picked up all the Newbie
Freebies yet?" ... when the Newbie answers "no"... they are redirected to
the vendor, where they get 10,000 free items that are meant to be free.

There is no reason to worry about forcing that chair re-seller to stop
selling chairs. If they manage to sell a chair after the newbie gets it
for free... well... I think there is a certain level of stupidy or ignorance
that just can't be helped... as much as we might like to try

If you are interested in the Newbie Freebie vending system we are
working on, then IM Pratyeka Muromachi for more info.

Gabrielle

I'm glad you liked my points... I find your posts very rational and am finding
myself respesting your opinions. SO... How is it that my "fixes" seem to be
long term? I'm all for working on short term solutions as well. I thought
the idea about the vendor for Newbie Freebies was a good short term
solution, and infact Pratyeka Muromachi is working hard to get that going
immediately! -- so seems like it will be working in the short term.

If you have other ideas I'd love to hear them... maybe some can be
put in to effect and we can all move past this challenge.

Gabrielle

I wont requote the lot, but its alll brilliant, and I'm on your side 110%. I get the feeling as well that its people with intrenched interests here who are perhaps the most vocal against newbies in terms of making some Lindens. Sure, we might not provide much competition yet for the Linden dollar but stamping on us now makes a lot more sense before we can grow and become a threat.
"I think it's more likely that she's selfishly upset that money was made off
her item, and it wasn't her. " sums its up for me...entrenched self interests of a small number of established Second Lifers. I'd note but most people aren't like that, and I'm meeting more of you all the time, its just sad that there are so many vocal on the boards.

By long term, I feel that many of these - the "permissions changes" especially - are something that will meet sufficient resistance to not be a good idea now. However, over time - "in the long term" - you're on the right track with these.

The vendor stuff is sufficiently closer at hand, so I will agree with you there.

As for other ideas, I'm still in the process of forming some of them. I've shared most of what comes to mind for the time being in previous threads.

One of those ideas is to work "hands on" with other creative communities, like the Blenderheads. This is something I personally want to see get off the ground as a Blender enthusiast myself.

Well, I'm not sure what permission changes you mean. Honestly I am not
for ANY permissions which would lead to setting a locked in price for any
item! I think that would be terrible for the economy. I feel people should
be just as free to handle an item in Second Life the same as they can in
First Life... which means the choice of throwing it away, giving it away, or
selling it at any price someone is willing to pay.

In fact, when considering permissions, I feel a few we have now are
terrible, and I'll soon start my new thread talking about how they are
doing serious damage to the economy as it is.

I'm probably right there with ya on this... but I guess we'll see more
as the days go by.

What are YOUR thoughts on the permissions?




Ya know... Someone took me to Yandi's Junkyard today! The first time
I've ever been there. TONS of great stuff practically free! I'm sure it's
all "free" stuff, but he's asking $1 per box to help cover land expense
which is another TOTALLY valid example of "selling" free items.... and I'm
glad we can't LOCK the price at $0, or he might not be able to afford
the land to offer us such a great place to get those 3,000 items!

So, yes... I spent $80 there yesterday and got ALL the boxes, and every
other little item I could find! Hundreds of clothes, textures, vehicles,
animations, on and on! Now, why isn't THIS place shown to each and
every Newbie that comes in to SL? FIRST THING!?!? If anyone is really
upset that a newbie has to spend $80 out of their first $250 to get 3,000
items in a nice and convient place, then I just have no hope for you.
Personally, this will probably satisfy most "players" needs for at least
their first 3 months in-world! -- talk about saving them gobs of money
they might "lose" trying to buy those items for higher prices elsewhere!
Talk about saving them countless hours trying to hunt down all the
freebies, if they feel confident that ALL of them are in one nice place!
If ALL the "free content" creators gave their items to Yandi, I think all
this fighting we are doing over this would end.

However, for those DIE HARD souls that feel even $80 for 3,000 items
is not good enough, then please... anyone... contact me in-world and I
will give you those 3,000 items for free -- at least for the next month,
so hurry! (my small contribution to helping newbies)



If you are talking about getting Blender files to work in SL, then let
me know what I can do to help. I work with Linux and would prefer to
see more support for NON-winblows platforms.

Gabrielle

New people want to find a way to subsidize themselves until their own creative skills are to the point where they can do it from selling their own items. There are two common methods... a) profit off the work of others without their permission, or b) buy yourself some L$. Which of those two choices is ethical? Hint: only one of them is. What people are asking for by wanting to sell other people's creations in order to subsidize their starting costs is to create a business without any personal investment. You can't do it in the real world and you shouldn't be able to do it in Second Life.

I continue to believe strongly that the biggest problem is not that SL offers insufficient opportunities to new users but that new users come in with false expectations. They expect SL to be like a regular mmorpg or TSO. They expect to be provided with artificial means to make money by pushing buttons or skilling or some other game mechanism. The problem isn't that those mechanisms don't exist. SL was never intended to be that kind of world The problem is that people aren't sufficiently educated about what it is they're really going to get for their $9.95. You get a toolset and access to a virtual world and marketplace. Everything else is up to you. No one has any obligation to subsidize you through the ability to resell the fruits of their labors. The only person who has any responsibility to subsidize you is you.

In any other MMO you're likely to pay $40-$50 to purchase the game and then $14.95 each and every month. Let's say in SL it takes six months to get up to speed with the tools and start earning some money. If it were any other game you'd have spent close to $150 out of pocket at that point. In SL you've spent $9.95 to get in the door. If you took the other $140 you would have spent on another game and invested it in startup capital through GOM or IGE, you'd have $35,000L plus stipend to fund you until you start making money through sales. Further, you can actually earn that $140 back in real money. In any other MMO you never get your money back. You only get game money that can't be converted back to real dollars because it's against the TOS. It's all a matter of perspective. In my view that makes SL the MMO that offers the MOST opportunity to new users, not the least.

Some residents are really good at one thing or another. Just because one resident can make money making clothes or building or trading land, does that mean that all residents are entitled to automatic success?

There are lots of ways to approach SL:

1. Don't worry about $L, just have fun. Go on a scavenger hunt for freebies. Dance naked. Make things in the sandbox. Meet people and socialize. Play Tringo, or Chess, or trivia quizzes. Walk around and gawk at the builds.

2. Buy $L on GOM or anshechung or IGE. Then buy whatever you want.

3. Make things and sell them. Or learn how to make things, be really good at it, and hire yourself out. (Foolish Frost thinks this is fun.)

4. Trade in land.

5. Forget about in-world and just hang out in the forums.

6. Buy or make a weapon and go hunting in Jesse.

Geez, I donno, there are plenty of approaches.

If none of these approaches are appealing to you, or if you are just unable to do the ones you want, then don't bother with SL. Go play TSO or something. There are plenty of games out there, maybe this one isn't for you.

I am concerned that in the interest of providing automatic instant gratification for all newbies, we take the challenge and the long term play value out of it. If you can accomplish everything there is to accomplish in a week, why would you stay in the game for years? Who says newbies ought to be able to automatically do the same things that long-term hard working dedicated players have accomplished?

Buster

P.S.

Having said all that, I would be 100% in favor of separating the "next owner can sell" from the "next owner can give away" permissions. It isn't right that there are unwritten rules about what can and can't be sold, and these rules are enforced by busybodies who neg rate newbies who don't know any better.

That they are incomplete. No Transfer exists because there is no labor cost of making "copies" of items given the Copy Permission. Modify Permissions need gradients of what modify specifies, because Scripts are able to copy certain parameters wholesale.

Ultimately though, they're irrelevant if we move to the original grand plan of "trusted/untrusted" protocols as Philip described (that quote is in the forums here somewhere).

The real Holy Grail here is the ability to better control the flow of data, not necessarily the control of permissions. And, to a larger extent, breed a community that frowns upon stealing.



Actually no, he isn't. The selling for L$1 is actually there because historically, doing so for L$0 is bugged. I'd be willing to bet these objects are also flagged "Anyone Can Take a Copy," which you can find the option for on the second page of the Pie Menu (More...).



They already do... kinda. I've already made a 3D Model Importer that converts faces into prims... but at the expense of a lot of prims. Once my game project is more or less complete, I plan to use Blender's native Python API to make transfers to and from Blender easier for residents. I just haven't had a lot of time.

But I totally agree, and when I code, I keep cross-platform support in mind.

Um, yes you can Chip in RL, Im not sure what part of the world your in but try all the second hand items on ebay for an example. I can go to the dump, or go to a market and purchase items, or even have items given to me in RL, and resell them where there is a market for those items. As I posted in another thread the most common occurance of this, outside of ebay is the annual clean up days we have where you put your junk outside your house and the council comes to take it away. Basically people jump on your junk and take away the stuff they find useful, and some resell it. I gave it away, what others chose to do with it is up to them. For another example I know people that import cheap Peruvian Jewelry in RL for resale at markets, and they make some good money on it. The maker gets paid what they want, and then the ppl I know resell it and get a cut. Are you suggesting that all chains of a market economy in RL and the emerging chain in SL should be abolished and only product creators can sell their items?

Having said all of this I do support the introduction of a no-resale option for people like yourself who are so obsessed with what people might do with your items 12 months after you make them, and god help us all, actually dare profit from something they LEGALLY OBTAINED (ie within the TOS) from yourself or others in world as opposed to actually enjoying SL and getting on with business and leaving newbies alone.

I cant emphasize enough times: if people are selling items that can be obtained free, they won't for very long because they'll only be a limited market, or no market at all for the goods. Its called marketplace economics.

Sorry, but I've got to argue with your "stealing" point. Stealing is what the hackers that broke into SL the other day and stole scripts and other things from items that were marked in a way to prevent ppl from doing so. Obtaining an item and reselling it, whether that item was free or not, and where that item is not marked in a way to prevent its transfer or resale, is not theft, its basic free market economics. I noticed your earlier comments on not needing a supply chain in SL, that's your personal view, but such a supply chain is totally legal under the TOS and although I'm not suggesting that you would undertake such behaviour, but others who harass those who legally partake in a supply chain arrangement compliant with the TOS become in breach of the TOS themselves by denying others the enjoyment that is suppose to be extended to us all.

Its becoming clear to me from the strength of feeling here on the reselling-of-freebies-is-stealing thing that there is maybe some history at work, and a tradition that has grown up, which people feel is precious.

To help those of us who were not here from the beginning to empathise, could someone trace how this practice came about ?

Who was the first person to have the idea that s/he could control the future destiny of her creations by verbally expressing an intention. Effectively creating an invisible, spoken addition to the permissions system LL chose to create. It would never have ocurred to me to even attempt it.

Did the original inception grow from the open-source software paradigm? When the practice caught on, were LL asked to extend the permissions system to regularize it? What did people do before, set free items to no-transfer ?

Was it back in the days when everyone knew everyone else, so it was a small group which could just agree things together ? And know what everyone else was doing ?

Maybe a bit of context like this, from an elder, would help us all to better understand each others positions.

Just needed to add: the GNU Public License allows for sale of said items as long as the original license is kept with the item and the licensing terms aren't changed. The SL equivalent would be no modify. perhaps weve got BSD license fans here instead?

Cannibalsim of others people's methods has been behind creative invention from the beginning. Does anyone really create with lack of prior influence. Did Ford create his automobile with no influence from the creators of the steam engine or wheel. People building on each others ideas is my definition of growth. Some will go forward, some will be mindless copies, and others will make you wonder what they were thinking.

I personally think cannibalism of other people's ideas is a part of the learning curve toward creativity. I don't have to cannibalize scrpits, because I've learned the basics in the real world on my own. A large part of my learning was through studying the programs of others though, and then I would try to get the programs to do what I wanted. I do a similar thing in world with building objects. I will highlight an object to get an idea of what prims they made, and then see if I can make a similar object. I can't be creative until I have the skills to do the basics. Everyone has to start somewhere. When I become as skilled at building as I am at scripting, then I will be able to put more creativity into what I make. It'll probably be more appreciated as well. No one seems to see the beauty in the canvas of numbers and code my deranged mind sees.

This is why free items offer something to the world of SL, it lets the starting point of its population be further than ground 0. As far as resell of these items goes, I guess the buyer must simply beware. Things tend to move themselves to market value in an economy after a while. The market value normally does tend to be somewhere above 0. If you have an item that someone else valued at 0 and you value it at $6000, then you may misjudge the value of the project as well. If it were really worth $6000, then it would be rare to find someone that could just repeat your ideas and resell them for free.

Your ebay example is flawed. If you're cleaning things out of your attic you can't make endless copies and keep selling them over and over again. I have no problem with people reselling items they bought from me second hand when they no longer want them. That's not the issue and never has been. The issue is with people taking advantage of the altruism of creators of freely distributed objects and taking advantage of the lack of knowledge of new users. If you sell someone what they could easily have obtained for free you're being nothing but a scam artist. The entitlement mentality of people who think doing that is fine and dandy makes me sick. If you want money, earn it from your own effort, not someone else's.

If your issue is copies as opposed to re-sale, which it seems to be (as opposed to some others) simply mark the items "no copy", simple as this. If you don't mark them "no copy" then you are giving a green light for anyone else to copy at will and do as they please, and I'd note this seems to be quite common, particularly at yard sales and auctions where the sales person/ owner forgets to make sure the items offered a marked as thus (which I'll admit is pretty low when they are being offered for sale)
If you're so hung up on it, why not implement no copy on your items? That way your intent is clear, and there can be no misunderstandings, and everyone lives happily ever after???

And I should note also, that if people marked items no copy, there could still be a decent second's market for them as well. Indeed I'd argue to some extent that SL economics would improve to some extent if creators considered creating a finite notion to their products. The scarcity caused by such actions would benefit all of us, and in many cases would encourage further design and creation in SL.

Don't bother, Chip. You're wrong. Despite your years of experience in Second Life, you're wrong and evil and you're just trying to keep people down. We just need to accept that our time here means nothing, our experience means nothing, our business success means nothing. Obviously we just need to face the fact that people should be able to do anything they ever want to do and if we don't like it, we'd better just eat a raw potato. Don't forget, Chip. We know nothing.

99% of clothing and skins are no copy.

An item shouldn't have to be no-copy for other people to know that selling something they got for free is scamming. This is simple basic ethics, not some obscure esoteric philosophy.

does this thread remind anyone of the idea that if you leave your door unlocked, then anyone has the right to enter your home and take your stuff?

A buffet lets you eat as much as you want while you are at the restaurant. However, you are not given permission to stuff your pockets full of ham and roast beef to take to your friends and family waiting outside.

Rationalize all you want, but if you resell free items then you are a leech. If you are so compelled to sell something made by another person and given for free (as a practice) then you are a greedy, self-centered asshat.

Apparently common sense doesnt come with 18 and a credit card (but we knew that already)

From: Champie Jack

Rationalize all you want, but if you resell free items then you are a leech. If you are so compelled to sell something made by another person and given for free (as a practice) then you are a greedy, self-centered asshat.

Apparently common sense doesnt come with 18 and a credit card (but we knew that already)

Personally I find that highly offensive. Firstly, SL and the market there in allowed you to offer such items for free, which is great, but then saying that a free market that allows you to provide charity then prevents others from reselling these items just because you used your right in that market to provide those items for free (and free for copy for that matter) makes you nothing more than a hypocrite. What your saying is that you should be free to exercise your right to offer free goods (and free to copy) but others cant decide what they should do with such goods? Given yours, and others attitude, I'd like to see free sales and offers banned, because banning such offers would hopefully weed out the utopianism ideals you and others have that such items should be held in religious esteem and should never again play a significant part in the Second Life economy, despite the fact that you and your friends were the people that created the economic misfunction of offering an item for free purchase and copy, basically an infinite item that distorts the very economic premise in which the Lindens are trying to establish for Second Life.

My thoughts, exactly...well said Chip!

LOL yep!

I'm reminded of a rash of peeping tom cases awhile back as another example of a behavior that is technically possible and not technically against any laws or rules but nontheless wholly rejected by the community at large.

Basically, what was happening was that peeping toms, armed with video cameras, were going out into public places like malls and getting "upskirt" shots of teenage girls. While the skirts technically allowed for the viewing of intimate regions under the right circumstances, it was assumed and accepted that no one would use that vulnerability to a video camera's advantage. When these offenders were reported to law enforcement, often police officers' hands were tied as current statutes provided no recourse against such activity happening in a public place.

Thus, technical opportunity and lack of clear rules for or against an activity don't absolve an offending individual from harsh eye of his or her community -- even if the law cannot be thrown the offender. If one is unwilling or unable to adhere to the standards of acceptable behavior set by a community, one should either not join that community or not take umbrage when that community is annoyed at its standards being slighted. Ultimately this is a maturity thing. People will fight tooth and nail to do anything they want just because they can until the cows come home when they lack sufficient maturity to accept the necessity of reason, integrity and personal rights.

Welcome to the internet, folks.

Not really. If you don't allow your clothes to be set to "copy", then people can't make outfits. If people set their prefab homes to "no copy", then once someone fucks up the original design, they broke it FOREVER, necessitating an (unnecessary) further purchase of something they already own.

There are a myriad of reasons why "no copy" is a bad idea for most commercial items.




So if you ever unlock your door, or not replace your windows with shatterproof glass, then you are giving me the green light to enter your home and take what I please?

Excellent! I'll be right over!



See above.



See above. No copy is bad for business.



There shouldn't need to be a secondhand market; there is no cost of production, minus time developing the product. If you want my chair, then go to my store and buy the damn thing.



It's usually disregarded as a get-rich-quick scheme. It works sometimes for prestigious designers, but newbies, by definition, aren't prestigious designers. It won't work for them.

Furthermore, the SL economy is working just fine without an undercurrent of slighty-used goods flooding the market.

Do you know why it's looked down upon to sell others' work? There's no risk by you; all you have to do is rez it, slap a price on it, and fly away. Zero business cost. That's why it's looked down upon; you're selling someone else's work, undercutting their profits, and not doing a damn thing to produce anything for anyone. It's scummy.




in SL, there is no such thing as scarcity. This isn't an RTS game, where if you dont mine all the ore right off the bat, you won't have any for the endgame. Copies are produced effortlessly, after the first one is made. Safeguards are put in place so people have an incentive to create things.

Why would I bother designing homes if someone can buy my house once, rez it for sale, crank the price up 150%, and sell 10 copies to unsuspecting newbies? What's my incentive?

LF

You just defeated your own logic. Read below.



Ergo, the folks that hacked SL did not "steal", they merely obtained the scripts they normally wouldn't have access to, and then distributing it however they see fit. Hence, free market economics.

Of course, such a notion is patently absurd. You're still taking someone's ideas, work, time, and effort, repackaging it (maybe), and then reselling it for your own ill-gotten gain. Don't you see anything wrong with this?



A fully-realized transportation-based package delivery system (ala UPS) is not against the ToS, either, but it's also horribly outmoded for the economic model of SL. You're trying to fit a square box into a round hole. Stop it.



Reselling someone's hard work is technically legal under the ToS, but it's scummy as hell. This is why most decent folks don't do it.

LF