BREAKING NEWS From GOM

We know that GOM and Philip are not on good terms. Why would you believe that LL will support you when they wouldn't support Tom and Jamie?

Regardless of whether I believe Philip will support whoever, that was a small-minded and nasty reply by Zeppi.

This is what is being responded to, not GOM closing to get LL's attention. Zeppi is saying, why would anyone believe that LL would be supportive of a new person running GOM when LL showed that they don't support them. This whole thing has been messy.

I do.

In reading all these threads and replies...the question that i have is...where is the $L that LL is planning to sell coming from. If the economy is to stay "stable", wouldn't they have to purchase or "earn" the $L's that they plan to provide for sale, or is the $L printing press about to go into overdrive?

From other residents wanting to sell

Just got the GOM email myself.

Glad to see SL is doing so well in my absence.

Awww heck. I like GOM. I'm not an old time user, but my park would never have been built if I hadn't been able to convert real dollars into L$. Nor would I have been able to buy bunny costumes for some of my close friends.

The closing of GOM isn't going to hit me hard, I already have my setup in place, but I feel bad for all those who are new to SL and won't have the ability to purchase more L$ in order to build their dreams.

Still, you guys did a great job with GOM. I wish you lots of luck in whatever you work on next.

Apples Mousehold

How was LL not supportive of GOM. They gave them card blanche into the system and paved their way to success. Furthermore, LL was clear that their intent was to act as means by which to facilitate currency transactions. GOM was a currency exchange. In essence, GOM set the value of the L$, LL facilitate the transaction of the L$ between parties. In my opionion, these two entities would have complimented each other, rather than be in competition with each other.

"We don't get French benefits?"

Ye gods.

This has been said over and over and over and over.

LL is simply duplicating GOM-like functions.

No money is created or destroyed; it merely changes hands from person to person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaynessa Jackson
In reading all these threads and replies...the question that i have is...where is the $L that LL is planning to sell coming from. If the economy is to stay "stable", wouldn't they have to purchase or "earn" the $L's that they plan to provide for sale, or is the $L printing press about to go into overdrive?



Ye gods.

This has been said over and over and over and over.

LL is simply duplicating GOM-like functions.

No money is created or destroyed; it merely changes hands from person to person.


well ty for saying it one more time. it answers my question

Not true! Or at least, not confirmed! Why? See this post: /130/dc/63354/1.html

Well you did only post it an hour or so ago lolol, perhaps it would be better in the hotline forum

The last post that any linden made in the "Hotline" version of "Land and Economy" was well over a month ago.

By contrast, they have posted in this non-hotline version of Land and Economy multiple times in the past 24 hours and are undoubtedly monitoring the pulse of the community here. So I figured this forum was the best place to put the question out there.

Yes good idea, thought it might be an idea because i saw robin lurking there lolol

Ricky's made it clear as to WHY Gaming Open Market (GOM) is ceasing to handle player currency transactions: XML-RPC problems that have _persisted_ for approximately one-month. As it's unlikely that this problem wasn't reported to the Linden staff by more than one player, one has to wonder why this XML-RPC problem was _allowed_ to persist AND what's being done to correct the problem (hopefully something other than a town hall XML-RPC pre-meeting, a town hall XML-RPC meeting, and and town hall XML-RPC post-meeting, with XML-RPC-related events in-between so that players can have an opportunity to buy at auction any Linden that might have used the acronym XML-RPC).

Due to a failure on the part of Linden staff (customer service and technical support) to _escalate_ and _resolve_ a technical problem being experienced a repeatedly marketed "feature" of the game (currency trading handled by a third-party company) will soon no longer be available.

In a nutshell: Having waited a month for the XML-RPC to become less buggy the customer decided to provide their own _resolution_ to a persistant problem.

Anyway, it's nice that Philip took a moment to pass through this forum and reassure us all that there will be some form of currency trading in the future, but it's clear that any number of technical problems being experienced within the game need to be shortlisted as actionable points and RESOLVED.

When customers experience problems they don't want to hear about _future solutions_ but to have _resolutions_ to the existing problem or, as we've now seen, they'll provide their own.

Let me stress again: If LL staff had taken the time to _resolve_ the XML-RPC problem then we wouldn't be experiencing these unintended consequences of _failing to act_.

LL came to GOM in the begining and asked them to do what they did. Then LL comes and says, thanks, but we are doing it on our own now. Have a nice day. That to me is not supportive of GOM, that is USING GOM to prove that a system works.

You base your assumptions on one side of the story. The other side of the story will not be told, and rightly so.

This was a business matter between two business entities. It should have remained that way and never brought to these forums.

LL offered GOM a "meet and confer" session. Unfortunately, the negotiations did not go well for GOM. No one really knows why except for GOM and LL.

One thing is certain though, each party must be cognizant of their position during "meet and confer" negotiations. Failure to adequately asses and evaluate the strength of your position during these negotiations can, and usually do, result in detrimental consequences for the unprepared party.

Yes true, yes confirmed.

Would you please post a link to the statement(s) that make you believe that it is true and confirmed? I've been keeping tabs on this subject and find it hard to believe I would have missed a concrete statement(s) to this effect.

(edit) Nevermind =) I see that Phillip just replied. Well, this is generally good news then!

Nobody seems to be denining how GOM started. Something along the way went wrong and now LL is taking over leaving GOM out in the cold.

I see your post got a reply?

What went wrong was that one party failed to adequately asses and evaluate the strenght of their position during the "meet and confer" session.

LL "taking over leaving GOM out in the cold" is the detrimental consequence for the unprepared party.

Or is it LL using their advantage unfairly? If you had a business and you invest money, time and effort into it, and then were offered what was below "fair" value, would you take it? We don't know what happened, we can just guess. What we do know is that GOM is going to stop trading the L$ on 10/2.