A thread everyone should read

I know linking to another forum is bad form.. but this really should be seen.

http://forums.gamingopenmarket.com/viewtopic.php?t=326

Third post down...

Wow....

Does anyone expect different behavior? Welcome to the Terrordome.

/130/78/59120/1.html

Yes, I did expect different behavior from LL. My question is, how long before the next business falls to LL?

Thanks Editorial - I've also posted the link to the GOM site in the GOM thread where we've been discussing this situation since last night.




GOM Question re: LL Competition - Important Issue!

I'm not sure what to say

I do:

*singing*

BEND OVER, TOUCH YOUR TOES.... I'LL SHOW YOU WHERE THE MONSTER GOES!

thanks, now the world is going to smell like pizza and beer for the next several hours. =P

I reserve judgement for when this actually happens.

To be honest I was shocked when I joined up here and saw people expecting to bend thier economic structre based on a third party website. People yelling "GOM is at 3.99 instead of 4.00". Personally concidering that information alone I would have told GOM to shutdown and where those users could take ther penny difference.

Personally I think GOM is a great idea and am sad that a mutual agreement could not be reached between them and SL. I have used the site myself once and found it very interesting and great to see such things done by other users.

This is really sad if it's anywhere near true. Without GOM, how could SL have even become the amazing business opportunity it is today?

I really hope LL reconsiders. These guys deserve SOMETHING for their incredible work.

Enabran I think the problem is they were given "something" and that something was not worth the current value of GOM.

Well if LL have any sense, they would make their own statement. This kind of thing can do a lot of damage considering how they market SL.

It's probably a good idea to be circumspect, but it definitely concerns me. This is a good idea from the standpoint of your average citizen, who just wants a quick, easy, and reliable way to trade L$ for US$ or the other way 'round. It's absolutely chilling news for developers who provide goods or services to the community. It's basically telling the development community that if you become successful enough, you'll either be bought out for below market value or your product/service will suddenly cease to have market value.

Ardith,

I agree with that. I also think it is a bad move for LL as a company. They will be assisting in setting a defecto value for Lindens. That combined with the way they market SL I think you make it easier despite whatever they have in the TOS for someone to take them to court in the future when their "temporary date" that is worth tens of thousands in USD is suddenly gone. It seems that they are opening themselves up to a new liability. Again, I would like to reserve speculation until they have acutally put the system in place so we can see exactly how it works, but this topic is so interesting, it is hard to ignore.

Fascinating. If Jamie's account of things is accurate, then it answers some questions, such as - Is SL just a "game" or is it a "developer's platform"? Can people reasonably hope to make a living with businesses and projects developed in SL? Is SL a reasonable simulcrum of free market capitalism, with similar dynamics? Does LL have a consistent vision for the product and the wisdom to follow that vision through? or is SL a patchwork of contingencies and immediate necessities? Is LL a well-run company and does it have a long-term future?

Fascinating. If Jamie's account of things is accurate, then it answers some questions, such as - Is SL just a "game" or is it a "developer's platform"? Can people reasonably hope to make a living with businesses and projects developed in SL? Is SL a reasonable simulcrum of free market capitalism, with similar dynamics? Does LL depend on developers or do they exploit developers for content? Does LL have a consistent vision for the product and the wisdom to follow that vision through? or is SL a patchwork of contingencies and immediate necessities? Is LL a well-run company and does it have a long-term future?

Second Life is set up like EBay, PayPal or Windows. In the beginning and as long it is not one established standard the developers badly need the content and users and will vie for both. Once critical mass is reached the content attracts users and users attract content and more users. Then whoever runs the (monopoly) platform can make nice money and enjoy huge margins by taxing those who use the platform and have nowhere else to turn because there is only room for one standard.

if LL makes 1 cent off of being the middle man or even to control all the economy themselves, this is going to result in price fixing. THe more LL charges for land, Linden, etc, the less we have to spend. If we have less to spend, the goods makers lose money. If they lose enough, they shut down. If they shut down... No more SL. ANd this is where this all is headed. They then will try to charge the sellers money to exchange thier linden.. which of course, is passed on to the buyers.. who again, have less money to spend, and goods makers lose money, they wind up shuttting down, and no more SL. My comment? It doesn't take a very big gun to shoot your foot off.

All of SL is based on player development. Why would anybody expect the lindies to act different? I'm not a bit surprised by any of this.

SL Motto: Our World, Your imagination

First let me say I feel very bad for GOM. It certainly SOUNDS like they're
getting shafted.

On the other hand... as a resident (and most newbies and even vets
would agree)... it certainly would be nicer to be click a button at the
top of my GUI and get more $L while I'm shopping, and not have to
deal with 3rd party sites, questions of trustworthiness, speed of
delivery, etc.

This seems like a very obviously useful and positive addition to my
SL experience.

Although GOM might not have taken LL's offer(s).. I don't see this
being any fault of LL. I'm sure LL saw this as an obvious feature
that needed to be added. Whether they had known this for a few
years, but kept it on the back burner until now, or if they saw GOM's
success and decided after that makes little difference. If *I* was LL
and considering adding this feature, but currently had nothing, I
might offer a decent amount, but if I was going to implement it with
or without them, I might not feel the need to pay them their top
dollar. 6 months later if my work was almost complete I might make
another (much lesser) offer to get my work finished up quicker,
but no big deal if they didn't take it.. I'd be finished soon enough.

Yes... it IS sad to see this happen to GOM, but I think it was kinda
like being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

I would not worry about price fixing. $L is sold on Ebay if nothing
else... if people try to sell their $L through the SL GUI at US$1=L$250
and can't because no one wants it, then they'll sell on Ebay, GOM,
IGE, etc for less.

Many people may continue to buy/sell through the GUI at higher
rates just for the security, speed and convience, but those of us
who pay more attention to profit margins will hunt the best deals.


Also, I don't think we need to worry (too much) about LL going in
to other markets like building/selling content, etc. The addition
of buying/selling $L on the GUI is doubtfully intended as a revenue
stream, but rather as a resident convience.. one of which I'm very
happy to see... as many content creators and land owners should be.

I CAN see LL setting in to place an easy/searchable database for
purchasing content.. which might rival SLexchange, SLBoutique
and the like.... and again, I'd be happy for that, as I could more easily
find things to buy and perhaps have an easy way to list/sell my own
items... all without going to a third party website.

But I do NOT think they will start creating clothes, vehicles, etc
to sell. It's much better to leave that work up to us who provide
free labor to build SL content... then.. if they DO want a cut of
that, the "tax" will be in the form of a listing fee to place your
item for sale on the GUI. Again, this gives SLexchange and the
like a chance to survive also... but again, taking HUGE hits from
those of us who'd just prefer to spend the tiny amount extra
for the more integrated approach.


In the end... This really takes them out of the motto of "Your world,
Your imagination".... since they will have a firm hand in the
economy as any GOVERNMENT would... but... then again... since they
have always been in the role of government welfare (stipends),
and land rentals/realty (no such thing as "buying".. then they've
ALREADY been doing a lot that does NOT make this (only) "our" world.

Gabrielle

Couldn't have said it better myself, but I have a jpg

Hi - sorry for delay in responding. I realize this is a very charged topic, and so I wanted to compose thoughts and explain as carefully as I could.

I just posted a proposal and will also schedule a town hall on this topic here /20/b5/59309/1.html#post620321

I think the feature discussion pretty completely covers what we are thinking and trying to achieve. Relative to the discussions in the this thread:

- We believe in an open currency market in which prices are always set by buyers and sellers.

- We support the existence of multiple competitive markets.

- We are simply trying to figure out a the best way to allow currency sellers to sell currency directly to buyers using the credit card or payment information we have on file, because we are confident that such a change will greatly increase the amount of currency purchased and therefore directly increase the revenues of in-world content creators.

I very much agree with the emotions of those on this board and thread - this is an important issue. LL needs to do the right thing and support an open community. Please read the link/proposal mentioned above and see what you all think. I believe that our thinking and intentions and actions on this issue are simple and consistent with the spirit of LL/SL.

In response to Phillip L.'s thread:
Enabling a larger volume of Currency Exchange

I have posted the following message at:
Request of Phillip Linden

"Phillip - I would like you to make one more effort to come to an agreement with GOM. They were your choice from the beginning, and GOM is arguably a founding cornerstone of SL without which today's success would not be possible.

Before proceeding - show us a good faith effort and re-open the discussion with GOM.

Thank you for your serious consideration of my suggestion and I respectfully await your response.

Merwan"

Granted, that is how things usually go in this industry.

To be fair, I'll also reserve judgment until I see what happens. Money dealings have a way of making me very uneasy, though.