Have your stipends been cut because of one Ponzi scheme?

Well, I refuse to believe that Anshe controls my pricing schemes at her whim. I base my prices more off of the effects I believe Linden Labs policy will have on land mixed with what I think supply and demand is on both the $L market as well as the land market.

I do agree that eventually there will need to be control over business in SL, but when grey areas pop up from new technology it takes a while. Policing a global service such as Second Life is not the easiest thing in the world. The tool easiest for them to use is the canceling of service, but Linden Labs is bound by their own TOS legally. When they implement a policy they need to have a way of adhering to the rules they set. Asking them to instantly tell which organization is a scam and which one isn't is a more complicated task than people seem to realize.

Hmmm, does this mean that Blaze's boat is ... *cough cough* ablaze?

=))

OK .. seriously .. .I want to know why this thread isn't locked and perhaps removed.

The outrageous attack in the very first post is akin to many others that received the "lock it up" treatment.

Why is this one still open? It can't be that Lindens dont know about it .. since .. Robin made a great post in it.

But .. why has this attack been allowed to proceed?

Oh .. wait ..

I forgot .. I just checked the /name/ of the original poster ...

Nevermind

Blaze, you may need to just give up.

If people have their fingers in their ears going "LALALALALALALALALAALA I CAN"T HEAR YOU" ... there isn't much you can do.

A prospectus from Ginko would be nice, because then you could at least *try* to back out the numbers and see if they add up, but it would be really easy to make it look professional and yet still be completely false. Ginko could simply provide incomplete information, point to private investments, or say something as simple as, "I needed 60K of computer equipment to start a consulting biz, and now you're getting paid back with a portion of my booming RL consulting income."

My read of Robin's post was, yes, she denied the stipend change was made due to a particular business (although it's hard to believe that the resulting downward pressure of the exchange rate didn't have any influence at all), but it also seemed like she was toeing the ISP/platform line: "we're the network and you guys are responsible for what goes on on the network, not us." Probably the safest stance for them, from a liability perseptive, no? ... even if it risks them getting egg on their face.


Investors have now been warned of the risks. There's a lot of people out there who either don't care or don't get it, but they are adults and can do what they want with their pocketbook.

Forseti, like 5% of the SL population actually reads these forums.

No one has been warned.

blaze have you actually read the website or notecard you recieve when you open an account with ginko?

She doesn't control your pricing directly Dark, and that's not what I am saying.

I have watched land prices for a LONG time now. I think that Anshe has become the de facto baseline. Therefore, I do think that other barons sort of follow suit with where her prices are at.

About three or so weeks ago, I watched as Anshe lowered prices a bit, and not surprisingly, so too have others. Prior to that, I watched the same process in reverse. Of course the market itself dictates some of this, but I do think that if tomorrow Anshe decided, market info not withstanding, to lower all her prices a bit more, some others may very well follow suit. This is one of the risks with unchecked "trusts".

I do think a land ownership cap will have to be put in place one day. The sooner the better probably. LL cannot allow a player to control as much or more land than they do.

It would also be in their best interest not only from an "anti-trust" POV, but to curb the resentment that will naturally ensue. This resentment exists already, to a cetrain extent, and can only get worse.

true

The problem with this observation is you don't know what caused what. Did the situation of the market change causing both Anshe Chung and other land sellers to change their prices, or did Anshe Chung change her prices in such a way that the situation on the market changed. The way I view economics, I don't believe the latter case is possible when there is competition. I do believe that everyone including Anshe Chung has the same information available to them. It stands to reason that more than one person can come to the same conclusion when looking at the same numbers.

There is already a cap on what she can do for the long term by the unlimited land supply from Linden Labs. She can't beat Linden Labs, because Linden Labs can make as many sims as they want. The flood on the market this month is proof of that. Price corrections are not instant. I believe another price fall is on its way after the supply flood, and Anshe Chung is not the cause; Linden Labs is. The trick will be riding the wave when it comes, and there is always the possibility Anshe will wipe out as well as others.

Every Ginko invester is given notecard with details, and has open opertunity to read the Ginko website info. So at the very least every single Ginko invester has been "warned" that it is a risky investment.

Ginko has not, I admit, engraved the info on a red hot poker and shoved it as far up as possible into every potential investor's anus.

For shame.

And Saul is correct about this, before you give money to someone, are you not going to read why you are giving money to this person, or company, or just give it to them blindly. No, you read, and people have, people have brought their concerns to me, and have wanted me to guarantee their funds. But I cannot, and Ginko does not, as it is clearly stated, and they understand this. Again blaze, you have brought nothing new to this discussion.

I think both the market situation and Anshe Corp affect it. I alluded to that in my last post.

I do think that when folks price their land (and I have heard this echoed by some large landholders) they take note of what others are selling for, and price with that at least somewhat in mind. It's like when you have gas stations adjusting their prices to compete with other gas stations in the area. When one *gas station* is holding 28 percent of all saleable *gas*, they can have more of an effect on market price than mom and pop's *gas station* and mom and pop will price accordingly.

Of course I agree with you that one cannot pin cause and effect all on the largest company, but I do think it definately plays a part.

Brilliantly put, thank you Robin!

Oh come on, Robin doesn't know why the L$ deflated. No one does.

We can all theorize. But none of us know for sure.

It could have been Ginko, it could have been GOM's changes, it could have been a weird alignment of the stars.

For Robin to come out and say that Ginko was not the cause of the deflation is just irresponsible.

Unless, she's trying to clue us into the fact that Ginko didn't sell any L$ (because they never had any to begin with), then yes, brilliantly put.

Blaze all you seem to do is point fingers. I have yet to see any facts to back up anything you say. Give it up, you are acting like a "child".

I believe the burden is on Ginko to explain to the community as to why they are reputable, not the other way around.

The alternative is for us to organize and create a SL better business bureau... which has been tried many many times and has always failed and will likely continue to fail.

No blaze, you are indeed wrong, it is up to your party to provide the facts and proof.

While that may be your opinion ... it doesn't mean you are right. I for one do not believe its their "burden to explain" ... I believe its for the accusers to bear the burden of proof.

I assume everyone is honest and well-intended and generous and compassionate and smart ... until they do something to demonstrate otherwise. As has happened in any number of cases.

WEll, amusingly, I suspect we're very much safe from a case of libel here because no doubt what Ginko is doing is likely rather illegitimate and therefore they can't really use the law against us.

I don't think any sane person would bother to use law against a guy who pretty much lost all credibility and is running around and pointing fingers.

Come on blaze cant you just back to your usual daily posts of Is grass really greener on the other side of the virtual fence

There’s no obvious constructive discussion going on in this thread, and perhaps the parties interested in furthering this discussion could move their conversation in-world or into more appropriate channels.