Chris Linden: Internally, we count our total number of residents in a couple of different ways, all for valid reasons. A couple of these different methods are: accounts in good standing, active last 30 days, active last 60 days, etc…
Even accounts in good standing can be counted a few different ways because we have numerous status' accounts can be in, some of which can be confusing as to whether they are "in good standing".
Anyway, to make a long story short, we've decided to tweak what we felt was a better representation of what our current resident count is.
So no, 10,000 residents weren't just eliminated. We now feel they were being improperly counted and adjusted the counter as such. As always, we strive to be as open and honest about our resident count as possible.
Chris
Even accounts in good standing can be counted a few different ways because we have numerous status' accounts can be in, some of which can be confusing as to whether they are "in good standing".
Anyway, to make a long story short, we've decided to tweak what we felt was a better representation of what our current resident count is.
So no, 10,000 residents weren't just eliminated. We now feel they were being improperly counted and adjusted the counter as such. As always, we strive to be as open and honest about our resident count as possible.
Chris
I appreciate your honesty and openness. I'm curious as to why there was no public announcement of the change. It's not a big hairy deal; I'm just curious.
I'm also curious about the criteria or status indicators used to determine whether an individual is in good standing. It sounds strange that Linden Lab staff are confused about whether an account is in good standing. If you can tell us, what are the criteria?
Lastly, I'm a bit unclear on what exactly was changed. Have the criteria used for determining resident status changed? Or has the "sampling" used to produce the "resident number" changed?
Thanks
