How come Slingo and such is still running in SL?

How come Slingo and such is still running in SL?

As I was aware anything that generated a random number such as a slot machine, poker, slingo, bingo and such was now ilegal in SL?

Sorry I did not want get in crap and things changed so much over the last few months and I have not been in game longer then 10min

Thanks.

Slingo wasn't specifically mentioned in the announcement, so I imagine some people are waiting for clarification.

Slingo has a freeplay setting, so there's no betting going on, you're just playing for the fun of it. Was the machine setup to be paid?

A lot of Other casino Applications are still running as well, you didn't expect them to All go poof the second LL sent down it's Ruling did you? A Lot of people are going to try to squeeze out the very last linden they can Before they are forced to shut down, and i don't think that Enforcement is going to be That Aggressive.

Just my opinion.

Angel.

I still see slot machines around from time to time. I've also noticed some clubs that took sploders out have put them back in.

As for the slot machines, I don't believe LL expected them to disappear overnight. I know of at least three business owners who are on vacation and have no clue any of this has occurred. I would also presume some think they may as well make some quick lindens before being forced out.

Sploders and slingo were not specifically mentioned in the blog, however, it doesn't take a law degree to figure out they fall under the ban. My guess is that club owners are hoping when they are caught that they will receive a simple slap on the wrist and told to stop. Probably banking on the fact that LL has had much bigger issues to deal with lately (like staying online).

lol, someone spammed a store group I belong to via IM earlier today advertising their new 'Kazino'...they even included a SLURL. Several people immediately AR'd them.

A lot of people still don't know of the new regulations. One of my neighbors had a few slot machines on her parcel. So IM her to update her about the ban, she said she thought only advertising was banned. I send her a link to the regs and the machines were gone in minutes. We'll just have to wait until the news spread around.

im wondering if it could be because you dont see slingo in a rl casino

Why?

Date: Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Violation: Terms of Service: Gambling
Region: Pahto
Description: Operating several slot machines.
Action taken: Warning issued.

Only one police blotter incident involving gambling and it scrolls off as soon as another person gets busted for "Disturbing the Peace, Scripted Objects". I think when I checked a day or two ago, there was one report, and it was also a warning.

My guess is that LL wants to make sure everyone is aware of the policy before they get too hardcore, and in the meantime the casinos are milking every last dime they can.

This probably: http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/07/25/wagering-in-second-life-new-policy/

It was a blatant violation and I'm sure the irritation factor of using such an inappropriate forum to advertise made people more eager to 'do' something about it. *shrug*

Who really cares, I don't think anyone actually supports this policy other than for the fact that it's a policy since it's so utterly ridiculous so let LL try to enforce it but until then have fun... also they'll never get rid of them all there will always be people willing to circumvent the ban so you'll always be able to find a slot machine or a slingo game or whatever.

This is INTERESTING!

Federal Court says recently that Linden Labs, TOS seek to impose a one-sided dispute resolution scheme that tilts unfairly, 'in almost all situations You can read it here.

http://games.slashdot.org/games/07/06/08/2017257.shtml

Of course the enforcement wont be that aggressive.

Pryamid schemes are agianst the TOS too, and all the pryamids (with this scheme scripted into it) ive seen in SL are created by a very well known resident who spends a decent amount of time in the SLexchange forums.

Yet for some reason he has not been banned.

Has anyone got an explanation for this?

Yah that's pretty much an old decision. Most companies slap on a TOS/EULA that you have to click "I agree" whether you do or not, and pretend that makes it a binding contract. But courts don't always side with that. If a judge decides it is not reasonable, it's no longer a binding contract. And the judge didn't scrap the entire TOS, just the conflict resolution section.

AHA..and let's have ANOTHER OPINION OF A US COURT OF APPEALS

A company cannot change its contract with consumers simply by posting revised conditions on its website, a US appeals court has ruled.

An example...A customer of Talk America has won a court ruling over a consumer contract which was amended online without his knowledge. The ruling clears the way for the customer to take a class action suit against Talk America.

I would not put it past customers to seek the same damages from Linden Labs.

BTW this is only about a week ago.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/26/online_contract_changes/

No, i beleive that Enforcement won't be aggressive because LL only made this policey Change as a "Butt Covering" measure. IF any federal, or State authorities get so bored one wednesday afternoon, that they decide to waste Hundreds of thousands of Dollars investigating the on line equivelent of Penny Pitching Then the LL staff have Indemnified themselves by saying "It's being done against our posted rules" The players now bear all the responsibility. LL may shut down a Few for Show, But i think that will be about all.

Angel.

i think he/she skirts the ban's cuz sometimes they are cubes, and not pyramids, also some are cones....

lol

People that report other people simply because it's "against the law" which automatically means it's "wrong" are a real problem.

So many are so paranoid about "Big Brother" and their "freedoms" yet play right into the very mechanisms that would most likely be used to take thier freedoms.

Informing busy-bodies are more dangerous to SL than ageplay and gambling.

Slingo should not be banned if it is set so that people do not have to pay to play. One of the key ingredients to gambling is money wagered. People have to bet something for it to be gambling. I can give away money randomly all I want without it being gambling. At least that is what is meant by "gambling" when it comes to any common sense interpretation.

It would be nice if LL clarified this though, since many people seem to lack common sense.

Isn't the slingo pot limited to that which is put in by the players? If so, its paramutual gambling, and that is a different animal than slots or craps or blackjack.

Whilst slingo is random with minimal skill even on the games where you CAN pay into the pot, being optional, means it's probably just outside the boundary as you don't have to stake to win.

Some places are still running the pay-to-play Slingo games because they fall into a grey area not specifically addressed by the new policy. The new policy specifically bans games that are 100% random, and specifically allows games that are 100% skill. Anything in the middle is not mentioned at all. Anything I've seen from people that have gotten a response from LL suggests that the LL legal team is still trying to figure out what to do about games that have elements of both skill and luck. I've set mine to freeplay until we hear something official from LL.

As I said, it was probably as much irritation at the person's choice of advertising tactics as it was because he or she was doing something 'wrong.' Besides, they CHOSE to announce their casino's existence over a group IM which could potentially reach upward of 2600 people...they had to know there was some risk inherent in that in light of recent events.