all consumed and convinced as ever, but where were you?
I can't make this stuph up. I really can't. This happened. Up to and including the chicken cuddling.
Bizarre. Anyway, we move on.
So, the Dare Designs controversy--minimal as it was--is pretty much over, but it did lead me to this entry, and all sorts of wondering over who, honestly, truthfully, the Labs think their clients are.
Seriously, now. I'm not being sarcastic, I'm not sniping (at least, not without damned good reason): I'm dead serious. Earnest, even. Who do they think we are? Who do they see us as being?
They certainly don't see us as adults wanting adult toys. They moved everyone they could over to Zindra and then broke Search. I'm not saying the two are connected, but killing Search as effectively as they did pretty much killed a third of all Adult-based businesses outright, and many are hanging on, stubborn and determined, hoping beyond hope their sales pick up.
They certainly don't see us as fans of music and theatre, as often as they show that in their promotional vids. If they did, they'd have better tools by now for both live performance, and live music, and lo these many years later--they don't. They just don't.
They don't see us as premium account holders, or they'd have found a better resolution than instituting insane script and prim limitations on homesteads--because homesteads as they functioned originally worked for user retention, premium account retention, and on top of that, required that at least one full sim holder owned (but could sublet) all homesteads; thereby encouraging full sim ownership as well.
But they botched that entirely, so obviously, they don't see the residents of the grid as being devoted to recurrent fees (for membership) and virtual real estate (which reinforces the recurrent fees).
They don't see us as wanting to sell things (which sadly, still gives me personal evidence on the Labs' attempted killing of user content on the grid theory), or they'd have made the Marketplace more fluid and less...well...buggy? Error-ridden? Problematic to use and fix? Likely all three.
And they don't really seem to see us as in-world shoppers, only off-the-grid shoppers (which, to be fair, there's good evidence that most people do prefer to shop off-world, so they own that one).
And, as we all know now, they don't see us as being invested in virtual education or training, or they wouldn't have pulled the bonehead stunt of raising all the fees rapidly, in an extremely short amount of time, unless said institutions are large enough, and wealthy enough, to move within the next two months and pay out two years of land fees at once.
So who do they see us as? What category of end user do they actually want for their product? Because--in all seriousness, here--if they're not thinking entertainment, sex, shopping, fashion, land ownership, entrepreneurship, education, dance, or games--good gods, what's left?
Who do the Lindens want to be on the grid, using their service? I would adore finding out the answer to this question. But I think, as with nearly every other question I've posed here, no answer will be forthcoming.
Bizarre. Anyway, we move on.
So, the Dare Designs controversy--minimal as it was--is pretty much over, but it did lead me to this entry, and all sorts of wondering over who, honestly, truthfully, the Labs think their clients are.
Seriously, now. I'm not being sarcastic, I'm not sniping (at least, not without damned good reason): I'm dead serious. Earnest, even. Who do they think we are? Who do they see us as being?
They certainly don't see us as adults wanting adult toys. They moved everyone they could over to Zindra and then broke Search. I'm not saying the two are connected, but killing Search as effectively as they did pretty much killed a third of all Adult-based businesses outright, and many are hanging on, stubborn and determined, hoping beyond hope their sales pick up.
They certainly don't see us as fans of music and theatre, as often as they show that in their promotional vids. If they did, they'd have better tools by now for both live performance, and live music, and lo these many years later--they don't. They just don't.
They don't see us as premium account holders, or they'd have found a better resolution than instituting insane script and prim limitations on homesteads--because homesteads as they functioned originally worked for user retention, premium account retention, and on top of that, required that at least one full sim holder owned (but could sublet) all homesteads; thereby encouraging full sim ownership as well.
But they botched that entirely, so obviously, they don't see the residents of the grid as being devoted to recurrent fees (for membership) and virtual real estate (which reinforces the recurrent fees).
They don't see us as wanting to sell things (which sadly, still gives me personal evidence on the Labs' attempted killing of user content on the grid theory), or they'd have made the Marketplace more fluid and less...well...buggy? Error-ridden? Problematic to use and fix? Likely all three.
And they don't really seem to see us as in-world shoppers, only off-the-grid shoppers (which, to be fair, there's good evidence that most people do prefer to shop off-world, so they own that one).
And, as we all know now, they don't see us as being invested in virtual education or training, or they wouldn't have pulled the bonehead stunt of raising all the fees rapidly, in an extremely short amount of time, unless said institutions are large enough, and wealthy enough, to move within the next two months and pay out two years of land fees at once.
So who do they see us as? What category of end user do they actually want for their product? Because--in all seriousness, here--if they're not thinking entertainment, sex, shopping, fashion, land ownership, entrepreneurship, education, dance, or games--good gods, what's left?
Who do the Lindens want to be on the grid, using their service? I would adore finding out the answer to this question. But I think, as with nearly every other question I've posed here, no answer will be forthcoming.
Comments
The ideal "Resident" (I'm beginning to dislike that term a lot) is someone who pays for land. Period. If they own a shop, it's best that they never concern themselves about selling anything from it. In fact, it's best of all if, once the land deal is arranged, the avatar never logs in again... as long as the monthly payments keep coming.
So, really, what Linden Labs want to be are absentee landlords, with absentee tenants. A perpetual money generation machine where no one works, no one plays, and the payments come on time?
How dull.
But no. Apparently it's a zero population world, where every avatar pays for the privilege of never logging in...