Linden Lab Removes User Content
by prokofy on 13/04/07 at 2:57 am
Prokofy Neva, Community Affairs
In an unprecedented move for a company that prides itself on promoting user creativity and user content, Linden Lab announced today that they will be removing user content — the ratings section on the avatars.
When the Lindens GOM’d the GOM, they removed the rationale for an independent currency market, but it was on a third-party site. When the LL stripped out the telehubs, they came dangerously close to removing the complex configuration of user-made builds and businesses around the transportation promoters, but in fact they didn’t actually touch anything users had made and even compensated them.
With the withdrawal of each avatar’s public portrait of rating points, the Lindens have for the first time put their hand on the “Your World, Your Imagination” they had implied they’d never touch — in the name of eminent domain over database load issues.
Jeska Linden posted a blog notice today that ratings have been removed on the Beta Test Grid, which means they are very likely to be removed in the next patch to the client. She suggested a variety of other resident-made services for searching and rating avatars, things, and places, indicating that the Lindens will remove the old ratings system as soon as they can — to save on data-base loads, as Jeska explained.
Until early 2005, the ratings system offered a chance to rate fellow residents positively or negatively in the categories of building, appearance, and behaviour. Cumulative points, called “stipend rating delta,” added up to give residents extra bonuses in their weekly stipends, which many older and more popular residents milked effectively to get free cash from the Lindens.
In the old days, it was common for people to flock to clubs and rate each other, or pull up alts and rate themselves and theirs friends and their alts, in order to boost the payout. The Lindens got tired of the drain on their resources, and tried to ban any events that promised rating parties. They then removed the feature completely from the client, taking away negative rating capacity and leaving positive — but now for a $25 fee, which effectively discouraged ratings. It was actually a testimony to people’s overwhelming desire to rate that many people, even new and poor, would take the trouble to pay out $25 just to send a signal of approval, especially to good builders and designers or even landlords.
The record of the pluses is a form of user-made content that people found very easy to make and maintain, and was part of the avatar identity. For now, avatars will be stripped of their identity content in that area, and will be forced to make use of a hodge-podge of resident services differing in quality.
I tried out Slicr today, after being a bit annoyed at being spammed repeatedly in IMs and emails to try it. It’s certainly a spiffy thingie, with several convenient globe-like balls that fan out and provide you with a variety of categories and activities to search in SL. It’s pretty simple — you just point and click and look at the icons. It’s a welcome relief from the ugly drop-down blue menu to have a HUD.
Still, nothing beats the Linden’s own interface, since they can make it work best. Being able to click right on the avatar is something we’ll miss. Having to fetch a third-party website to write my ratings is a bit of a chore, but I personally am liking Shaun Altman’s slrealreps.com just because it has space to write. I’m also using SLOOG which is pretty, clean, and very quick in uploading your favourite places. I would say try all the ones Jeska recommends plus slrealreps.com which she missed, and get a mixture of them going, because they all have different focuses, i.e. some are only about avatars, some only about places, some combine places and avatars (Slicr) but you may find it requires some adjustment.
If you’d like to give Philip a piece of your mind about the way things are going in SL, slrealreps.com enables you to find an object of his in world, without waiting for one of his rare appearances. Look for his few sticks of furniture and a mysterious black box in “Philip’s Forest” at Waterhead 242, 41.
Daniel Pennant
Apr 13th, 2007
This action was good for users.
I mentioned it on EbonyFriends.com and many person supported it.
Artemis Fate
Apr 13th, 2007
They’re dropping the ratings box? It’s about frigging time. That thing has been useless since they started it, and was only made progressively more so as it went along.
Doubledown Tandino
Apr 13th, 2007
I do like that they’re removing the pointless rating system. Personally, I like ratepoint, and hopefully it will be the unofficial official rating system of SL now.
dandellion Kimban
Apr 13th, 2007
I won’t miss it. One short excursion with checking all the ratings of all the avatars near you will show how pointless it has become. One is not surprised to see exceptional avatar with just few points for apereance and right next to it a rather common looking one with three digits rating. Too many factors make rating. One of the most important is age of avatar. More time more opportunities to get ratings, especially for the avatars born in the period of free rating. Other factor are friends. A lot of wealthy friends is not a proof of being good builder, but it can boost your rating.
Things like this will happen more and more. Second Life is growing and some features that were covered by Linden Lab are now to be passed to third parties. That is for good though lot of mistakes and bad decisions will be made.
Trinity Dejavu
Apr 13th, 2007
Hurrah !!! Bye Bye Ratings !!
Nicholaz Beresford
Apr 13th, 2007
Prok,
quite honestly, I have used the rating system a hand full of times when someone was really nice, but probably only gave less than 10 ratings over all. It may be something the old timers hold dear, but for me (just a few weeks old) it’s a feature I couldn’t care less about.
I do see your point (in a basic way) about them touching user content and interfering with “your world, your imagination” (as in the recent actions on ageplay and casinos) and that path (or “slippery slope” as someone called it in the casino blog comments) is something that concerns me.
But from a practical standpoint, I have lost more user content through messed up inventories than the rating system could ever take from me, anything easing database load is welcome from my point of view.
marilyn murphy
Apr 13th, 2007
i dont see any point to ratings. if they are available they are abused in one way or another. a few years ago i gamed them myself when they were tied to our stipend. every time some new person i am talking to goes wow, u have a lot of ratings, i just say, “yeah. so?” to explain to them the ratings story has just become to involved and boring to go into. let em die.
and ratepoint or any and all others. the whole idea is to open to abuse.
Barney Boomslang
Apr 13th, 2007
A real big problem of the outworld rating systems: if you don’t go to all of them, you can’t get a full view on your own ratings. You see, the inworld ratings where shown on your profile – you could see them easily. The outworld ratings don’t show up at all, unless you either wear a HUD or go to a web page (some of them give their data only to members, so you even have to have a membership to see your ratings!).
The way those systems work is, tons of them will spring up over time. One isn’t happy with one other and rebuilds it with different targets. And so you gather ratings in places you don’t know – and a potential customer could use just that rating system to look you up and notice negative ratings. Negative ratings whose existence you don’t even know about, since the systems don’t inform you when you are rated.
That’s something that really irritates me, because what it does create is unknown homepages for me – some of them I will never actually see, since they are on services whose existence I don’t even know about. But all of them will connect my name to some rating and some comments to me.
A multitude of non-connected rating systems that aren’t easily monitorable from inworld won’t be able to supplant a tightly integrated rating system.
dandellion Kimban
Apr 13th, 2007
rating system is something more appropriate to games. Second life is not a game! It can be game, that’s for sure, but don’t forget that SL can be lot of games. That is the point. It is a platform. And what do you want to rate on platform?
It is just an atavism of old times, prehistory that is. We should grow up over the rating systems.
RZ
Apr 13th, 2007
“rating system is something more appropriate to games. Second life is not a game! It can be game, that’s for sure, but don’t forget that SL can be lot of games. That is the point. It is a platform. And what do you want to rate on platform?”
eBay is a hell of a lot more “platform” than SL is, and their users absolutely rely on ratings.
Oh, and by the way, SL is a toy. Not a platform.
dandellion Kimban
Apr 13th, 2007
LOL. Ok, I can live with SL as a toy
eBay is serious thing. SL’s status is very doubtful. Nobody come to eBay to play around. Even if somebody do, nobody will claim that is his or her right to do. Rating system on eBay has its purpose. What is the purpose of rating system of second life?
Nacon
Apr 13th, 2007
I agree with Artemis, it has been pointless since they took the ability to give Negative rating out. Sure… it’s nice to have a few rating but no one is going to miss it.
SL is still a platform since business are still growing inside. Yes, of course eBay need user rating but they don’t even need it either. It’s like saying Head should be on tail side of a coin and Tail should be on head side, hardly any difference… plus you couldn’t even GIVE NEGATIVE RATING! So who cares?
Better to drop it for less God-damned lag on SL.
Arthur Fermi
Apr 13th, 2007
While the ratings probably don’t have a significant meaning, anyone who things this will lower lag is a fool, maybe if LL increased bandwidth to the Asset Servers, and optimized their database farm we would have fewer problems. This is like replacing the radio in your car to get better gas millage.
Teneo
Apr 13th, 2007
For the time prior to when people really started gaming it ratings did serve a purpose, but at that time SL was just a game. I agree with the others here that stated ratings are of very little use in the client. I find it interesting that the article labeled using the rating system as form of user-made content on par with what GOM did or with what the people who gamed telehubs built. Funny…
Jellin Pico
Apr 13th, 2007
Oh Prok, I’m sorry, I know how much losing the ability to triple neg rate anyone and everyone that disagrees with you will hurt you. 8(
Harlequin Salome
Apr 13th, 2007
Prok, not everything is “the end of SL as we know it”.
Honestly, this is why your opinion gets minimized everywhere. You can’t help but freak out over everything.
To quote Carlin: “Take a breath… relax. Here. Have some dip.”
Tenshi Vielle
Apr 13th, 2007
That thing was useless when I joined; it’s still useless. I feel bad when people use their hard-earned L$ to rate me. Again: useless. Couldn’t care less if it stays and goes; it’s been phased out.
Nacon
Apr 13th, 2007
“I feel bad when people use their hard-earned L$ to rate me.”
Wow, youre doing a good job being a bitch with close-minded ego thought in your comment, Tenshi.
shockwave yareach
Apr 13th, 2007
when I first arrived and someone rated me positively (for some code work) I didn’t know what it was for. Now, later, I still dont’ know what it is for. What, I’m supposed to trust this person more because he/she has stats equal to the GNP of a small South Atlantic country? Is it proof that the builder knows what he’s doing and can deliver? No to both. So rather than mourn its passing (and wonder how much bandwidth 4 integers could possibly consume…) I will simply wonder what it was ever used for in the first place.
Jessica Holyoke
Apr 13th, 2007
Being a relatively new user on SL, I liked the ratings system provided by the Lindens. I felt it was a nice way to permanently show your appreciation of someone, whether just your friends or people you received goods or services from.
Frankly, I don’t see myself using an outside rating system, only due to the inherent hassles involved.
Artemis Fate
Apr 13th, 2007
“I felt it was a nice way to permanently show your appreciation of someone”
Actually, ratings aren’t permanent. They disappear after 6 months.
Macphisto Angelus
Apr 13th, 2007
Say what you will, but I always had a sense of pride when someone rated me.
It meant more to me to know that the rating was not gamed or for anything other then that person saying they appreciated something I did for them or made or whatever. I also liked giving someone ratings when they did something I appreciated.
If by useless you mean you don’t make money from it or whatever then it would be from that perspective, but for what it is intended for now it worked great. I will be sad to see it go. I won’t be trying third party avenues for it either. Frankly I am getting tired of having to go around signing up for stuff that was available through LL and was able to be contained that way.
Fiend Ludwig
Apr 13th, 2007
I really like the rating system. It allows me to provide some positive feedback to a friend or acquaintance in private, without the banality of simply paying them cash. I will miss it.
(I also wrote about this on my blog – http://fpsl.wordpress.com/2007/04/13/i-liked-the-ratings/)
Also, @Artemis – I have had my ratings since the day I received them – they did not disappear after 6 months.
Artemis Fate
Apr 13th, 2007
“Also, @Artemis – I have had my ratings since the day I received them – they did not disappear after 6 months.”
Yeah, I’ve noticed that ratings don’t seem to disappear. But it was an official linden announcement a while back that they would after 6 months. But I haven’t been keeping real track, so I don’t know for sure.
Artemis Fate
Apr 13th, 2007
But it might be hard to notice since I think the deal is, that if you get rated once 6 months ago, and 300 times 3 months ago, so you have 301 in whatever, that at 6 months you’d have 300. But I wonder how they figure that out, if each rating has a time tag attached to it or some such. Really the whole 6 months expiration seemed pretty silly to begin with.
But so did the entire ratings system, even when I joined it was already pretty useless, and then it became popular in club culture to just throw ratings out like candy to anyone within range of you (when it was 1L$) in the expectation of getting rated back to get a larger stipend or some such. Then you had people with building ratings in the thousands who had trouble building a default prim cube. (which, come to think of it, is one bit of proof that ratings do disappear, because I remember most of my ratings being in the 600-700, and now they’re all around 300-400). At least cranking up the ratings to 25L$ maybe the ratings given more meaningful, but there’s still plenty of ratings candy left over, and I don’t think the ratings system is any way to judge someone’s behavior, appearance, or building skills. I mean, look at Prokofy’s ratings there. He’s got a 216 in behavior, and he’s a total douche bag.
Rasputin Putin
Apr 13th, 2007
This is not going to make an appreciable difference on the asset servers.
What they *REALLY* need to do is eliminate texture and audio uploads. Eventually, uploads WILL have to be canceled because the space necessary to host all these images and sounds (animations/poses/etc) is certainly not infinite. As it is, there are enough places where you can purchase any sounds or images you can possibly need. By limiting the load to already existing textures/sounds/etc, it will free up a lot of lag and finally cache will be a useful thing.
When SL becomes the mainstream “Web 4.0″ that they dream of, do you think LL will be in the business of simply hosting millions of asset servers for the world to constantly upload to? In fact, there may come a time soon when removeable media is able to hold terabytes of info – you may be able to pick up a “DVD” with all the textures etc necessary to make SL run smoothly as WoW (all textures/sounds residing locally instead of downloading).
Now – before your head explodes – I’m only kidding. I realize this isn’t feasable, I just wanted to get your adreneline pumping this morning heh.
BTW, any truth to the rumor that Apple is developing a virtual world?
(gawd, I suck – I’m sorry, just can’t resist sometimes)
Artemis Fate
Apr 13th, 2007
“What they *REALLY* need to do is eliminate texture and audio uploads. Eventually, uploads WILL have to be canceled because the space necessary to host all these images and sounds (animations/poses/etc) is certainly not infinite. As it is, there are enough places where you can purchase any sounds or images you can possibly need. By limiting the load to already existing textures/sounds/etc, it will free up a lot of lag and finally cache will be a useful thing.
When SL becomes the mainstream “Web 4.0″ that they dream of, do you think LL will be in the business of simply hosting millions of asset servers for the world to constantly upload to? In fact, there may come a time soon when removeable media is able to hold terabytes of info – you may be able to pick up a “DVD” with all the textures etc necessary to make SL run smoothly as WoW (all textures/sounds residing locally instead of downloading).”
Well, it’s probably more feasible then you’d think, not the DVD full of textures part, that’s ridiculous
but the eliminating uploads and audio thing. I don’t know the actually schematics of the whole concept, but places like Active Worlds, you had to host your own textures and link to them in the prim like an HTML tag line.
But yeah, that would create a TON of problems. Like if they did this with clothes or attachments and you suddenly put it on one day to find all the textures missing (for real) cause the owner lost their image hosting.
dandellion Kimban
Apr 13th, 2007
“What they *REALLY* need to do is eliminate texture and audio uploads. Eventually, uploads WILL have to be canceled because the space necessary to host all these images and sounds (animations/poses/etc) is certainly not infinite. As it is, there are enough places where you can purchase any sounds or images you can possibly need.”
WHAT?! Well, that is killing of user creativity! How do you know what images and sounds do I need?
dandellion Kimban
Apr 13th, 2007
“I don’t know the actually schematics of the whole concept, but places like Active Worlds, you had to host your own textures and link to them in the prim like an HTML tag line.”
There is even easier way… try it P2P…. explained here: http://metaverse.acidzen.org/2007/centralized-networks-or-p2p . But, then we’ll have problems with property and everything.
Tenshi Vielle
Apr 13th, 2007
“Wow, youre doing a good job being a bitch with close-minded ego thought in your comment, Tenshi.”
That wasn’t an ego comment unless you were looking for it. You’re doing a good job of being a retard, Nacon. Go back to your BDSM college slut.
Otenth Paderborn
Apr 13th, 2007
I took one look at ratings when I joined in November 2006 and promptly ignored them. I’ve ignored them ever since, and am amazed at the hand-wringing and moaning. I’m glad to see them go–whatever small amount of code/bandwidth/database load they use can be put to much better use.
Sean Clancy
Apr 13th, 2007
Much ado about nothing. Ratings have been useless for ages now (cranking the cost of them up to L$25 pretty much took care of that) and no one I know issues them anymore, much less consults them.
If this actually reduces database strain and inworld lag, I’m especially for it!
But of course, in the worldview of the author of this post, anything LL does to make a change is Automatically Evil. As my partner’s granny used to say, “Some people ain’t happy unless they ain’t happy.”
Joshua Nightshade
Apr 13th, 2007
They were pointless; though I, like many others, enjoyed watching you cackle when they took away your neg-rate weapon.
I put a disclaimer in my in-world profile saying that I’m not affiliated with any third-party ratings efforts and don’t plan to be.
Allana Dion
Apr 13th, 2007
>”I would say try all the ones Jeska recommends plus slrealreps.com which she missed”
I don’t think she missed it, it is linked in the blog entry. Well unless that one was a later addition and I’m not aware of it.
I actually have a question that I couldn’t get answered on the real reputations site. The site states, “Every Second Life resident who has had feedback submitted to Real Reputations about them has a public profile. It contains everything that the community has to say about a resident.”
Does that mean that someone could post “feedback” about me and I would automatically have a profile on that site whether I want one or not? That is also one of the issues with another one the Lindens linked to, TrustNet. The creator of it has actually stated that there is no way to opt out.
Allana Dion
Apr 13th, 2007
Actually scratch that, as that was posting, I found the information. Apparently the “feedback” can only be removed if BOTH parties agree to it’s removal. So in other words, no ability to opt out and not appear on the site.
“Any resident can use our web interface, or more commonly, our easy to use in-world HUD, to leave feedback about any other resident they meet (it does not matter if the other resident is a Real Reputations member or not).”
dandellion Kimban
Apr 13th, 2007
Isn’t that another violation of privacy?
On the other side, isn’t resident’s attempt to opt-out violation of free speech?
Prokofy Neva
Apr 13th, 2007
Alana, it was NOT part of her original article. There’s a back story here that I don’t feel like going into. If it’s there now, it’s only because it was brought to her attention, because as usual, the Lindens play favorites, or are just busy and put up only what is pushed to them by favourites. You’re always in reaction, always contrary, and always trying to argue. Try to accept that there are often very valid reasons and more complex reasons for things than you’re prepared to admit.
I’m all for having public profiles of people whether or not they wish to have them. I’m happy to make up one about YOU and characterize your long-time trolly, contrarian behaviour, if that would help the public.
If I can’t protest about people’s bad behaviour and fraudulent business practices in this world, I don’t live in a free world.
Opt-out and opt-in are things that can be debated endlessly. Your private conversation in your bedroom, your lifestyle on your sim in private, these should be free of intrusion and scrutiny. I don’t think Grid Shepherd should get to scrape, store, and publicize these and then only after doing that, give you an opt-out.
An evaluation of another person, however, in a world where reputation makes you, for better or worse, is vital to the functioning of that world. It’s not at all a good system, but it is the one we have, and we have to adapt to it or else be hermits and not come online.
The public commons, the public domain of business, that can’t scream for protection in the same way as the private sim, such as to have bad deeds endlessly hide behind “privacy”.
Example: in real life, certain government agencies endlessly claim that they can’t tell you anything about what they’re doing because it would compromise national security. But then they apply overbroad and even unlawful notions to this concept, and that’s how you get things like Guantanamo. It’s also how you get things like children dying in big cities of abuse and neglect, and child welfare agencies who are even visiting their homes but who are negligent or incompetent themselves never getting brought to account. Yes, a certain degree of classified information and secrecy must be applied in state security and child protection. But at some point — and society has to endlessly be free to endlessly debate when — it becomes abusive, too, and unjustifiable.
I fully stand by the right for anyone, for any reason or no reason, to make a portrait and rate a landlord or anybody else in SL. I wouldn’t fear such ratings whatsoever. If there are bad ratings, too bad. You can then rate those people back and put your side of the story. People doing business, public figures, sure as hell get to be rated; private figures who think they shouldn’t be noticed will be rated too. No one can escape the judgement of Hive Mind. It’s a terrible system, I agree, but the only solution is to have more of it — to try to trump the bad judgements that come with mind-memes and cliques with more openness and more publications. The answer isn’t to hide more.
People are welcome not to participate in such a system, and then it won’t catch on — but all the systems out there we already have shows that people use them and express themselves freely on them. I’ve rated a number of people negatively, but not a single one has rated me. Maybe they have nothing to say. Maybe they’re scared.
But like the concept Nethermind Bliss was trying to mount as a political justification for my original SLCC banning — that people are “intimidated” from coming if someone who expresses their opinion forcefully comes — is bogus. It means bad behaviour and ill acts get to hide and not be accountable. That’s wrong.
If you engage in behaviour in SL that is questionable, I don’t think you get to endlessly invoke “privacy”. Who gets to decide what is questionable? I do. You do. Anybody does. That’s what an open society is about.
What’s also likely to happen in these systems — which is why I really don’t like any of them very much, and find the whole concept of “trust circles” flawed, regressive, and medieval — is that this fashionista will dis that fashionista, this DJ will dis that DJ, and the rest of us either won’t care, or will have no way to judge who is telling the truth. But that’s ok. You can triangulate. One thing that occurs with a lot of ratings is that you can see if there is a cluster. If you see one or two negs or even 10 negs, you figure that it says more about the person rating than it does about the person rated.
Prokofy Neva
Apr 13th, 2007
Just for the record, since we’re discussing the history of rating, I was a big believer in the negrate. Many people mistakenly believe I flew around the world administering negs indiscriminately, but in fact, I did not issue that many, nor was I give them. I gave more positives than I got; I also gave more negs than I got, but not by much.
As always, there were a relatively small number — the Toxic Twenty — that I negged, and of these, a smaller number who got the Prokofy Trifecta. They could be counted on two hands. The two dozen or so people I negrated behaved badly on the forums, over and over again, with impunity. The Lindens wouldn’t act; their little friends enabled them; there was no recourse but the inworld negrate. I’m very proud to have used the inworld negrate on these people; they deserved that kind of rough frontier justice for their bad behaviour in the absence of any rule of law, and any good-faith equal enforcement of the TOS (Jeska let these abusive, foul-mouthed vicious friends and friends of friends of hers have a pass for years, and it created an awful climate).
The TOS was either non-enforced, so that some people got to start threads about one individual to pillory them, call names, and use foul language, and any one else who did this even in milder fashion would be selectively prosecuted. Or they would be enforced in a work-to-rule exasperating fashion as a form of harassment, while letting broader offenses go, because they didn’t fit. Example: I get a warning for being “sexist” (!) because I make a crack about Ingrid needing to eat an Easter chocolate bunny because she was cranky and “menstrual”. She, in the meantime, got to accuse me of being a failed business, jealous of everyone, and trying to get the Lindens to change their software to accommodate my failures (false).
The result? I acquire a warning I don’t need about something stupid. Ingrid gets a big fat sense of gloating self-righteousness, and her amen choir cheers her on and is emboldened. The group tools, however, still get changed, and not because of anything to do with me. Imagine. Imagine what you have to do to make proposals like that against the grain. Awful, awful.
Allana Dion
Apr 13th, 2007
>”You’re always in reaction, always contrary, and always trying to argue. Try to accept that there are often very valid reasons and more complex reasons for things than you’re prepared to admit.”
Apparently the instant disgust you feel upon even reading my name causes you to miss certain things, such as where I stated that this was a possibility:
“Well unless that one was a later addition and I’m not aware of it.”
But yes I am about to be contrary now. Wow you are just wallowing in the muck of hypocracy.
Let me get this straight. The ESC search bot that goes around SL making a list of items that are set for sale and the names of the creators and owners, is evil because it is necessary to go to the trouble of opting out if you don’t want to appear on that list. I seem to recall you yelling OPT IN OPT IN OPT IN ONLY at a meeting recently.
Yet a system which allows residents to rate, comment on and create profiles for other residents on an open website without their consent is perfectly acceptable to you.
At the time, while I was looking at all of these rate sites, that was something that only mildly bothered me and simply made me decide not to participate. But it is apparently the reason you choose not only to join up but to promote them.
As to all the guantanamo bay and child abuse hyperbole… nevermind I’ll just sit here and quietly roll my eyes.
Feel free to rate me any way you want, make any comment you like about me anywhere you like. Not only am I confident enough in my reputation to not be overly concerned, I’m actually a grown up and therefore feel no need to resort to that kind of jealous childishness myself.
Joshua Nightshade
Apr 13th, 2007
“I’m all for having public profiles of people whether or not they wish to have them. I’m happy to make up one about YOU and characterize your long-time trolly, contrarian behaviour, if that would help the public.”
Prokofy, I DARE you to make a profile for me without my permission.
Go on.
Joshua Nightshade
Apr 13th, 2007
“Just for the record, since we’re discussing the history of rating, I was a big believer in the negrate. Many people mistakenly believe I flew around the world administering negs indiscriminately, but in fact, I did not issue that many, nor was I give them. I gave more positives than I got; I also gave more negs than I got, but not by much.”
This is an utter lie.
You used it extensively, harassing-ly, constantly.
To this day I had a total of three negative ratings on my entire profile. They came from you.
Allana Dion
Apr 13th, 2007
Another note about this slrealreps…
According to their website, if you have a free basic account you can only leave feedback about other residents. In order to be able to respond to feedback written about you, you then have to pay for a premium membership.
“Basic Account Features
* Can leave feedback about any other Second Life resident.
Premium Account Features
* Can attach a comment to any feedback left about you by another user. Your comment will show up in your Real Reputations public profile along with the original feedback.”
So if you wish to defend yourself against people like Prokofy, open your wallets first.
No offense to Shawn Altman who created this. But It would be nice if it were the other way around, pay money to dump on other people, free to defend yourself as the dumpee.
Allana Dion
Apr 14th, 2007
Oh and apparently only premium members who have paid up can request the removal of any negative “feedback”.
http://www.slrealreps.com/info/upgrade
Mark
Apr 14th, 2007
Funny, a person who maintains a list of people to not do business with and who runs her own “police blotter” whining about ESC, Banlink, you name it, anything not run by someone she likes, she hates.
Hyprokcrisy in full swing.
The ratings sytem has been dead since club kids and people like Angel Leviathan started to abuse them, while Prokky was still over in TSO impersonating 16 year old Wiccans.
It was then that we were told by LL that the ratings system would be reworked, and eventually phased out. They held true to their word, and thank god, because children inhabiting adult bodies, who simply have no clue how to share the sandbox, don’t need to be given Linden created avenues to grief others.
Blingtards, Angel Leviathan, Plastic Duck, and Prokofy Neva. What do these things have in common? All abusers of the old rate system, and all reasons why the system was nerfed and now cancelled altogether.
Good riddance.
Prokofy dear, for someone who wants SL to be so much like RL, surely you understand that we don’t walk around with numbers tattooed on us indicating what every fuckwad we encounter on a daily basis thinks of us.
So much for your faux machismo, counting coup bullshit.
Prokofy Neva
Apr 14th, 2007
No, I never even heard of Joshua Nightshade until Second Citizen opened, and that was after negrating was even removed from the client.
Prokofy Neva
Apr 14th, 2007
>pay money to dump on other people, free to defend yourself as the dumpee.
Most people don’t “dump”. In fact, read my posts there, they are mainly positive.
I’m not interested in stalking Joshua Nightshade and finding his objects in world *shudders* to rate him on some service . But he’s a creepy stalker, just to put the record straight.
I need to start a Joshua Nightshade Rebuttal Page and just link to it every time he lies about something, otherwise it gets very boring.
Joshua Nightshade
Apr 14th, 2007
“No, I never even heard of Joshua Nightshade until Second Citizen opened, and that was after negrating was even removed from the client.”
Bullshit.
Allana Dion
Apr 14th, 2007
“Most people don’t “dump”. In fact, read my posts there, they are mainly positive.”
Ok fine, I can believe that. But more importantly, are you seeing my point at all? Ignore that it’s me saying it and just look again at the information being given. Can you see how wrong it is? People are NOT charged to post feedback, but they ARE charged to either respond to any feedback about them or to ask for it’s removal.
You recently argued that the ESC sheep bot needed to be stopped because it forced people to go to the trouble of visiting the island in order to opt out from being on their list. I disagreed with your position, but certainly not with your right to say it.
These ratings systems (not just slrealreps but as I understand it also TrustNet) aren’t even giving people the ability to opt out. They are in fact almost forcing people to participate in order to have any control whatsoever over what is being said about them.
The maker of TrustNet has actually stated that opting out isn’t possible. The slrealreps site states that you have to pay them to have anything said about you removed.
Can you honestly stand by your support of the ratings systems and not see the contradiction?
Joshua Nightshade
Apr 14th, 2007
“Can you honestly stand by your support of the ratings systems and not see the contradiction?”
Yes. This is the root of the Prokofy’s power.
Artemis Fate
Apr 14th, 2007
“Can you honestly stand by your support of the ratings systems and not see the contradiction?”
You have much to learn about the ways of the Prokofy, young grasshopper.