[sldev] Re: SLDev Digest, Vol 21, Issue 22

Darien Caldwell darien.caldwell at gmail.com
Tue Sep 9 15:58:05 PDT 2008

Well, I can't speak for LL, but It seemed pretty clear to me that they
were starting this group because they feel LL isn't receptive to the
changes they want to do. In other words "if we can't get LL to do it,
we will fork our own viewer."  Which is fine.

There are a lot of viewers out there now, I learn of new ones every
day. And everyone has their own take on how things should be done. In
the end people will choose the viewer that works best for their needs.
And there's nothing anybody can do to stop that, short of LL refusing
connections from anything but their own viewer. I don't get a sense
they will move in that direction though.

Different Lindens run their office hours in different ways. I do agree
it's unique to have a guest speaker, but it's not an unheard of
convention in teaching circles. It may boil down to they have nothing
more pressing to discuss at the moment. :)

On 9/9/08, Random Unsung <ravenglassrentals at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Re: "Jacek Antonelli has announced a new, user-interface oriented project
> called mprudence as a major fork of the Second Life viewer.  She will be our
> guest host for Rx Office hours and will lead a discussion on the Imprudence
> Project.http://imprudenceviewer.org/"
> I'm highly troubled by the privileging and promotion of certain minority
> points of view on the viewer that are indicated by this totally
> unprecedented step involving the Lindens inviting a resident to speak at
> their office hours, something that I don't think I've ever seen in the
> history of SL.
> The "manifesto" about Imprudence is based on the entirely false and
> incendiary premise that an angry and aggressive minority with a perspective
> on the viewer of their own making should overthrow the majority, whom Jacek
> views as supposedly "sullen" or "passive" or "resistant to change" or even
> "abusive" about changes.
> Oh, that's ridiculous. Just because we don't want more damage inflicted on
> an already very long-suffering population that has put up with numerous
> patches with numerous new gizmos doesn't mean that we are "sullen" and
> "resistant" to change -- especially when it's obvious the change isn't
> toward simplification and intuitiveness but is mere replication of the
> existing issues. Jacek's model of the viewer replicates some of the same
> Linden geekiness, with things like "camera controls" in your face that the
> average person simply doesn't need and also in the name of "simplification"
> or "inventory control" imposes non-intuitive solutions and removes some of
> the features absolutely vital to business and *commerce* which gets both the
> Lindens and us paid -- namely the SEARCH buttons and tabs, which have been
> ENTIRELY removed in Jacek's viewer, in lieu of a lame EXPLORE which implies
> no commerce but merely passive viewing entertainment.
> People can argue endlessly about what kind of viewer is needed, but if back
> of the cosmetics of a viewer change there is still the drop-down blue screen
> to effect action, it is doomed to clumsiness. That's the sort of entire
> overhaul that is needed -- getting rid of the blue screen drop-down
> completely in lieu of other types of interfaces already in the viewer, some
> as chat, pie menus, etc.
> I think the Lindens should provide assurances that if some small group is
> elevated and encouraged to run off and remake the viewer "because everybody
> else is sullen" supposedly, that they are not free to impose it for
> mandatory use. That might be self-evident to some; I'd appreciate getting a
> statement of intent about it from LL.

More information about the SLDev mailing list