Talk:Second Life

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article candidate Second Life is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
December 29, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Internet culture (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Community (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Community WikiProject, which gives a central approach to Community and related subjects on Wikipedia.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Video games (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Client section rewrite[edit]

I've made a start at rewriting the client section so it contains current relevant information. I have not mentioned any specific third party project to avoid favoritism (things are quite competitive) and removed ALL mention of depreciated projects etc etc.

A section on the history of SL viewers is probably beyond the scope of this article and would always be very controversial.

TrinityDejavu (talk) 10:55, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

An average 38,000 residents at any one time?[edit]

I find this figure quite incredible. I went to 2nd Life a few years ago because I saw a program about it on British Channel 4 News saying there were five million people on it. This proved pure hype. I chatted to a few people I met there in the virtual world and they all agreed that five million people may have joined up but 4,999,500 got bored with it very quickly, left and never returned. There were never as many as a hundred people resident in the few times I went there. Now I am quite prepared to admit I am totally wrong on this but 2nd Life seemed to me to the most hyped thing I ever found on the whole WWW. I got bored with it very soon like all the rest of 4,999,900 and have never felt the urge to return. It is really just a glorified chat-room but with very, very few people. So I am baffled by this figure. As I say it was a few years ago and maybe things have changed. I don't feel inclined to revisit the site and find out because, as I say, I found it all immensely dull. Has anyone else had a similar experience or can throw any light on this please? Thanks SmokeyTheCat 13:23, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

You can find the number of people currently logged in on the login page, or look at graphs for the past day or longer here: SL Graphs by Tateru Nino, and it currently averages 50,000 people (35-70K depending on time of day). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:01, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
There have been articles in Wired Magazine and The Register, accusing SL of inflating its population statistics. Refernces to that controvery seem to have been expunged from this article and its discussion. DonPMitchell (talk) 19:03, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Agree with Smokey, I too feel SL was super-hyped by magazines, tv and reviews, between 2006 and 2007 mostly (nowadays, no one around knows it even exists). Back then, you'd hear of major pop acts having gigs there, politicians apperaing and giving electoral speeches, and such. Today? Nothing. I logged on it around late 2006 and in a week I had it. Before I even logged in, it made me go and upgrade my video card (a thing I didn't even know existed), then when in, I wasn't ever able to go any place interesting, I wasn't able to wear anything better than a tank-top and slacks and go barefoot (I had to buy stuff there?) and also movement, talk and such interaction was robotic at best. Other users i (rarely) saw around were apparently also struggling with hand and body movement, except some weirdos, probably real no-life geeks, dressed as dragonfairies of dubious gender, doing weird things and looking really, really scary. I mean, being Italian, I even picked up a chinese chick in there (which is what i went SL for in the first place), and like, strolled about hand in hand for an afternoon (i had som'else in mind but whatever...), yet I thought the whole SL experience was really, really, REALLY CLUNKY, badly designed and extremely hard to grasp, awkward and clearly made for computer game geeks, which I definitely am not.

Max Ventura, Italy.

Thats very odd Max. I joined in 2005, and i was at the time using a very outdated PC with a totally unsuitable graphics card - it still worked (albeit slowly) and I wasnt ever compelled to upgrade the graphics card. It is also not true that you had to only wear a tank top and slacks and go barefoot. Avatars came with their own "free" selection of clothes, including shoes, although you could if you wish, buy better ones. Even with my useless graphics card and outdated processor I was able to dress the avatar perfectly well and move around. What I couldnt do was experience full high-res graphics of the surrounding environment - for that you need a more powerful graphics card. I didn't find any problems in using SL, to be honest. And I am definitely not a computer games geek (prior to SL I hadnt played any computer games since about 1998 when I was using an Amiga!). Theres lots of reasons why SL failed, and everyone has their own view of it. Technical reasons are almost certainly not among them. Stan Pomeray - London UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:13, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

SL is not an MMORPG[edit]

I personally DONT beleive SL has much to do with being an MMORPG, quite the contrary it's users have made it so. SL is a VIRTUAL WORLD, a mimick of REAL WORLD in so forth that it lets it users... ok scratch that, COMMUNALLY FORCES Its users into doing things in such away that even in the REAL world they'd gag and barf from it. WoW is different than SL and same with other things - GOREANS ARE NOT MMORPGS they're honestly an RL and SL merge of a society that is bound by their laws. BDSM and such are not RPGS either. Would you call SL modeling an RPG? (You walk around in a modeling area like a doll, you wear custom created content and listen to crabby other users who make you feel like crap for being an honest person. wait.. this sounded like Diablo 2 back in the day.). This is just feed back of personal opinion, if other people think i'm wrong or different whatever its option of opinion :) XxReikoxX - The Visual Asia Geek (talk) 06:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

MMORPG and SL Roleplay and Combat[edit]

There seems to be some confusion both here and in the article about Combat Sims and Roleplay Sims. They are NOT one and the same. Yes, there's often combat included within roleplay, depending on the genre, but this section of the article makes it sound like these sims are functioning like MMORPG's...and there are very few that even come close to that kind of linear "end game" structure. The closest I've seen to date is Avalon, which offers a puzzle filled quest that ends with slaying a dragon and which will earn the avatar who completes it a rideable dragon. All other sims are either combat focused with a little "role-play" on the side to keep it social or devoted to roleplay at the level of paragraph roleplay with "actions" to suit that may include metered combat only in rare instances. Nor would be combat, zombie killer sims are combat (possibly even classed as "first person shooters" as they're very like a shooting range and not roleplay at all), Valahari and Everwind are fantasy roleplay that actually frown on combat outside of sanctioned "arena" duels..whether with magic or weapon HUDs. Most Gorean sims are roleplay with combat limited to dueling matches, slave capture, or raid style combat as the roleplay requires. Most martial arts and japanese sword-style combat sims are entirely arena based metered combat with almost no role-play involved beyond the niceties.

Incidentally, having been a gamer (online and offline) all my life, a citizen of Second Life for over three years, and a beta tester for virtual worlds like Blue Mars...I find the inclusion of "Entropia" in a list of virtual worlds that compare to SL a bit...idiotic. lol It's only working "portal"(Planet Calypso)is a game, even if you can put ridiculous amounts of real world money into it and it has no "end game" beyond trying to make that money back. It has no social interface beyond what you can find at the often skinned Knights-Online and no user input to the creation of anything. CryEngine or no, it plays like a sci-fi mmorpg. [Well, okay, Anarchy Online actually plays a lot better...and it doesn't even require a GPU. Raging graphics be hanged, learn to design something people want to log into already. ;P] Steorling (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Prim vs. Sculpty Prim[edit]

I am not very good at editing here, so please forgive me if I make any mistakes in what I'm about to say: the mentions of prims in the article link to a page on sculpted prims. However, not all prims are sculpted prims. Many if not most prims are basic objects such as boxes. There are a set number of 'basic' prim types, including boxes, spheres, cones, etc, which can be linked together. A page should probably be created to differentiate prims from sculpted prims, or perhaps the two terms combined into one page? I have never made any edits that weren't grammatical or spelling fixes, and I am also a regular SL user who makes money there, so I feel I should not attempt this myself for fear of appearing biased. Ihavenomouth (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:29, 14 January 2010 (UTC).

Sex content removed[edit]

It was replaced with "this is not allowed" or similar. I dropped the not allowed thing, but while I don't think the section should have been deleted entire, it was largely OR and I don't feel it should be restored... and I don't feel motivated to fix and re-add. - Sinneed 20:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

How much did SL cost to develop?[edit]

I'm trying to find information on how much money was spent in the initial development of Second Life. Considering the fact that it started with almost no content (since users actually create the content themselves), I'm guessing it must have been a much cheaper to produce than a real MMORPG. Does anyone have any info on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

1) Linden Lab's investment is likely to be highly confidential company information. 2) A great part of the development of Second Life, as Linden Labs is the first to proclaim, was done by users themselves. Their contribution would be impossible to assess. 3) An investor asked me how much it would cost to create a competitive site, my guess was at least $10 million to launch a beta -- and a lot of luck. Piano non troppo (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
It may have started with few content but had to have in-build tools for the users to create content, a fairly rich and complex scripting language to allow users to implement particle systems, working vehicles, weapons, HUDs etc. which MMOGs usually don't have. In a sense it can be seen as a developping platform like Unity 3D but where the users are inside the world while they expand it`s content (with technologies to import work done in external programs like Blender added later). -- (talk) 20:49, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

This is different to source of information[edit]

"In March 2009, it has become known that there exist a few Second Life entrepreneurs, whose profits exceed 1 million US$ per year." The source given ( only suggests that these entrepreneurs have grossed over 1 Million. They could have invested more than a Million and even lost money for all we know. (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

The second edition of "The Official Guide to Second Life" mentions, as I recall, that only 5% of businesses make a profit, and that only a few people earn as much as "six figures" (USD). The people I have talked to who claim to earn their real world salary from Second Life were all peddling online sex services. Piano non troppo (talk) 16:06, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Feted Inner Core?[edit]

Since the article never mentions the expression, i've removed the redirect, please don't create it again unless there is actually some info about FIC in the article. --TiagoTiago (talk) 23:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

My understanding is that FIC is a supposed elite within SL, that was occasionally reported on, maybe five years ago. You'd probably have to do original research to get some info. Not something that seems to be current. Zhochaka (talk) 13:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

The "FIC" is the pet boogyman of everyone's favorite ranting lunatic Prokofy Neva. It is of absolutely no notability independent from Prokofy Neva themself. Prokofy Neva however is possibly of note. Just google the name and you'll find all you need to know. (talk) 19:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Woodbury University Controversy[edit]

This is currently a live situation, and the piece on the page only reports one point of view. Since Linden Lab seems to have a consistent policy of not making public statements about bans, I doubt anyone will know the reasons for sure. It maybe is part of the big picture, but I can see a big NPOV problem looming. Zhochaka (talk) 13:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the material, largely for the reasons given. Second Life is an complex environment, with millions of individuals, and thousands of businesses over many years. Often people will be involved for some time without knowledge of features that others use on a regular basis. There's a temptation to speak from one's experience. Wikipedia is not a battleground. Nor is it a place to insert bias by pick-and-choosing isolated studies. Rather than synthesizing, more emphasis should be placed on stable reliable references such as "Second Life: The Official Guide" and "Second Life for Dummies". Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 18:43, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Mark P. McCahill argues that the ban of the university was related to some of its members questioning a datamine database operated by the developers of one of the third party Second Life clients, the Emerald Viewer.Pixeleen Mistral (Mark P. McCahill) (May 19, 2010). "Did Linden Lab's Emerald Dev Coverup Lead To Woodbury Ban?". The Alphaville Herald. 

Journalist Maria Korolov asserts that "in the case of Second Life, companies using the public grid have to submit to a number of restrictions on user names, ages and content — and risk losing access to their worlds and their communities of users if a server crashes or Second Life decides to shut down their regions", mentioning the case of Woodbury University as a recent example.Maria Korolov (May 13, 2010). "How open are virtual worlds?". Hypergrid Business. (talk) 03:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit Needed[edit]

History Section "...formed Linden Lab. The development of hardware that would enable computer users to be fully immersed in a virtual world experience." ---This isn't a complete sentence. ArishiaNishi (talk) 03:33, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I fixed grammar and removed wandering WP:PEACOCK language. Piano non troppo (talk) 06:46, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Made some slight other changes to the sentence structure, so the issue should be resolved. Thistrackted (talk) 14:38, 30 May 2013 (UTC)


Why is Second Life part of WikiProject Apple Inc.? Bwrs (talk) 07:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Why is this even listed as a game?[edit]

Because to be a game it has to have a goal like killing monsters,gaining experience points,leveling up,or anything like that. It has none of that.Werewolffan98 (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

This has been discussed pretty thoroughly. See the sections above. Second Life is a meta-game or "game container". There are many Sims that offer roleplay, combat system huds, point systems, and much more. I do not have statistics but my guess is that of all the various activities within Second Life, gaming would be near top of the list along with dancing and spamming local chat with inane gestures :) Ronald Joe Record (talk) 16:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I question the "game" label as well. While one can indeed play games in Second Life, you can also play games on the Internet or Facebook. While I might agree it is a "game container" in the same way as Facebook, I'd also agree both go well past this. It has large parts that are authoring tools, simulators, and social media destinations.--Mark Burhop (talk) 20:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Re revision as of 01:56, 3 October 2014 by BreakfastJr: "Mainly italicised the game's title (which was previously italicised in some places but not others), in accordance with the MoS (I know SL's status as a game is disputed, but it seems to me that "game" is the best-fitting label that the MoS has))". SL's status is not in dispute. It is a virtual reality within which many real life activities take place, including education courses, ecommerce, social networking, musical concerts and art exhibitions. I propose that "Second LIfe" be non-italicised. -- Oniscoid 21:25, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I think that Oniscoid might well be right that uses of the title should be italicised. There's definitely a strong argument to be made there, and I'm not exactly opposed to it. However, it's at least not clear that that would be better.
In Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles, the most relevant regulations I can find are that the titles of "Computer and video games (but not other software)" should be italicised, that the titles of "Software other than games" (examples given are iTunes, traceroute, and Sobig) should not be italicised, and that "Website titles may or may not be italicized depending on the type of site and what kind of content it features". I'd say that "computer/video game" and "software other than games" are both better labels for SL than "website", so that can probably be ruled out right away.
Then the question becomes whether SL is better described as a computer/video game or as software that is definitively not a game. I definitely do think that SL's game-or-not status is in dispute. In this very article, it says "the initial objective-driven, gaming focus of Second Life was shifted to a more user-created, community-driven experience" (implying that it was initially quite game-like) and "Second Life's status as a virtual world, a computer game, or a talker, is frequently debated". Also, SL uses the Havok engine, which is usually described as a game engine or as providing "a physics engine component and related functions to video games" (from its Wikipedia article). Most significantly, it is very easy to find articles about SL from reputable media sources which refer to it by the label "game"; for example, and (both of which were in the first page of 9 results when I Googled "second life").
However, I do recognise that SL isn't clearly or undisputedly a game. Those same articles often refer to it first by terms such as "virtual world", and one can also find other articles (e.g.,, also in the first 9 results) or statements from developers specifically denying that SL is a game. So it is possible that it'd be better off unitalicised.
However, this isn't about whether SL is a game exactly, but about whether SL is better a better fit for the label "Computer and video games (but not other software)" or "Software other than games". I think that, since the latter label defines itself in opposition to games, the former is better, because SL is at least not definitively not a game. For an illustrative example, I personally think that the form of SL is closer to World of Warcraft or Club Penguin than to PowerPoint or PaintShop. I recognise that SL generally has significantly less of a focus on traditionally game-like features than WoW and Club Penguin do, but it still has significant similarities with games, and those other two virtual worlds also both have features not traditionally found in games, such as economies and a significant potential for social networking.
Also, I recognise that this whole thing is quite cosmetic and not very significant, but I do like consistency, so if it's changed I'd like it to at least be consistent (which would include changing the info box). BreakfastJr (talk) 04:32, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
@BreakfastJr - No. I think Second life should *not* be italicised, just as (eg) Facebook and YouTube are not italicised - see the last sentence of my comment (the one you are replying to) which says, "I propose that "Second LIfe" be non-italicised." (*Life) :) -- Oniscoid 23:57, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the Emerald viewer[edit]

Although the Emerald Viewer was the most popular third party viewer, as of 9/8/10 it is now banned as a couple of developers effectively performed a DDoS using the client, and then refused to step down off the project at Linden Lab's request. Emergence and Phoenix viewers have picked up where it left with much of the original Emerald team, minus the few that LL demanded removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Economy Edits Needed[edit]

I've never actually played the game (not trying to contribute the war revolving around the word 'game' - I'm just not sure what else to call it), but was coming here to learn about it (this is why I'm not going to do any editing myself). As a non-user here for academic reasons, I find the economy section to be a bit lacking. It seems to imply that in-game money (L$) can be converted to real world currency and that some users run real world businesses on SL. But 'imply' is all that it does. This section really doesn't explain SL economy to someone who is not already familiar with the subject. (talk) 23:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I made a stab at clarifying this, adding a paragraph to the Economy section along with additional stats. Ronald Joe Record (talk) 04:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite "Separate grids"[edit]

The entire section should be rewritten, such as

In Second Life, there are two age-differentiated grids (one is for teens 13-17(which no longer exists), one is for adults 18(now 16) or over)

Which just looks sloppy. I'm not very good at writing but it should be more like,

In Second Life, there is only one grid for those 16 and over.

Also, the part about the forums and false allegations, totally unsourced. If someone has the time to rewrite, it would be nice. I may try but it would probably be very poorly written. I guess I will try. Alex³ (talk) 00:33, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Did a little work myself anyways with a friend. It looks better but it still lacking A LOT OF SOURCES! Sheesh really the section should be removed, but hopefully someone will help it. :/ Alex³ (talk) 01:22, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
  • There is actually two more grids. The beta grid and the mesh grid. These are used for testing creations made in real life. The main grid charges $L to upload these creations and the other 2 grids are free. There may me other grids as well for other puropses. The SL wikipedia should have info them.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

"Unclear trading limit obtention"?[edit]

The section headlined "Unclear trading limit obtention" is so poorly written as to be incomprehensible. Can someone render it into English, please? I would fix it myself but I don't have the time or energy at the moment— and I don't know if some editor has been jealously guarding the section in its current form. Timothy Horrigan (talk) 04:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The issue is sufficiently complicated that it can't be made accurate and simple. Suffice to say some people can earn 50,000 USD in secondlife in a year, and not be able to move that money into a real life bank account like they used to overnight because all the tentacularly complex multilayer weird ways to ask for a trade limit raise are entirely obscured or even unknown to Linden Labs staff itself. As such some well known product lines ended distribution because they couldn't get 50,000$ USD/year in their pocket after earning it - and linden labs ends up keeping the money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:16, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe I have remedied this problem. Jeff Alexander (talk) 08:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
I think you helped some, but I think it's still far from clear to somebody who has no idea about how Second Life works. Also, it's still fully of whining that looks suspiciously POV. I can understand people would be pissed about not being able to move money out of SL (which I gather is what this issue is about, although again this section doesn't explicitly state that), but Wikipedia isn't the place for it. Wjousts (talk) 13:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Now that it's readable, other editors can determine whether this is truly a widespread criticism of the game or merely the griping of a single editor overreacting to a bad customer service experience. The former is appropriate in the section it's under. Jeff Alexander (talk) 07:41, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

File:SecondLife premiumgrowth.png[edit]

Does anyone remember why this image was removed? - RoyBoy 18:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Highly Dubious statement in "History" section[edit]

The statement is this:

In January 2008, residents spent a total of 28,274,505 hours "inworld", and, on average, 38,000 residents 
were logged in at any  particular moment. The maximum concurrency (number of avatars inworld) recorded is 
88,200 in the 1st qtr. 2009 [9]

Basic sanity check: 28,274,505 / 38,000 == 7440.7 hours spent in-world by the average resident that year. 7440.7 / 24 == 310 full 24-hour days spent in-world by average resident in 2008. ... People maybe stayed logged in all the time (?), then this might make some sort of sense.

Also, that citation is no longer any good. Kace7 (talk) 16:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

That 38000 is only the number of people on at any one time, not the total number of players. Handcuffed (talk) 18:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I have been to Second Life and looked around some. I noticed that some users have many "Avatars" "in-world" at any given moment. I have seen huge groups of them stored in dedicated and isolated pens. I myself have operated as many as 5 avatars at the same time (as an experiment). This might help explain the numbers above. (talk) 14:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Most SL residents have only 1-2 accounts but some use extra accounts as "emergency alts" (in case their main account is compromised) or as store mannequins and the like. That aside from griefer's throwaway accounts and abandoned ones - Skysmith (talk) 14:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
This section is nonsense; of course the average concurrency would be similar to 24/7*365*concurrency; concurrency means 'people online'. Which users which are online at any point is different. (talk) 03
32, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

3rd Party viewers[edit]

Mostly speculation, has little baring on the current state of open source tpv development beyond a footnote. Needs a rewrite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Perceived competition[edit]

  • The section Competitors was deleted.
    Since any company can view themselves as potential competitors of another, an uncited list of wannabes has no place in Wikipedia. Any company at all could see themselves as a competitor, this is a matter of business planning, not verifiable fact. A company, for example, that seeks to improve the standalone PC/console market could reasonably want to put Second Life out of business. That would give an opening to every single PC/console game company to include themselves in this article.
    Really the only thing that should be accepted is a reliable, official statement from Second Life about who they see as competitors. (And no, I'm not assuming good faith on the part of a system administrator who removed an edit that had been justified, by his own, that was not justified.) (talk) 16:55, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
  • The sentence in question is:
    Second Life has many smaller competitors including Twinity, Smeet, Smallworlds, IMVU, Active Worlds, Onverse, Kaneva, Utherverse and Blue Mars.
    When describing something popular, what is wrong with saying what competitors it has?
    I restored this section with edit comment "some people DO want to know what other programs are like Second Life.", with "like" used to mean "similar to".
    It was later re-deleted with edit comment "Appleyard, see Discussion. "What people might like" has nothing to do with Wiki rules and guidelines. And you know that .....", with "like" used to mean "find pleasant", not with my meaning. See wikt:like. Let's discuss this properly here. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Why not put the competition in 'See also'? PrincessSchala (talk) 23:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


it' called Hipihi it's the only Competitors of SL, because it offers the same service and same functionality but by a japenese company article speak primarily of second life and not of another world — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdoppelganger (talkcontribs) 08:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

The book about virtual relationships[edit]

Feel free to use the book ("Virgin's Handbook on Virtual Relationships", ISBN:1463666993) as a reference for the discussion about virtual relationships in the Second Life. However, the article is not a discussion of the book, so there's no need to have a paragraph devoted to it. In addition, external links don't belong to the main text, see WP:EL. --Eleassar my talk 07:50, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Emergency Responders[edit]

This section is not written in an encyclopedic style ("who train other avatars in stuff like fire training"; "other types of training that the emergency departments do today"; etc.). Much better than it was in April, but still not encyclopedic, and since it's uncited...? Also, the current wording implies that this is sanctioned for real-world application, and since none of my co-workers or higher-ups would ever "train" someone on SecondLife for emergency response tactics that are intended to have real-world applications, I hesitate to trust that the uncited section is depicting accurate events or is accurate in the real-world role of the "trainers". — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

High Prim" Island (Grandfathered) ????[edit]

 No such thing.. Also... Grandfathered sims cannot be sold, ever.

If there were such a thing, then when it was sold, it would no longer be grandfathered. Grandfathered is the cost per month for the sim, and has nil to do with anything else. There are two types of Homestead, and two types of full sim as well, ( if you consider grandfathered as a "type"). If there actually exists one or two sims out of the 30,000+ on the grid that have 20,000 prims, you should name them. SLURLs are easy to put into HTML as well.  :)

cheers... have a good day.

--some anonymous user that doesnt know squat about Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:21, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Second Life 10th anniversary[edit]

Today marks the Second Life 10th anniversary and earlier in the month, I added a section regarding Second Life 10th anniversary regarding the events and stuff in Second Life. On June 20, 2013, Linden Lab has posted an infographic regarding the stats over the past 10 years in Second Life, and Second Life today on the Linden Lab press releases and on the Second Life blog, so I decided to place the information on the article and cite the sources. ELITE 3000 (talk) 08:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Technical issues, last paragraph[edit]

The last paragraph of the the chapter "technical issues" is not written in an encyclopedic style, and the contents of that paragraph are not understandable to someone who does not know Second Life. I can't even tell if it is relevant to the issue, since I do not know what it tries to express. It does not help that the only source it uses is not publicly visible. Can someone more familiar with the issue look into whether the paragraph is relevant, and if it is, fix it? Wikikrax (talk) 09:36, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. Each region/simulator has its own server. Rebooting the servers didn't fix performance issues that changing servers seems to fix. The ref is their bug report list that you can view by creating a free account and logging in.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Yellow or green?[edit]

The article had an image with the description yellow submarine and I deleted the word yellow because I see the submarine as being clearly and unquestionably green. Is anyone seeing it as yellow? Cogiati (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

For me it is yellow indeed, dirty yellow though. Tested on three monitors. Did you look at it full-sized? --Worstbull (talk) 08:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
It is a yellow submarine, but will be slightly green-tinged due to the blue water. —ajf (talk) 19:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

"However, Linden Lab changed their terms of service in August 2013, to be able to use user-generated content for any purpose" is based on a misunderstanding[edit]

see Updates to Section 2.3 of the Terms of Service

I copied it below

by Community Manager Linden Lab ‎07-16-2014 09:59 AM - edited ‎07-16-2014 09:45 AM

When we updated our Terms of Service in August 2013, the revised language of Section 2.3, the “Service Content License,” caused concern among certain Second Life creators. The revision to this section was worded in such a way that these creators expressed concern that we intended to appropriate their original creations and sell or license such creations without their permission. As our historical practice demonstrates and as we have since tried to clarify, this was absolutely not our intent. Creators are the lifeblood of Second Life. It is you who have populated Second Life with a petabyte worth of unique content and experiences, and it is important for our collective and continued success that you remain confident in continuing to create in our world. To be clear: Linden Lab respects the proprietary rights of Second Life’s content creators and prides itself in its success in providing platforms on which users can create original content and profit from their creations.

As part of an update to our Terms of Service today, we have made a modification to further clarify Section 2.3. The updated section still provides Linden Lab with the rights that we need in order to operate and promote Second Life, so you will see that we have retained much of the language as the previous version. However, the updated section now also includes limits that better match our intended meaning, and we hope will assuage some of the concerns we heard about the previous version.

First, the modified version limits our rights with respect to user-created content in Second Life by restricting our use “inworld or otherwise on the Service.” Additionally, it limits our right to “sell, re-sell or sublicense (through multiple levels)” your Second Life creations by requiring some affirmative action on your part in order for us to do so. This language mirrors the corresponding User Content License currently in Section 2.4, which has been part of the Terms of Service for years.

We know that the legal language of documents such as the Terms of Service can seem daunting, and we expect that some creators may continue to have concerns about particular elements of the updated agreement. Today’s revision to this section of the Terms of Service more closely expresses our intent - that we do not intend to appropriate or sell your content outside of our Service - and our hope is that the limitations clarified in the updated language of this section will support creators’ confidence in our platform.

As with any document like this, it’s important to read the whole Terms of Service before agreeing to it. Section 2.3 isn’t the only thing that’s changed - we’ve also added the updated policy for skill gaming, which we blogged about here - but we wanted to blog about this update to be clear about what’s different in this section, what it means, and why we made the change.

Tallsally (talk) 21:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Apologises for the very basic cut and paste ... I think Linden Lab has replied to concerns and declared they are not taking away creators copyrightTallsally (talk) 21:24, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I still think that their TOS allows for such things. For example, this

Except as otherwise described in any Additional Terms (such as a contest’s official rules) which will govern the submission of your User Content, you hereby grant to Linden Lab, and you agree to grant to Linden Lab, the non-exclusive, unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual, and cost-free right and license to use, copy, record, distribute, reproduce, disclose, modify, display, publicly perform, transmit, publish, broadcast, translate, make derivative works of, and sell, re-sell or sublicense (through multiple levels)(with respect to Second Life, Inworld or otherwise on the Service as permitted by you through your interactions with the Service), and otherwise exploit in any manner whatsoever, all or any portion of your User Content (and derivative works thereof), for any purpose whatsoever in all formats, on or through any media, software, formula, or medium now known or hereafter developed, and with any technology or devices now known or hereafter developed, and to advertise, market, and promote the same. You agree that the license includes the right to copy, analyze and use any of your Content as Linden Lab may deem necessary or desirable for purposes of debugging, testing, or providing support or development services in connection with the Service and future improvements to the Service. The license granted in this Section 2.3 is referred to as the "Service Content License." I bolded what I think was important. Tutelary (talk) 21:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

It is in reality all a bit complex for me :), is that extract from 2013 and/or current Tallsally (talk) 23:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
That is from their current terms of service, and seems rather plain to me from what they say and what their ToS says is that they don't match up. I don't even personally play Second Life, it's just that they don't seem to correlate with eachother. Tutelary (talk) 23:34, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
I do play SL, but I am not a creator or a legal buff ...I just believed the recent amendment/update to the terms of service ... i cant make a good/solid case against your editTallsally (talk) 19:13, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Game engine[edit]

Appearantly, the "game engine" used now is Havok 2011; however what was it before ? The game engine is part of the SecondLife Viewer; perhaps that the latter can also be explained in more detail. It's important for the Metaverse, see

Open Simulator still works on the old second life viewer btw, so knowing what engine that is seems important for that too. (talk) 07:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Have editors forgot "Culture of Second life"?[edit]

I was running through clean up articles on its portal and I came across this article[1]. It is "Culture of Second Life". I saw that the talk page was busy so maybe someone can do something about it. Mbcap (talk) 13:38, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Merger Proposal[edit]

I propose mergingCriticism of Second Life with Second Life. This will create a more NPOV driven article, if the length is too long we can break up the article based on content, a history of Second life, articles like that.Bryce Carmony (talk) 21:39, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

...what? That's how it presently is. You don't propose to blow up articles like that on a vague one-sentence arm-waving knee-jerk guess; you do it because you already tried everything else in editing, and then it is still required by major policies and guidelines, which you name in detail along with something of a draft to prove the point. All of the "Criticism of" articles need periodic extra attention, as I've somewhat done for Apple's and as someone else has been doing for Facebook's. — Smuckola(talk) 23:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Grammar error[edit]

"In some cases the Lindens told people who had months (or years) of critically bad simulator performance that they changed the simulator server it fixed the problem permanently." This sentence seems wrong. What should it say? (talk) 23:29, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Sounds like it should be something like:
"In some cases the Lindens told people who had months (or years) of critically bad simulator performance that they [had] changed the simulator server [and] it fixed the problem permanently."
ajf (talk) 19:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
It shouldn't be any of that, because that is all WP:OR WP:USERGEN and hence was already deleted. — Smuckola(talk) 20:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Second Life. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:53, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merging of Second Life research into Second Life[edit]

'Second Life' and italics[edit]

Not much on this in the archives - the title of this page is italicized, yet there are many instances of "Second Life" with no italics. So, is the name in italics or should it be unitalicized? I'm not familiar enough with the site to know the answer to this (talking to a friend who has been active on Second Life so am poking around trying to get a handle on the Wikipedia pages on it). Thanks. Randy Kryn 14:22, 3 July 2016 (UTC)