Change in POLICY required.

Provide feedback, criticism or praise about Kitely, or suggest new features
User avatar
Ilan Tochner
Posts: 4825
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:44 am
Has thanked: 2533 times
Been thanked: 2590 times
Contact:

Re: Change in POLICY required.

Post by Ilan Tochner » Sat May 20, 2017 12:39 am

Hi Dot,
Ilan Tochner wrote: You can include a website where you provide information and instructions about your products but only if that website doesn't include any mention of where those products can be acquired outside Kitely / Kitely Market.
People can create a website with the desired information that just doesn't mention other stores.

Alternatively, technical people can easily create a subdomain of their main domain and point it to a copy of their website which contains the desired information but doesn't contain links to alternative stores. The two sites can even share the same backend with a simple URL-based JavaScript inclusion for the alternative stores part.

In other words, there are easy, free, ways to comply with our policies while retaining the external documentation people want to provide.
User avatar
Handy Low
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Yorkshire, England
Has thanked: 207 times
Been thanked: 140 times
Contact:

Re: Change in POLICY required.

Post by Handy Low » Sat May 20, 2017 1:07 am

Rather than restructure the website and add Javascript functionality to comply with your revised ToS, it's even easier to close my store, which is what I've done.
Handy Low
User avatar
Ilan Tochner
Posts: 4825
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:44 am
Has thanked: 2533 times
Been thanked: 2590 times
Contact:

Re: Change in POLICY required.

Post by Ilan Tochner » Sat May 20, 2017 1:20 am

That is your right Handy. It's up to you to decide if the extra effort this would require is worth your time to do so. Just please note that we haven't changed our TOS since June 1, 2015 (see the date at the bottom of our Terms of Service page). We just weren't aware that you haven't been in compliance with it until now.

That said, I agree with Dot and Graham that your contributions to OpenSim have been valuable and so, If you ever change your mind, we'll be more than happy to welcome you back with open arms.
Graham Mills
Posts: 997
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:26 pm
Has thanked: 606 times
Been thanked: 754 times

Re: Change in POLICY required.

Post by Graham Mills » Sat May 20, 2017 8:59 am

While I don't want to be over-dramatic, the point I'm trying to make is that there are no winners compared to the situation prior to this thread, just losers. Kitely, Handy, Handy's customers, OpenSim, all have lost as far as I'm concerned -- ymmv. I don't know Spax so can't comment further there.

I find it hard to believe Kitely was suffering any material loss as a consequence of Handy's website. Bit of a longshot but given the disparate value of the revenue streams, perhaps Kitely Market might consider according additional rights to trusted residents who host with Kitely and have contributed positively to its community. These are the people who promote Kitely Grid most effectively.
These users thanked the author Graham Mills for the post:
Dot Matrix
User avatar
Ilan Tochner
Posts: 4825
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:44 am
Has thanked: 2533 times
Been thanked: 2590 times
Contact:

Re: Change in POLICY required.

Post by Ilan Tochner » Sat May 20, 2017 2:10 pm

Hi Graham,

I agree with your assessment but we can't make different demands from different merchants without it having a disparaging effect on other existing and potential merchants who will view that as favoritism. As it is, we're often confronted with needing to show people that everyone is required to play by the same rules. If we start handling reports differently based on the identity of the person whose listings were reported then we'll lose a lot more than just Handy's contribution.

I know it looks counterproductive for us to insist on this but we have to maintain goodwill with a lot of people and can't sacrifice that even for people who are MVPs in the OpenSim community. It's really a case of walking a mile in our shoes, we're often faced with lose-lose situations where whichever path we choose will lead to resentment from some people.

I wish people using our service would keep that in mind but I know that it's only human to view things based on how they effect you personally and not what it does to the system as a whole.
User avatar
Handy Low
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2013 3:38 pm
Location: Yorkshire, England
Has thanked: 207 times
Been thanked: 140 times
Contact:

Re: Change in POLICY required.

Post by Handy Low » Sat May 20, 2017 9:13 pm

That said, I agree with Dot and Graham that your contributions to OpenSim have been valuable and so, If you ever change your mind, we'll be more than happy to welcome you back with open arms.
Thanks, Ilan. And I bear no hard feelings either.

Personally, I've not been asking for special treatment - to be clear, my disagreement is that my own website's links to SL and IW in no way constituted competition to Kitely. Despite what you say, there is no way for anyone to bring copy/mod-protected scripts (and I dealt only in scripts) from either of those locations into Kitely. But I do understand that you feel the need for a blanket policy with no exceptions, even if I disagree with that approach.
These users thanked the author Handy Low for the post:
Graham Mills
Handy Low
User avatar
Ilan Tochner
Posts: 4825
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:44 am
Has thanked: 2533 times
Been thanked: 2590 times
Contact:

Re: Change in POLICY required.

Post by Ilan Tochner » Sat May 20, 2017 10:34 pm

Thank you Handy.

There are a significant number of Kitely users who I've talked to who have bought content/templates from Second Life marketplace with explicit permissions from their creators to use or modify and resell that content in OpenSim grids. Some of that content included scripts (mostly resizers, autorezzers, animation players, etc.).

Getting content from Second Life into Kitely may not be trivial for some types of content but it's clear that there is at least some overlap in the customer base between these two marketplaces.

Quite a few people own both Kitely Market stores and stores in Second Life Marketplace. Several of those have tried pointing from their Kitely Market stores / listings to the equivalent listings in Second Life Marketplace. In all of these cases we required them to remove those references once they came to our attention. I can assure you that there was more than one occasion where these merchants weren't happy about this. Despite that most of them complied instead of deciding to close their Kitely Market stores. Please note that I'm not blaming the ones who did decide to close for their decision, I'm just describing our experience with this to date.

While your scripts are quite more advanced than the ones I've seen included in the aforementioned products, allowing exceptions based on content type, permissions or complexity opens the doors to many threads such as the one we're communicating in now. As is quite obvious, those hurt the ecosystem and aren't happy making for anyone involved.

In other words, as much as I'd love to be in a position where we could make an exception for your store based on the specific nature of your products, we can't really do that without inviting a lot of problems with a segnficant number of other existing and potential merchants. I'd hate to see you close your store because of this but, unless you're willing to reconsider your decision, I don't see how I can offer you a solution that won't create more problems than it would solve.
Post Reply