Bad Sign: Linden Lab to No Longer Publish SL User Stats

Tateru got a good scoop: Linden Lab will no longer publish quarterly or annual Second Life economy reports. I wondered if that also meant the company would no longer publish monthly unique user stats and hourly usage stats, and asked company spokesman Peter Gray that very thing. And Mr. Gray did say:

Yes, we're no longer going to do the quarterly economic summary blog posts. Here's the official statement: We are discontinuing regular reporting of aggregate economy-level data, because landowners and merchants have told us that the information is of limited value to them. Moving forward, we will instead focus on improved reporting tools that help individuals better manage their businesses in SL.

But the thing is, monthly user and hourly usage numbers are of great value to the broader tech/gaming industry, so if Linden Lab stops publishing those, the company's narrative of SL as a profitable product with a relatively small but dedicated user base will be thrown further in doubt. So I'm not quite sure why the company is doing this, especially after Nielsen reported SL once again in its top ten PC games in the US. But it's hard not to think the overall picture of SL's health is not as rosy. And gives more credence to this analysis from Botgirl Questi, which echoes what a number of insiders have told me in recent months:

My guess is that Linden Lab calculated that even if they solved all current issues by investing a million or two on reengineering legacy systems, revenue would still decline over time. OpenSim and other emerging platforms are offering land at a tenth the price of Second Life. As the competition's communities, economies and capabilities mature, Linden Lab's customer base will continue to erode. A dramatic cut in land pricing isn't an answer because that would create a corresponding cut in revenue. There is no sign that the market for sandbox worlds like Second Life will significantly increase in the foreseeable future. So there's really not a lot of upside for them. It's no wonder that they made the decision to take advantage of their current cash-rich situation to invest in new products that offer, at least potentially, a much higher return on investment.

So take a good look at these SL user stat charts from Q3 2011 embedded above, because in all likelihood, they're the last of their kind you're ever going to see.

Tweet

Comments

[shockwave yareach]

I said 6 months ago that we were approaching the tipping point at which enough people and sims were gone that exponential loss of people would begin. It has started, and with important and personal sims disappearing daily (along with their users) this is just trying to avoid the harsh reality of the numbers.

But hiding the bad financial news won't fix the bank note. And it won't stave off the inevitable bankruptcy LL will face if they don't wake up and realize that their product is overpriced and their customer relations is carp. And sadly, LL has brought it all upon themselves.

I could right the ship in under 9 months. 8 if I skip breakfast.

[Ezra]

Nielsen reporting Second Life as a "top-ten PC game" only proves that the reports are worthless if that's the type of cause they're serving; misconception of exactly what Second Life is.

Those reports were good to blog and speculate about, but I think way too many people confused them with something akin to a quarterly earnings report of Linden Lab itself, something the company doesn't do. If the purpose of the reports was to serve land owners and merchants, then its ok if journalists have to do without misappropriating them.

Hopefully Linden Lab is sincere about adding new reporting for individual business owners in world.

[Ezra]

And while not your quote:

"A dramatic cut in land pricing isn't an answer because that would create a corresponding cut in revenue."

Does the opposite hold true that a dramatic rise in land pricing would create a corresponding rise in revenue? Of course not, sim attrition would pick up and the grid would implode.

Believing a cut in tier pricing would equate to a cut in revenue is misunderstanding the whole point of cutting prices, which is to gain the customers that believe tier is too expensive right now, and to keep the customers on their way out of the very same belief.

Sim counts have to grow for revenue to grow, so do what reverses the attrition, lower prices.

[Ciaran Laval]

If you want stats see Tyche Shepherd, we don't need no stinking official stats while the legend that is Tyche Shepherd is in our midst.

[Hamlet Au]

"Nielsen reporting Second Life as a 'top-ten PC game' only proves that the reports are worthless if that's the type of cause they're serving; misconception of exactly what Second Life is"

Ezra, in what existing category should Nielsen place Second Life?

[Ezra]

The category Facebook fits in, or any other similar platform where only a subset of user minutes are actually spent devoted to games.

If Facebook doesn't fit anywhere on a Nielsen chart then Second Life shouldn't either. Just because Second Life is graphical doesn't mean every minute spent in it makes it a video game. It makes no sense to count every minute in Second Life as a minute of 'game play' when no games are being played for the majority of them.

[Hamlet Au]

Ezra, read the link -- in that list, Nielsen is counting client-driven programs, not web-based programs, so Facebook wouldn't be there either.

Most activity in SL is fairly similar to player activity in The Sims 3 or World of Warcraft (both on the PC game list), so why shouldn't it be in that category (if only as a near-miss/otherwise hard-to-categorize entry)?

[Ezra]

"Most activity in SL is fairly similar to player activity in The Sims 3 and World of Warcraft"

You say that, but what's it backed by? You present counter-evidence every month when you publish the top 50 active regions in Second Life. Only a few if any ever have anything to do with interacting with gameplay mechanics, presumably a requirement to be spending minutes playing a game.

[Desmond Shang]

Oddly... this may not be a bad sign. It's one of the few decisions recently made that I wholeheartedly agree with.

tl;dr explanation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_economics

Longer explanation:

Say it's your job to keep the grid going at maximum potential. Just as growth has momentum, so does contraction. Speculators, 'word on the street' and all sorts of other factors can amplify positively (2007 era hype) or negatively (now). So why poke yourself in the eye? Why poke existing residents in the eye? There are plenty out there working hard enough to do that already. In a world where perception is truth, it's especially damaging.

And where is that truth, really? It's difficult to get an 'actual value' story except for those two rare instances during the transition from perceived feast to perceived famine (and back) ~ precisely those instants when it's a "non story" anyhow. Imagine if AOL's image and stock price were *properly valued* throughout its history. What a fantasy that would be! Instead, we get hype and anti~hype, no exceptions.

So... does this mean they shouldn't be transparent? Of course not. But let me put it this way, if your local mom and pop grocery store, your favourite gas station and your cardiologist all started reporting the number of times they had a downturn, what would you have done? What would everyone have done?

Those of us that really care, have Tyche Sheperd's stats, though really... who honestly needs *even those* to know about the grid economy? We all feel it. But the big story isn't an X% decline... it's the fact that we are all still here talking about it.

As horrible as things are, there is more right than wrong in this picture. Even now.

Two factors here. One is the individual laundry list of domestic issues; the other is the entire online "log onto a platform of some kind" industry. Both are hurting. I saw a good article on this a month or two ago; can't find it now to cite it but essentially it's a tough time these days to talk people into paying for yet another online subscription for anything, across the board.

* * * * *

I see all this as a sort of natural process; consolidation, or shakeout if you will; time and technology, businesses and markets move forward. In all change, there is opportunity. I see this as a *fantastic* opportunity for a re~think of the business model; perhaps one that lowers rates and causes the ultimate explosion of such technology across the world. Could it happen? Yeah it could. Perhaps not in a purely 'main grid' style ~ perhaps we all wear Linden Goggles some day and are able to 'see' people's avatars in our living rooms if we wish, who knows, sipping virtual white wine. The future's a big place, and technology... gets adopted, moves forward.

In a way it's good to see some forces (economic or otherwise) still molding and shaping the basic premises of the world. Without that, we'd have a giant anchor holding us fast to 2004.

[Ann Otoole InSL]

HAH!LL doesn't care. LL calls their customers "whackadoddles". People need to be exploring alternatives unless rodvik apologizes for the scum of LL he is firing and replacing.

[Kim Anubis]

Jeez, Ann, do you expect Rodvik to put rotting heads on pikes in front of the Battery Street office, or what? When I found out the specific people at the Lab who did me dirt were let go, I was more inclined to send a thank you note than a kick in the ass.

If you always beat someone with a stick and never give them a carrot they're gonna learn that nothing they do matters and there is no way to please you. Then they might call you a whackadoodle, and they'd be right.

[Hamlet Au]

"Only a few if any ever have anything to do with interacting with gameplay mechanics, presumably a requirement to be spending minutes playing a game."

However, Ezra, all SLers are engaged in some kind of variety of avatar-based roleplay in a 3D simulated environment run by a client -- just like WoW, just like LOTRO. It's true that unlike those MMORPGs, many SLers don't roleplay in a game context or framework (though a large percent do), but the very act of customizing and controlling and communicating through a 3D avatar in a 3D simulated world is in itself roleplay. Which is in itself a kind of game, in Huizinga's magic circle sense. Meanwhile, a game like Minecraft or Sims 3 also doesn't have explicit RPG structures, but is still classified as a game. So basically, you're trying to argue that we ignore all these similarities between SL and explicit games, without giving a good alternative that's useful for marketing or research or development purposes.

[Hamlet Au]

> HAH!LL doesn't care. LL calls their customers "whackadoddles". People need to be exploring alternatives unless rodvik apologizes for the scum of LL he is firing and replacing.<

Ann, this isn't very civil. Do you even have a source for that quote?

[Ezra]

"However, Ezra, all SLers are engaged in some kind of variety of avatar-based roleplay in a 3D simulated environment run by a client -- just like WoW, just like LOTRO."

All SLers?

Shoudln't roleplay mean actually assuming a role and then playing it out? Not everyone in SL does that. You don't. Outside of SL you're the NWN blogger Hamlet. Inside of SL you're the NWN blogger Hamlet. Like you, a lot of people don't assume a different role based on whether or not they're logged into Second Life.

For those that do assume a different role and actually roleplay, that still doesn't qualify their time in Second Life as gameplay minutes as that Nielsen chart is actually measuring. You know this if you understand the difference between a Halloween party and a LARP session.

Gameplay requires rules, goals and actual play via mechanics. The existence of a 3D avatar and a simulated world isn't the definition of a roleplay game. If it were, then Second Life would count as a game yet pen & paper D&D wouldn't. And Second Life would apparently cease being a roleplay game if I logged into it via Radegast.

Its likely that in the future many more uses of 3D avatars and simulated environments are going to pop-up. So it wouldn't hurt if Nielsen and anyone else that misunderstands Second Life breakaway from that shallow logic it must be a game just because it has a 3D client.

"Meanwhile, a game like Minecraft or Sims 3 also doesn't have explicit RPG structures, but is still classified as a game. So basically, you're trying to argue that we ignore all these similarities between SL and explicit games, without giving a good alternative that's useful for marketing or research or development purposes."

Not ignoring similarities. I'm just saying a 3D avatar and 3D world doesn't make something a game. I'm pointing out Second Life's distinct lack of gameplay elements like rules, goals, story, etc. Any mish-mash of common ingredients that makes a game a game regardless if its pen and paper, 2D side-scrolling or apart of a 3D client.

How's it useful for 'marketing or research or development purposes' for someone to read that chart and think Second Life is a game and all those minutes tallied are gameplay minutes? Its just not true, as simple as that. You may try and pigeon-hole your use of Second Life as a game for the sake of fitting on a Nielsen chart, but I think differently of the in-world reporting and blogging you do, even if its all just gameplay minutes to you.

[Hamlet Au]

You still haven't proposed an alternate category that Nielsen could use, if SL isn't in the game category. While your complaint may be valid, a lack of a realistic alternative sort of makes it an academic one.

"Not everyone in SL does that. You don't. Outside of SL you're the NWN blogger Hamlet. Inside of SL you're the NWN blogger Hamlet."

But inside SL, I have a white suit (which I never wear IRL) and have an office with a floating couch and 50 foot pot plants (which, sadly, I also don't have IRL.) And my RL name isn't Hamlet. So I am roleplaying a fanciful version of myself. Which everyone in SL does on some level. Which is a kind of roleplay. Which makes SL more or less a game or interactive toy (Will Wright also uses the "toy" language for The Sims, which are still considered games), and more crucially, makes it quite similar to other programs that are clearly games.

[Seymore Steamweaver]

Whatever all that stuff means. I trust LL. My premium membership pays for itself with a nice profit every quarter. Sales have been picking up and even a price increase on one of my top movers has had a positive effect.

No complaints.

[Ezra]

"You still haven't proposed an alternate category that Nielsen could use, if SL isn't in the game category."

Every Nielsen category is a stretch. How about 'radio' just because Second Life has music venues and some people spend a lot of their time listening to music? That'd only make as much sense as putting Facebook in that category because now it integrates with Spotify.

Nielsen doesn't have a category nor metric for the most generic kind of minute spent in Second Life. The only reason Second Life is listed in the 'Game' category and Facebook isn't is due to a misunderstanding of exactly what users do in Second Life. If Facebook was as small as Second Life and consequently misunderstood, Nielsen would probably have some misconceptions about it as well.

We know better though than to misconstrue what Second Life is, so why try so hard to pigeon-hole yourself and what you use Second Life for just to fit in a Nielsen category? Shouldn't you be doing the opposite and championing how broadly Second Life is used rather than jump hoops trying to equate a white suit to Will Wright's idea of what a game is? And I'm pretty sure he'd list gameplay as a necessary ingredient, something Second Life doesn't natively have and only a fraction of sims implement any form of.

This really isn't a foggy matter when it comes to that Nielsen chart. its saying that every minute spent in Second Life is a gameplay minute and its not true. Plain and simple. You should be the first to point this out.

[uknow]

I am LL target audience and I have already moved onto greener pastures. I know many who are not just in other worlds/virtual spaces open sim and the most popular Inworldz but also in SL. They stick around SL to see the end. It's like a train wreak you don't want to look, but you can't help yourself. LL obviously doesn't care about their product, why do you care. I love watching LL make stupid mistakes, TOS changes on the viewer and how it affects 3rd party viewers. Coupled with the above article. In all honestly, I read this type of thing and now laugh...hard. Ppl are idiots if they leave themselves no other option but SL. They can only beat this dead horse so much before everyone walks away just looking at it with pity in their eyes.

[Hamlet Au]

"The only reason Second Life is listed in the 'Game' category and Facebook isn't is due to a misunderstanding"

That's simply not accurate. Again, please read the original link before commenting on Nielsen's rating system again.

"its saying that every minute spent in Second Life is a gameplay minute and its not true."

Much of the minutes spent in WoW and LOTRO are not gameplay, but users hanging out online chatting about their real lives. By your logic, should Nielsen also take out those gameplay minutes from their measurements of WoW and LOTRO? And how do you propose they do that? And how do you propose they do that with SL?

[Ezra]

"That's simply not accurate. Again, please read the original link before commenting on Nielsen's rating system again."

The chart you linked to states: "Source: Nielsen Games - GamePlay Metrics™. Share is the percentage of the gaming audience measured that played the title. Overall TMP% represents the percent of total minutes played from the Top 100 non-casual/pre-installed PC games measured."

What am I misunderstanding about Nielsen incorrectly measuring Second Life usage in minutes of gameplay?

"Much of the minutes spent in WoW and LOTRO are not gameplay, but users hanging out online chatting about their real lives. By your logic, should Nielsen also take out those gameplay minutes from their measurements of WoW and LOTRO? And how do you propose they do that? And how do you propose they do that with SL?"

When you log into WoW you have a character that has a level, abilities and is bound to associated gameplay mechanics. That's never not true in WoW regardless of what you're doing or not doing.

My logic is that for a user of anything to be considered gaming, they actually have to be playing a game. The existence of a 3D avatar and 3D environment alone doesn't make something a game, no more than the absence of those two things disqualifies an actual game like like D&D from being considered as much.

You know all of this perfectly well because you know all the varied uses Second Life has that have absolutely nothing to do with gaming, but it's evident that Second Life being misconstrued to fit in a Nielsen category is more important to you than it and its users being more accurately described.

Due diligence is your business, is it not? Why settle for the "it's a game" generalization when better can be done?

Anyway, I won't help the derailing from the original topic anymore. We just disagree.

[Jack Singularity]

In the long term, what does SL deliver that Opensim cannot? SL has to support a huge central corporate bureaucracy with stifling one-size-fits-all rules, whereas Opensim is lean and free-spirited. Nothing in this life is certain, but it sure seems like SL is competing while wearing a ball and chain and a strait jacket.

[Masami Kuramoto]

Second Life is a game. It has rules, it has goals. You don't have to roleplay there, but you _can_, and that option puts SL on a level with WoW and other games.

You don't have to roleplay in WoW either. You can totally be yourself while slaying virtual monsters. And you can be yourself while flying through SL. That doesn't mean you can do the same things in real life.

[Masami Kuramoto]

@Hamlet

Linden Lab stopping to report user stats is only a problem if you see a platform's value as a function of its popularity. I know you do, and you know that I disagree with that. ;)

Even if Linden Lab shut down Second Life completely, the platform will continue to exist because all the essential components are free software and will be maintained by volunteers for decades to come.

Of course, when OpenSim takes over, many of the game's goals will change. Those who are in SL to make a quick buck will probably leave for greener pastures. Land will no longer be scarce, so there will be more sandboxes and fewer banlines. Most people will have their own sim or two. Without a central "government", it will be harder to get a complete picture of what's going on. The grid map that appears in your viewer will be just one of many. Each grid will be like a planet, and hypergrid travel will connect most of them.

That doesn't mean that the transition won't be painful. Many people have invested a lot of time and money in Second Life and won't be happy about losing years of inventory. Everyone will arrive naked in the new world. But life will go on, probably on a smaller and more personal level than before.

The more I think about it, the more I can't wait to see the old SL go. ;) However, no matter what happens next, the platform will survive anyway.

[Hitomi Tiponi]

"Even if Linden Lab shut down Second Life completely, the platform will continue to exist because all the essential components are free software and will be maintained by volunteers for decades to come."

Sadly OpenSim is three years behind SL in development and stability and without a centrally organised body I don't think it will develop much more - so many of the little things we take for granted in SL are not there. I like OpenSim but it is not a practical platform and unless it was run like a company (which it won't be) I can't see it becoming one.

[Graham Mills]

@Hitomi -- so many of the "little things" like mesh, MOAP, NPCs, C# region modules, megas > 64 m, OARs, IARs, forced teleports, free texture uploads, web-based avatar enrolment with preloaded inventory (as I get at Dreamland Metaverse), free Vivox speech, free on-demand sims with OAR support (from Kitely)? Seems practical enough to me.

Who knows how OpenSim will evolve? That's why it's called "the future".

[Masami Kuramoto]

"Sadly OpenSim is three years behind SL in development and stability"

Many people were quite happy with the SL of 2009.

[Metacam Oh]

3 years behind in development? Thats a laugh. Open sim has Mesh, it has web on a prim, please tell me what features Open Sim is missing that makes it 3 years behind?

[Arcadia Codesmith]

Game/World is a continuum, not a binary.

For example... every person in SL has "hit points". They're just disabled in the vast majority of the world.

I've seen the numbers crunched badly and misinterpreted so many times that I can't fault the Lab for discontinuing them.

But if they can't rethink the revenue model and get land into the cheap-to-free bin, I think the future gets increasingly gloomy. At some point they'll have to toss out the baby, the bathwater, and just put in a whole new bathroom.

And at that point... who knows if a freewheeling frontier virtual world where anything is possible is a challenge that they'll want to undertake again?

[shockwave yareach]

Arcadia: If they lower the cost of the land, then more people can have it. You make up what you lose in profit margin with volume. This is why Ford makes 6.6Billion dollars in profit in 2011 but Buggati, maker of the world's most expensive car, is barely eeking out a profit at all. All you have to do is look at Automobiles and see how you make more profit selling more product by taking less profit from each one so more people can buy them.

Otherwise, the entire business model of LL will have to change. It is the land sales that pay for the servers and certain board member's third solid gold ferrari. If land sales won't be the prime money maker for LL, something else will have to take its place. And what exactly could that be? Subscriptions? Everyone else is going away from pay-to-play and selling addons for cash, which doesn't begin to work where everyone can build and sell already. An LL-sold sex bed? When people won't even use a free LL viewer?

Free for the first 12 hours a month, unlimited for premiums? Perhaps. But that will drive people out of SL, about half of them. And it takes lots of premium accounts to make up for one lost island tier.

Subscription required past a certain level like WOW is doing? Um... levels?

What made SL different was that it had an economy. People made and sold stuff inworld and got real money out for their efforts. Greed made the world what it is; greed and fun. And SL has over the years become less fun and almost impossible to make a profit within. So the creators are quitting, the land owners are quitting, and the residents are finding the new SL to be not worth their time and they are quitting too.

I warned that we were near the tipping point which would begin the exponential decay and failure of the grid six months back. We have now crossed the threshold and nothing but fundamental changes in how LL treats its customers and prices its product will change that. We need people thinking "Would this be fun?" and "Would this make people join or quit?" on EVERY decision the lab makes.

However, I've seen the writing on the wall. The lab won't change -- they cannot. The early days of clever and quick solutions and being able to do a simple thing simply are lost in the heirarchy and rules. The ivory tower has put the Lindens up so high that they don't know what happens to the world beneath the clouds. Thus the base of their tower is collapsing, and they cannot be bothered to acknowledge it.

[Ann Otoole InSL]

re: whackadoodles: http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2012/01/why-linden-lab-staffers-seem-out-of-touch-with-second-life.html

Oh snap it was Hamlet that called LL customers whackadoodles!11 Or was it qarl?

Either way there is your ref.

[Pussycat Catnap]

"Believing a cut in tier pricing would equate to a cut in revenue is misunderstanding the whole point of cutting prices, which is to gain the customers that believe tier is too expensive right now, and to keep the customers on their way out of the very same belief. "

Yes and no.

I think tier needs to go down.

BUT, it needs to go not too much, and not too little.

There is a point of diminishing returns in any price reduction. What you need to do is hit a sweet spot where you satisfy your demand, but not go any further.

The question is, how low will get as many people as they can get who are not investing due to price? And how low will fail to get more as everyone who was holding off for price is already in?

- This takes business sense and business skill. Something LLs completely, almost 100% lacks.

Granted, I lack it as well - I'm not saying I know that sweet spot. I'm saying they need an upper manager who does.

Hamlet is nearly alone in thinking they are already at the sweet spot (if that's his opinion, it seems his opinion but he's corrected me before on my attempts to guess him)... I think most of us agree the sweet spot is somewhere lower than it is now. But the question of where it is is the difference between a profitable company and a bleeding out company.

- Managers who are risk adverse don't make decisions over things like that, and prefer to try and fail slowly instead...

[Pussycat Catnap]

"Much of the minutes spent in WoW and LOTRO are not gameplay, but users hanging out online chatting about their real lives."

I agree with your general sense that it is right to count SL in those ratings and count its minutes...

But WoW at least is the wrong counter example now. There's not much of a social community left in WoW. With all the various ways to random queue for things, across servers with people you can't trade with and can't ever meet again, and constant 'holiday' and 'daily' events one has to do to keep current - very few WoW players say anything in chat other than chuck norris jokes and gay bashing...
- And the only ones ever waiting around are the ones who picked the wrong random thing to do, and have to wait for at least 4 other compatible people out of 10 million to check that same box...

There's more community at a convention for narcissistic hermits than in WoW. :)

[Pussycat Catnap]

"Ezra, read the link -- in that list, Nielsen is counting client-driven programs, not web-based programs, so Facebook wouldn't be there either. "

Personally I think Facebook does belong on that list. Just call the list "Digital crack" - or to be less honest but also less insulting: "relative time spent in digital passtimes."

- Because Facespam is the sort of junkie behavior that occupies the same need as all the others - and if you're doing one of these things it is more than likely taking away from your ability or amount of time devoted to another of them.
- Ie: group then not by which crowd is least insulted being called a game, but by who they compete with.

[Pussycat Catnap]

"Ann, this isn't very civil. Do you even have a source for that quote?"

The wackadoodle comment is from your own blog Hamlet. :)

[bobo]

Release the Kraken! zzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Hamlet Au]

"Oh snap it was Hamlet that called LL customers whackadoodles!11 Or was it qarl?"

Ann, please read the link more carefully. Qarl said it... after he stopped being a Linden. And he wasn't referring to all or even most customers, he was referring to the small minority that do act pretty crazy.He explained that in the comments of that link you just posted. So you saying Linden Lab the entire company called its customers whackadoodles is not accurate thrice over. Making your use of the word "scum" even less appropriate that it already generally is.

[Hamlet Au]

"Personally I think Facebook does belong on that list."

No. Because yet again, this Nielsen list is only counting client-based programs, which Facebook is not.

[foneco zuzu]

Well Hitomi, You really should give another try on Os grid.
The diff is that Os grid is maintained with love.
And to be part of that growing commnunity, to be able to have 120.000 prims on 6 regions without a single Usd spended, using just my oldest 2 computers, being able to place and keep 120 Npc's on them and still no lag for me or my love, that is a continent apart, being able to watch for free for more then 1.45min a great Folk player performance on the Maritime Os grid pub in belfast 3, seeing so many amazing looking avatars of all kinds on the Sunday meeting On Bade Plaza, not crashing more then twice over a Week of intense use of os grids, so much i can tell about how the future is not based on greed, but on the spirit of sharing, emotions, assets, ALL!

[foneco zuzu]

SL is a tool and if the Lab cant realize it, others, as already was said here, will make better use of that tool.
But stop saying its a game!
And Im a proud "Fap" user of the metaverse, meanining i make love on Sl or OS grid, with my partners, using my hands a lot, and so what? Is that a sin?

[Ann Otoole InSL]

Hey man just keep covering SL the way you do. Things get heated sometimes but that is part of "the game:. :)

[Pussycat Catnap]

""Personally I think Facebook does belong on that list."

No. Because yet again, this Nielsen list is only counting client-based programs, which Facebook is not."

Which is a flawed metric to use.

End users don't make the choice based on client or not - but on what need it fills for their time and emotional desires.

SL, WoW, and Facebook all directly compete in terms of how people spend their time and why.

[Pussycat Catnap]

"And Im a proud "Fap" user of the metaverse, meanining i make love on Sl or OS grid, with my partners, using my hands a lot, and so what? Is that a sin?"

TMI...