OK... After much thinking about LL's latest TPV policy update, here is my take on the matter:
First of all, the method used to introduce the changes... You'll ask me, "what method ?", and indeed I should have said "the lack of any method", because throwing in new paragraphs in an existing policy without any official forewarning and announcement being done is quite a stupid thing to do and shows a total absence of any method !
You should remember also that when the TPV policy was first introduced, LL did provide forewarning and some time for users and TPV developers to react and contribute to its refining...
Indeed, proceeding as LL did with the latest policy changes was bound to trigger strong reactions (and much unneeded and exaggerated drama) from the community; makes me wonder if there's anybody left in charge for the communication at the Lab...
Now, let's look at each individual change:
I can't agree more on this one !!! I always advocated for the strict respect of the users' privacy and always refused to implement (even marginally) privacy threatening features in the Cool VL Viewer. I'm actually happy the Lab took this step.
Again, I agree to these rules, even if I have many doubts about why LL implemented them... I always refused to implement the viewer tag stuff and viewer identification advertizement (via avatar textures), and always found it a (minor but no less real) violation of the user's privacy: what a user runs as a viewer is no one's business (but for LL's, but they already know thanks to the viewer channel id transmitted at log in time). I also always found it funny to see how viewers such as mine were mistaken for LL's viewers (currently, the Cool VL Viewer v1.26.3 is identified as "viewer 2" by such systems: former versions would be identified as either SG v1.x or SG v2.0, depending on how it is implemented).
Now, the actual reason why LL is introducing these new rules is probably not user privacy... I'd bet that LL just got pissed off that their own viewer so blatantly appears to be used by a minority of SLers (even though the few Cool VL Viewer users involuntarily contributed to make it look like there were more official viewers users around: LL should thank me for this
).
But even if introduced for a bad reason, I still agree on these rules.
Now that's probably the worstly worded rule of the whole TPV policy (and it's not even the only badly worded one) !
What does it mean exactly ?
In fact, Oz practically admitted (by paraphrasing the rule himself) that by shared experiences, LL meant others' shared experiences. I.e. a feature that would only affect the TPV user (on their screen) won't fall under the rule: as long as their avatar looks the same for people using the latest official viewer, everything is fine...
Let's look as some TPV features and see how the rule applies:
RestrainedLove: that's the first thing that came to my mind. RLVs (Restrained Love Viewers) do provide a different shared experience to people using them (e.g. they can have their avatar "captured" by an object and bound to it; they can be force-teleported; their avatar can be "transformed", etc...). It also means that users without RLV do not have access to some areas on the grid or to some experience RLV users get (for example, some mazes only work if you got a RestrainedLove relay and viewer active): they definitely don't have the same "shared experience".
But, no, apparently, and if to believe Oz, this is not what LL meant by "shared experience" and RLVs are not endangered by that rule.
OK, so let's now see about Mesh deformer... This is the next
big feature to come to viewers, something SL users and SL merchants
want really bad !... Bad news, it falls under the 2.k. rule !... Why ?... Isn't it a viewer-side feature ?... Well, yes, but if merchants start providing mesh clothing items that would only fit with mesh deformer on, then people using a viewer without mesh deformer would not see the avatars wearing such clothing items right: "shared experience" is broken for them.
Oh, wait, good news, Oz said it'll be ok since mesh deformer is bound to be part of LL's own viewer features... Oh... wait, wait again !... What
if LL change their mind and finally put their veto on mesh deformer ?... Well, then rule 2.k. will apply !!!
Now you are starting to understand why I find such a rule to not only be a badly worded rule (it should read "You must not provide any feature that alters
others' shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab") but also a stupid rule... But there's even more to it:
What about features such as multiple attachment per points and body physics ?... You probably know that these were first TPV hacked features (secondary attachment points and "wiggling boobs") before LL provided a proper implementation for them. Among those two features, the first did alter the shared experience for users of viewers not implementing them (with attachments not appearing rezzed where they should have, or "floating around").
To give some background about my own feelings towards such features, I must say that:
I personally refused to implement "wiggling boobs" because it caused FPS slow down, was a really, really dirty hack that could even cause shape wearable corruptions in some cases, and also because some (prudish but no less legit) objections were done by some users not wanting others to see their avatar with wiggling boobs without their own permission (it was similar to the "everyone naked" feature that made its way in a hacked viewer a long while ago...).
I also refused to encourage people to wear secondary attachments on illegal points, but I did provide a compatibility path with those wearing them, allowing their avatar to rez properly in the Cool VL Viewer.
Now, you could believe that I would agree with LL on 2.k. regarding these features... Well, no !... While I do admit it would have been much better if these features could have been first submitted to LL and approved by them before they would go into broadly used TPVs, I also perfectly know that LL is too slow, too timid and too conservative to accept such features in a timely manner (if at all). Plus, LL is clueless (as we all are !) about what feature will be a success or not. For example, the "wiggling boobs" were such a success that the first TPV to implement it (alas, it was the griefers' preferred viewer: Emerald) became an immense success and saw its users range broaden exponentially !
Had 2.k. been in force sooner, I bet we'd never have seen multiple attachments or body physics come to SL.
I therefore think that, while such hacks can temporarily "break" the shared experience of some of the SLers, they are still acceptable as test beds for future, properly implemented features; what I would like LL to do in such cases is to first observe the result of the implementation of the hack (clearly saying to TPV developers: ok, we are allowing it for now, but beware, we can change our mind depending on how it will be received by the users), then (and only then) to tell the rule about it (go or no-go) which would then apply immediately to all TPVs.
You see, LL must face it... Because they are too big, they are too slow and too far away form their very users' needs and wishes to properly foresee what feature should make its way or not into their viewer and what priority it should be given. Granted, TPV developers are no clairvoyant people either, but the sheer number of TPVs makes them perfect testing beds for new features.
Also, about "shared experience" breakage... there's much worst than the secondary attachment points... With viewers on the grid ranging from old, alpha-less, tattoo-less, physics-less, mesh-less v1.23.5 viewers (or even v1.1x: they still work on and can connect to the grid !) to the latest LL viewer, there's a whole lot of users that don't see the same things in SL (and then some that don't see many things any more in some places). So, the "not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab" screams hypocrisy...
Come on, LL... You
can do it !... Just remove that stupid 2.k rule, or negotiate its contents and wording with us, TPV developers, who often know better than you about SLers needs and wishes.
Remember the true LL motto: "
Your World,
Your Imagination"
Let's just do it !
PS: comments welcome, but please, let's not make it a flame war like I saw in some forums...