TP again

Arria Perreault · Post by **Arria Perreault** » Sun Aug 26, 2007 1:08 pm

Thinking on the convenant of the new sim, we have spoken again about the question of the teleportation point. It seems that it was an historical decision: CN and NFS should have a unique TP. I can understand the reasons (discover the main place first, see the commerce on it, ...). But some experiments were made by citizen. My two plots are supposed to be commercial. I have built a museum in one (exhibition Gods of Love) and I had a small shop in the other (exactly like in the houses of Herculanum).

The exhibition was in the SL list of places. I have distributed LM. But visitors did not find it very easely. The other problems were: not enough room and lack of prims. So I moved this museum somewhere else. I have redesign the house as a Collegium of priests (a place where groups of priests had meetings and dinners). But I really don't know if I can organize something there, if it so hard to find.

Same with the shop. Some people saw it by an extraordinary hazard. It is now in the Macellum of Subura and in the museum. Roma has the same policy, but it is in a mall. Giving freebies, I know that people visited it regularly.

Renouncing to this TP would make the life of citizen so easier. I was agree that the new sim will not have a unique TP, mainly because I hope that it will clearly show how it is much better.

I officially ask the RA to discuss this point. I ask the RA members to think to this problem not in an ideological point of view, but in a very pratical one. I suggest them to talk with people before to decide (aren't we in democracy ).

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:13 am

Arria,

CARE is currently drafting a bill that would allow direct tp to any place within a sim all whilst allowing those who find us by means of searches to tp to a central hub. We will propose this system be adopted in CN on a three-month trial basis. ThePrincess Parisi is the initiator of this bill, so please feel free to contact her regarding this matter.

Michel

Patroklus Murakami · Post by **Patroklus Murakami** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:54 am

I saw this [url=http://www.slexchange.com/modules.php?n ... 7:3mqwjvoa]teleporter device[/url:3mqwjvoa] on SL Exchange. Might this be the solution to our problem? If we could have a central tp point but then an easy and accessible way to tp to businesses etc within a sim that would accomodate both the privacy concerns of those who don't want direct tp and the desire for accessibility of those who do.

Dnate Mars · Post by **Dnate Mars** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 7:52 am

Having a direct teleport is a great idea for our new sim, and I will support that. However, I do not support changing the teleports for CN or NFS. Some people that bought land in these sims may have done so [i:1bmo3c1h]because[/i:1bmo3c1h] it isn't direct TP. SL went on for a while without the direct TP, sometimes you would be 12 sims from the nearest TH, so why can't a single sim?

Salzie Sachertorte · Post by **Salzie Sachertorte** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 7:54 am

I am neutral as to TP points, but I urge everyone to consider the fact that you are proposing the CDS commit an act of inverse condemnation and must be willing to reimburse the affected citizens.

Let's examine the historical factors which set up the situation in the first place.

At one point in time, LL only allowed centralized TP points, thus all avs were required to TP into a central point. Real estate near the TP points had a much higher value than areas further away. Accordingly, NFS set up a commercial zone around its TP point, charging higher land prices and higher monthly fees for the land. When LLs eliminated the centralized TP points, they reimbursed owners of the land for taking away the advantage.

You are proposing we do the same. Should we remove the advantage of being located near the centralized TP points, we are committing an inverse taking. Thus, we need to re-examine the fees being charged owners of land within these zones and perhaps the fallen value of the land itself, in order to make those affected whole.

michelmanen · Post by **michelmanen** » Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:31 am

Assuming, if course, that the central TP brought any real advantage to those owning lots next to it (in NFS or CN).

We would need to have traffic data and possibly sales figures from owners of lots around TP points and compare them with those of owners of luts located further away to see if the policy worked in practice, not just in theory.

If it did not, and there is little or no difference in actual data between the two types of lots, there will be no loss and and therefore no need for reimbursement - as the owners of central lots will lose nothing they had before.

In other words, the real value of a lot is determined not simply by a law or policy stating that its value is higher for reason X,Y, or Z, but because of actual empirical data actually demonstrating the advantage of that lot's positioning. If the empirical data does not support what the laaw or policy states, the original intent is irrelevant: the values of the lot will not be higher because the facts do not match the theory and land value is determined in practice and not by legislative fiat.

Moon Adamant · Post by **Moon Adamant** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:05 pm

Michel: a metrics system could be put into place to gather the data for analysis.

I must say that I personally share Dnate's opinion: perfectly willing to have a mix of sims bearing direct and central TPs. That way, we can offer our citizens a choice as regards this issue. Alpine Meadows, being less centralized in its urban plan, and primarily residential as it will possibly be, is a good candidate indeed for direct TP.

But i am worried that if you have direct TPs to NFS and CN... people will just never more see the Kirche, say... unless it is through a window at the destination

Rose Springvale · Post by **Rose Springvale** » Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:35 pm

I am frankly in favor of upgrading NFS to new server, and refiguring everyone's tier fees so that all our sims have equal capability and cost... and changing the tp system to PtP at that time... but that's a different thread. Seems to make more sense to "reimburse" for land that isnt' being used as planned than to pay "guides" to show people where they want to go all the time...and makes more sense to decrease lag than lose visitors who won't deal with it... but again, another issue.

I agree that we should vote on this issue.. and i think it should be by sim. Given that i've had NO response to my offer to pay tier fees for people to actually USE these parcels of land that they paid more for... (no response at all except for people to say they dont actually LIKE our own commercial development, which is quite bothersome to me.) I feel that we are arguing for the sake of argument rather than for the good of the community. And i suppose that is a longstanding CDS tradition as well.

Bromo Ivory · Post by **Bromo Ivory** » Thu Aug 30, 2007 6:26 am

TP or not TP, that is the question?

LOL

I don't like the idea of [i:1lb1grrp]forcing[/i:1lb1grrp] people to view the build and get lost in the SIM when all they want to do is go to a shop or a friends party or house.

What I do see is people TP in, wander int he pltaz, TP out not finding what they want or immediately flying up and over looking for the cluster of people on the map. So, best to give them a TP. This is not doing foot traffic. Either that or go all the way and forbid flight.

Moon Adamant · Post by **Moon Adamant** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 am

Well Bromo, you are [i:817mg8gz]forced[/i:817mg8gz] in the same way as you are [i:817mg8gz]forced[/i:817mg8gz] to see an exhibition at a museum, or[i:817mg8gz] forced[/i:817mg8gz] along a mall... meaning, routes are an important part of planning and architecture itself. Granted, the routes at the CDS are a bit minimal, perhaps the issue of people getting lost could be solved by efficient signalling and a good directory teleporter in platz and forum?[/i]

Bromo Ivory · Post by **Bromo Ivory** » Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:12 pm

I suppose it is going to have to be a balance at the end of the day. Though it really does make it difficult to have events not right next to the TP point - and the current signals/signs + lag aren't working for me (and Asha who is selling up because of these! )

Tanoujin Milestone · Post by **Tanoujin Milestone** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:28 pm

i think there would be a quite simple solution: in case of an event, direct tp is (sometimes) allowed, after the event switched back to the telehub settings - that are a few clicks, software should work as we need it, instead of us working around a setting, eh? If an event qualifies to have direct tp could be discussed - we love that, don't we?

Bromo Ivory · Post by **Bromo Ivory** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:25 pm

UNder land control you can block direct TP's to any parcels you own, or set the place where they would land. YOu can even prevent them from creating landmarks.

These are tools that residents would have to protect privacy if/when telehubs would be abandoned.

Tanoujin Milestone · Post by **Tanoujin Milestone** » Sat Sep 15, 2007 9:14 pm

sorry, Bromo, i do not understand - i know that settings, and i am suggesting a compromise - and you suggest to fall back to "abolish the telehub system"? I thought that was the starting point of the discussion?

It is a fact that if we had had ptp teleport for the storyteller event, we would not have had to tp Residents manually from the rezzing spot in Colonia Nova to the Schloss because CN had technical problems. I am not sure if every PIO will work that hard to make sure everybody arrives at the right spot at last!

On the other hand this argument can not be instrumentalized to abandon the all day telehub setting - i have given the conditions above. Sometimes it helps to leave the theoretical discussion for a few and remember the problems of putting something into practice. We can continue to discuss this in general after we made sure our civil servants do not have to fight windmills to reach a performance that is standard throughout the grid.

ok, wrong thread, my fault enough for today

Dnate Mars · Post by **Dnate Mars** » Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:56 am

One thing I really don't understand is why so many other sims out there can do just fine without direct TP. These sims hold events and people seem to be able to get to them just fine. People that have landing points in mega malls seem to have no problem getting people to go across the plot to get to the things that they want. Why is it such a problem in our sims?

Do we need to have all the sims using the TH system? No, I don't think so. Do all the sims need to be direct TP, I do think so either. As we grow, I think it would be a really good idea to have a mix. Sims with a central business district, TH system makes sense. If they are a mixed sim, or all residential, I can see direct TPing being much better. As with everything, there needs to be a balance.