Groups, groups, damn groups!

'Groups exist in Second Life for many reasons. Most of them are social, but there's so many unique variations. Whether you're running an in-world business, being a Volunteer helper, enjoying random titles above your head, or just have a common interest with others, groups help Residents come together.'

So often have I heard and understood the call for us to be allowed more than 25 groups I thought it was time I had my say;

I fully understand and sympathise with anyone owning a business that is placed on different lands - like a shop owner - needing a group for each place he/she wants to rez objects. With griefing, setting land to group build is one way to protect it, and I advocate doing so on any land you own, but the problem is the group limit.

I know myself that I often have to leave one social group so I can set up a new place for either my business or for the newspaper office.

Lets look at other reasons for being in a group:

Business - As stated above mainly for ability to rez objects, but also to establish pecking order in your own business. To update consumers and notify then of upcoming events/new products and to let others know your business exists.

Roleplay - A lot of roleplayers need the groups to be assigned roles within their community.
Social - To keep in touch with like minded people maybe in the same community or having the same interest, to announce parties, events, and chat with friends.

Discussions - To be able to have open debates and informative discussions, help others and obtain feedback.

Organisation - Allowing organisers to communicate with each other while setting up events and getting feedback for idea's that have been proposed.

Privacy - To set access to land to a limited group of people.

There are probably many other reasons for being in a group but these are the main ones leaving out the ability to build/rez, the main object of being in any group is Communication!

It allows everyone to communicate with those of similar interests with each other and to generate discussion and feedback - doesn't it?

There we come to the crux of the group problem - sure we can use notices to inform but you can no longer chat or join in a discussion - why? Quite simply group IMs have not worked well for quite some time.

I remember once keeping a group chat open for 4 hours as the subject was enthralling and people came and went with their opinions, arguments ensued, and the debate raged on - could anyone honestly say they can do that now?

Even given that you can stay logged on without crashing for that length of time the group chat function simply crashes "ERROR connecting to group" or the chat lag is so bad your comment comes up at a completely irrelevant point in the discussion (which can be quite amusing at times but definately not useful).

The group limit has led to a spate of solutions - one system is the Artizan subscriber and mailbox system that you only pay for once and has an easy set up that allows you to send notices, notecards and objects to all those who subscribe to it for as long as you wish, another Subscribomatic, is one in which you pay a continuous server subscription for the ability to send messages to those who join your group.

This is one way of communicating with a group instead of using a precious group space needed for rezzing/land permissions. Many inworld businesses now offer this option to their customers, we at sl-newspaper now offer the Artizan solution to allow those with limited group space to keep up with what is happening (join up at our main office).

There is another benefit to this system and that is that you are no longer subject to what has become known as chat spam, the point of being in a group is to communicate - this often gets taken advantage of by people trying to promote their own services and can be a source of irritation to many in the group when they are bombarded with information and advertising they are not interested in, and let's face it the constant advertising can actually disrupt any reasonable conversation going on at the time and drive away those who are interested in your group - so using a subscriber system cuts that out BUT it also stops any kind of two way communications. So think about what it is you need before you decide which system is best for your business.

My opinion is that group instant message is at best barely functional at worst a great source of irritation to many, is it any wonder Residents are looking outside SL for a solution - like forums and chat rooms.

Isn't it amazing that Linden Lab who advocate Secondlife as a communications tool cannot find a way for its residents to connect with each other without leaving Secondlife to do it?

Many find running a browser and SL difficult at the best of times and with sim limits and lag communicating to a large group of avatars is fraught with difficulties. The time is ripe for someone to step in with a communications tool that will work within SL and allow us to communicate with large numbers of Residents at the same time, an Instant message system that actually works! (Well we can dream).

We do need more groups for rezzing/land permissions, especially those in business, BUT that aside Linden Lab needs to make the communications WORK before adding to a broken system.

Today Linden Lab have launched 'SLim' as a solution to off world to inworld communications but this does not answer the problem of INWORLD communications problems - it will involve running a seperate client to allow communications with those inworld or with inworld friends lists:

'Today, we’re happy to formally announce SLim, a lightweight, voice-enabled instant messaging client that will allow you to communicate with your Second Life friends without logging in to the full viewer. While the viewer will still serve as the primary communication engine when you’re inworld, having SLim installed will enable you to connect with friends whether or not they are actually inworld.'

It is definately NOT the answer to inworld group communication issues!

Dana

moreless