Add "Members Only" Category to Destination Guide
under review
Jasmine Kiyori
TL;DR
Allow destinations with a paid entry fee or paid group membership to be listed in the Destination Guide via a clearly labeled category or filter.
Description
The Destination Guide currently excludes destinations that require an entry fee or paid group membership. This is inconsistent with Second Life’s promotion of paid features, Premium memberships and Premium-only destinations. Notably, the Destination Guide already includes a Premium category.
Many residents are comfortable paying for entry to destinations they feel are worth it, provided the requirement is clearly disclosed. Paid access is already a normal part of the Second Life economy (for example, paid group memberships are commonplace for stores).
As a result, many high-quality resident-owned destinations are excluded from one of Second Life’s primary discovery tools, which are proven useful to new residents especially.
Proposed Solution
Add a clearly labeled
“Members Only”
or “Paid Entry”
category (or filter) to the Destination Guide to maintain transparency while expanding discovery and supporting resident creationsExpected Outcome
Improved discovery, fairer visibility for destination owners, and a more complete and representative Destination Guide.
Log In
Kyle Linden
updated the status to
under review
spirit Wingtips
I'm fine with the Paid Destination idea BUT Quote: "Many residents are comfortable paying for entry to destinations they feel are worth it" while this is true to some extent, I ask this how do we know the paid destinations are worth it if we cannot visit the region because you have to pay to access the region? I've visited MANY regions in destination guide and some of them visually via pictures present themselves as "photographic or scenic" but when you tp there it's a rental region. and because of THIS FACT unless there is some way to have a teaser of what the region may hold and not just the picture on the destination guide
Jasmine Kiyori
spirit Wingtips “some of them visually via pictures present themselves as ‘photographic or scenic’ but when you tp there it's a rental region.”
Your example highlights why clearer categorization is useful. If destinations can feel misleading today, better labeling (such as a “Paid Entry” or “Members Only” category) would improve expectations by informing residents upfront.
No system can guarantee perceived value, but clearer disclosure reduces confusion rather than creating it.
spirit Wingtips
Jasmine Kiyori totally agree
Anne Forbes
I’m not against the idea, but I’m trying to understand how it fits with the way SL already handles premium‑only regions. Those are controlled by the Lab and tied to a platform‑level subscription, so the access model is clear. But if resident‑run pay‑gated places start appearing in the destination guide too, it gets confusing. Would SL be gatekeeping access to resident content while residents also charge their own fees on top of SL’s premium model? That starts to look like double‑gating, and the guide could easily drift into a list of paywalls instead of a low‑friction discovery tool.
Another thing I’m unsure about is the idea of paying for “exclusive” access when most destinations aren’t original mesh. A lot of places use the same prefab mesh kits from the same creators, just arranged differently. I think I’d be pretty annoyed if I paid for member‑only perks and then realized the content wasn’t actually unique. That’s where mixing pay‑gated resident destinations into the guide starts to feel strange.
And if SL is going to direct people toward places that require payment to enter, they really need to be upfront about that. The destination guide has always been framed as something you can browse freely, so dropping residents into fee‑gated locations without clear disclosure would be jarring. Transparency would matter a lot here, especially if open destinations and pay‑gated ones start appearing side by side.
Jasmine Kiyori
Anne Forbes I think those concerns are actually addressed by the proposal itself.
The idea isn’t to mix paid destinations invisibly into general listings, but to add a clearly labeled “Members Only” or “Paid Entry” category or filter. That preserves a low-friction browsing experience while improving transparency and user choice.
Resident-run paid access is already common across Second Life (paid groups, events, experiences, rentals, etc.), so this wouldn’t introduce “double-gating” it would simply reflect how the platform already functions.
On originality, using shared assets doesn’t automatically reduce the value of a destination. Many builders create highly original environments using a mix of custom work and available assets. The experience itself is shaped through composition, atmosphere, scripting, and interaction design, regardless of asset sources.
And on transparency, we agree, which is exactly why labeling makes more sense than exclusion.