I have a stupid question (which I asked elsewhere as well).

Wasn't the word "gacha" to be removed from all those 2nd-hand resales of items?

https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Gacha_policy hasn't been changed so far, and I quote:

> The use of the term “gacha” or “lootbox” to describe the sale of content is also prohibited.

Nevertheless, there are over 600,000 items on the SL Marketplace being announced as "gacha" and are even in the "gacha" ? (see also: the talk page on that Wiki policy article)

Now, it's obviously not up to me to 'decide' what is supposed to be "gacha" in the terms allegedly forbidden under some RL jurisdictions. Second-hand resales of items clearly do fall in that category. But this is what we see being presented on the Marketplace. The items are as "gacha". As Greecegirl Resident so well explained it, merchants carefully submit their products listed meticulously under the "gacha" category, and promote them as such, with good pictures, videos, and descriptions. There is a lot of work involved in marking items as rare or otherwise, and of explaining to the consumer what exactly they're supposed to get (i.e., a box that will supply them with some items).

Now, if it walks like gacha, acts like a gacha, and talks like a gacha... surely there must be a line to be drawn somewhere? Who will, ultimately, what items can be sold as "gacha" or "lootbox", and which cannot? I'm well aware there is a FAQ on the policy page, giving a lot of examples of what is permitted and what isn't. But, in practice, what matters is that the usage of the word to describe a product is forbidden. Is it really? When there is a gacha and all? (Not to mention 600,000+ items within that category)

I'm well aware that the amount of work to go through all these items, one by one, just to see if they conform to the policy or not, is , and obviously that would be wasting the Lindens' precious time.

Thus, the simple policy — you cannot resell anything and use, in the product description, anything like "gacha", "lootbox", or words conveying the same meaning (or similarly spelled to 'trick' automated procedures). This means that all that LL needs to do is to run a query on their database, and mark all items with the "forbidden" keywords in it as unavailable, possibly alerting merchants that they're in violation of the so-called gacha policy. Many of those will quietly disappear. Others will comply and relist their items as "second-hand" or "previously used" or "not original" or whatever — all of which are perfectly legitimate and valid. And, sure, many will complain that searching for the keyword connects potential customers to the merchant's product, while any other term with a completely different meaning will not (not in the same way, at least).

And as Greecegirl Resident also pointed out, there "gacha resale markets" in-world. While the 2021-era "gacha machines" might be mostly broken (i.e., disabled, or their owners/creators banned, etc.), in three years, I can imagine that a lot of new devices are now available. Do they work like the original machines? Probably not. Are they still using the keyword "gacha" to attract customers? You bet they are!

That said, shouldn't the so-called gacha policy be scrapped? What's the point in forbidding a word or a description, if there are 600,000+ items being offered on the Marketplace which clearly and deliberately ignore that prohibition, not to mention many more only available in-world?

Since the original intention of this policy was to ensure that all merchants comply with some laws in certain jurisdictions where the concept of gacha is considered to be a form of unlicensed gambling, while, these days (2024, that is), "gacha" is mostly used as a synonym of "items re-sold cheaply for a fraction of the original price". So long as it's clear what its is, and that the way such items are being sold is compliant with whatever jurisdictions apply, then I don't see any necessity in banning the word "gacha" or "lootbox". Since it's not being enforced anyway — what's the point, then?

Note that the anti-gacha policy, in its core, describes exactly what is forbidden which might constitute gambling. What this activity is called is irrelevant. I could replicate the scripting of the old gacha machines and launch a new brand, called "Chaga", and duplicate exactly the same business model... but since I would keep the words "gacha" or "lootbox" off any description, and focus myself on establishing the "Chaga" brand instead... would this be allowed?

Of course not. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet". So, there has to be a careful review on what is supposed to be acceptable, and what parts of the anti-gacha policy are to be enforced (or even enforceable!), and scrap the rest, which makes no sense.

And, worse, it leads to customer confusion: they might expect an item labeled as "gacha" to a gacha as defined by these jurisdictions, and therefore conclude that LL is ignoring such policies; or they might avoid buying such second-hand, re-sold items, because they might fear they were illegitimately acquired and then resold — none of which is true.

I can also understand that, when a certain word is used to describe a commodity or a service, due to popular usage, it's very hard to avoid using it — because that's the word people know, and that's what they search for when shopping for cheap second-hand content. It's like referring to a "region" as a "sim" — something which has been going on for two decades now, and people use the word "sim" to describe a 256x256m area of the map. While official documentation naturally uses the denomination, a gazillion others use "sim" just "because everybody knows what a sim is, while very few know that this word is being incorrectly applied". But that's how it works.

We still see offers for land sale or rentals saying how many prims are available, when what is meant is how much free land impact there is. But old habits take a long time to change. Even if sometime in the future, the SL viewer automatically aggregates prims into meshes, turning the SL Grid effectively into a mesh-only environment, I'm pretty sure that people will continue to offer rentals "with double-prim allowance" and so forth..

Anyway, just my two cents... please note that I have absolutely no problem in people selling (or buying!) second-hand items, exactly like in the real world.

(Personally, I also don't have any issue with such things as raffles, where you buy the equivalent of a raffle ticket to participate, and get an item randomly chosen — but I can perfectly understand that such a process may be considered "unlicensed gambling" in many jurisdictions...)

This change has been reverted. Have a good day!

I too am experiencing the same issue. Sadly there was no forwarning to the disconnect. So unlike SL. As noted, SL looses 10% on each sale.

Please reinstate until we can work together to figure it out. Gacha has a large community still, after the 2021 announcement.

Let us know your decision in the open environment.

Appreciate your attention,

Praxislady Witt