EroScripts is a community for scripts that sync interactive sex toys with porn. Learn more.
To find and download scripts, create an account.
The keyword being danger. You’re assuming NFT = bad
So if we would use NFT’s to protect the content from piracy, something the user is not involved in or bears any cost of, you would cancel? - You’re also conflating the use-case with my personal opinion about piracy.
Function of competition could be improved streaming distribution and load balancing. Oracles that improve accuracy of information and improved search functions.
Advocating ways to use NFTs is not an acceptable response to SLR stating that there would be no involvement with NFTs and then proactively seeking ways to make use of them them 9 days later.
Let’s take a look at how this situation has played out.
SLR makes a thread asking if there is any interest in incorporating NFTs into scripts
The community response is overwhelmingly negative
SLR’s official voice acknowledges the overwhelmingly negative response to the NFT idea, later updating the original post to say there are more reasons not to use it, linking to a reddit post as evidence of why
Despite the community making their feelings clear, and the official voice of SLR acknowledging this, a different member of SLR staff refers to those feelings as “100% wrong”
SLR is asked outright if there is a danger of NFTs being incorporated into SLR’s services in any way (as in, not just scripts). The answer was clear - no, “unless something new comes out that would be really beneficial for everyone”
9 days later, with nothing new or beneficial having come out of the NFT world that would benefit SLR’s userbase, SLR begins proactively seeking ways to incorporate NFT technology into SLR’s services
When this is remarked on, SLR’s response is simply to talk about how NFTs are good, ignoring all the previous things that have been said by both SLR and the community on the topic, as well as the answer that was given 9 days prior
So we have a company acknowledging that their userbase does not want something at all, saying that there are no plans to make use of it, then setting the ball rolling on doing the complete opposite just over a week later despite the community being vehemently opposed to it.
It’s fair to say that this has been a very poor way of handling the NFT question by SLR. Asking the userbase for their feelings on something, then telling them they’re 100% wrong about it upon hearing the answer is not a good look. Saying one thing on a topic important to the community, then reversing it 9 days later, is not a good look. It damages trust.
To answer the first question - I get a lot of enjoyment out my SLR subscription and would like to continue it for years to come. However, I seek to avoid directly funding the use of NFT technology with my own money as far as I am able. And if content becomes tied to an ecosystem? There is no way anything like that is acceptable to me and I’m sure I’m not the only one. We should be able to use content how we see fit, just like with every other VR provider out there, and not have it tied to SLR or any other company. It is simply not acceptable. If those were the terms when I was considering a subscription, I never would have joined. I’m grateful that nothing of the sort has happened so far, but repeated ecosystem comments from SLR staff are making me incredibly wary.
I want to make it clear that my disappointment is with SLR, not individuals, as nobody should be personally lambasted or insulted for this. However, I can’t hide my disappointment in what has occurred here and I’m greatly concerned that it sets a precedent for how quickly SLR’s stance on something so important to the community can change. What else has been said recently that could potentially be reversed just as easily? I don’t like feeling like this as up to this point I have been a very happy customer and SLR basically had my subscription on lock.
In order to prevent this from becoming an SLR bashing thread, I’d like to remind SLR that the option is always there to reverse this course of action and stick to doublevr’s sentiments on NFTs from 9 days ago. His previous conclusions were good and showed a full willingness to listen to the userbase - that should be encouraged. A return to that would go a long way towards maintaining trust. This is entirely salvageable by SLR, there is a way back.
SLR, please listen to your userbase, they’ve sent a clear message on what they (do not) want. You heard that message loud and clear only recently, please hear it again.
Not sure what’s your problem.
We are exploring for ideas. If nothing comes out we won’t be doing a thing. You can keep your own opinion whatever it is. With such attitude there’s no sense for any kind of talks.
Let’s just each of us mind our own business. If you don’t want to be a part of that just find yourself something else to do.
And make sure to check this post https://forum.sexlikereal.com/d/2321-anyone-into-nfts-and-blockchain/5
We don’t actually have any plans in mind. Rather exploring what’s possible.
Otherwise I like the idea of bringing the next level of abstraction and virtualisation. Not only it allows to reword creators and performers based on actual engagement, but we can also build the whole economy for viewers and viewers brought by these viewers who watched, commented or recommended the video.
The core idea is not bad at all. It’s true that most of NFTs and cryptos are hyped garbage.
But look, in early days of VR 99% of content was shit. No one else could think of making the whole thing streaming as SLR did. Chances are we can find the right combination for crypto.
I can assure you we are not going into classy ICO/NFT bullshit. Not at all
We also plan to introduce SLR token at some point to replace any currency transactions that we have
Regarding
There is no personal problem, to be clear, hence the complete lack of anything resembling a personal attack. As for the attitude I’ve expressed, that attitude has been one of disappointment in this recent course of events while hoping we can return to your earlier sentiments that were good ones. Short of being on board with NFTs (which I and seemingly the majority of the community absolutely are not), what better attitude could I possibly express while still disagreeing strongly with this? No personal attacks, no insults, and making every effort to refer to the actions of SLR rather than actions of individuals. I would say that an attitude like this is a reason to talk more, not less.
It would be unfortunate for me to walk away feeling that SLR didn’t want to engage with someone purely because they disagree, although they remained polite. Surely this is not the case? You are not receiving feedback from a hater, this is from a happy but very concerned customer.
Regarding what my problem is - to explain it succinctly, my issue is how we went from SLR saying this:
To “It’s about time we start thinking of getting NFT and blockchain on SLR.” in 9 days. I’m quoting that word for word and linking to the post in an attempt to be fair.
I did read that thread in its entirety and do note the comments you made later in that thread. However, I also note the following:
Was this idea in place when it was stated that there were no plans to get involved with NFTs 9 days ago? Would that token be making use of NFTs? And how does this match up with the following statement made in the very same post:
We don’t actually have any plans in mind. Rather exploring what’s possible.
I hope I’m getting across how this can be seen as inconsistent messaging? Of course it’s possible for this SLR token plan to have nothing to do with NFTs, so please do correct me if I’m wrong on this one.
I also maintain that exploring NFT ideas without a specific beneficial use case in mind is not in keeping with the very clear statement made 9 days ago. Nor is possibly having a specific use case in mind that SLR intended to implement at some point at the time of making that statement. Firstly, can we agree that all of this can come across as a very mixed message?
You’ve got to love it when a two representatives of a shop front website decide to have a go at their customers raising perfectly legitamate points.
@doublevr Maybe NFT’s could be used to hear constructive feedback from your customers who really have skin in the game 
Cracking me up how adamant some people get about anything new or different happening. The good concepts that get implemented well and benefit grow and mature and the not so good ones don’t get purchased. If nothing else it could simply be an alternative purchase option for those that wish to use it.
I’m always happy to see people willing to take the risks to come up with new ideas and put them out there. Who knows maybe in a few years we’ll be visiting each other’s VR porn collection islands and can try out samples, visit model parties, early access, etc…
Why is everything NFTs now? Can we not just enjoy shit?
At best NFTs can be said to be an attempt to create artificial scarcity where there is none, at worst they are an outright scam or money laundering operation.
Many big claims are made as to what they can be used for and they do a spectacular job of not actually doing what was claimed on many levels.
Many of those selling both the idea and the items rely on people not understanding the technical details, often not understanding it themselves, beyond seeing some way that they might profit from it.
A lot of art has been stolen, a lot of people have been scammed, a lot of money has been laundered, all whilst contributing significantly to both rising emissions and a big shortage of computer hardware.
They rightly deserve the scorn they get now.
Well, less than 2 weeks after saying they wouldn’t, SLR are now inviting anyone interested in NFTs to get in touch so they can make something happen. From the last post there as of now - “I guess the only option is to look for people to breathe life into it”. No, the main option should to leave all this alone and stick to earlier statements made on NFTs!
The official response to unhappy customers over the NFT debacle so far has been “Let’s just each of us mind our own business.”, and that “With such attitude there’s no sense for any kind of talks” - despite there being no insults and nothing personal/derogatory being said.
Firstly, the only thing more outrageous than a company telling paid customers who raise concerns to mind their own business (!!!) is to do that in a thread they created asking for customer opinions. I’m struggling to think of a time I’ve heard a similar response from any other company I’ve dealt with. Secondly, it seems SLR takes umbrage at customers calling them out doing something mere days after they said they wouldn’t (that they know most of the community hates), and somehow disagreeing with them going back on statements they’ve recently made amounts to an attitude problem.
I say it amounts to misleading behaviour from SLR, as well as a convenient manufactured reason for SLR not to discuss going back on themselves so quickly and how awfully they’ve handled this entire topic. How is anything they’ve said here supposed to promote any kind of understanding around their actions?
What worries me is that if SLR try to pull the ‘attitude’ card here, they’ll try to pull it on anyone who calls them out for anything. And even if they did remedy that, there’s still the dirty business of looking for people to help with NFTs days after publicly saying they wouldn’t get involved.
Trust in SLR was wounded a few days ago. That wound is quickly becoming a gaping chasm between the company and its customers.
Please stop it. There’s nothing bad about SLR exploring what’s possible with NFT. I absolutely welcome everyone who makes a sense of it to do his best.
We won’t pull the trigger unless there’s an added value to the community. SLR has started as community platform, it’s the very best example of community platform and we are doing our best to get as much community platform as it possible. We get even more community people becoming a part of SLR than ever.
I can’t believe how good some people are at making drama out of nothing.
@doublevr. to be fair you asked the community their opinion they answered.
Representatives then told the community they were wrong.
You then told the community you weren’t going to do it.
You then told a different community you were going to look into it.
You then compained when someone pointed this out and said they had a bad attitude.
You’re now complaining about drama you created.
If the plan is we’ll look but not do anything unless it benifits the community maybe replying complaining that people are talking about the things you’ve said is not the best way to go about it. If it was me I would just keep quiet until you have something to announce (unless your saying your looking just to butter up investors.)
Complaining on the complaint complaining on the complainer complaining over something that hasn’t even started to be implemented yet.
The lesson here is to not allow the option for people to invent things in their head to bitch about that don’t exist.
@doublevr if SLR wants to explore and grow into new areas, you should definitely go for it and worst case SLR learns a bit about a new industry.
I don’t see things that way.
Yes, there’s no plan whatsoever to implement any kind of NFTs as we know it today.
Yes, I’m exploring NFTs if it has a potential to bring a value.
I see no point in the drama that you are propelling with your reply.
Right to the point. Really appreciated
Btw I clearly remember how many in community and SLR partners were telling we shouldn’t waste our time investing in interactives as there are like 200 people using it. Many in scripting community insisted we should not even try going there for 100 and 1 reasons.
Yet we did it and it was one of the best decision I’ve ever made.
Nor anyone ever succeeded with VR videos streaming before we brought SLR app.
There’s a difference between something exciting, interesting, and new versus something very dumb, not understood by general public/users, and not needed in areas such as this. Like I’m not trying to give you crap, but c’mon with this stuff.
I think it ultimately comes down to value.
Do NFTs bring value to your customers or does it introduce another paywall?
Scripts do offer value (Credit to you for persevering as I do enjoy my SLR p-sub) but I am sure there was people in this community that did not want to pay or slow down the eventual progression for paying for their scripts.
NFTs on the other hand (IMO) offer little to no value. It has also been met by almost global pushback especially in the video game industry because of how microtransactions first started to the what became the embodiment of the industry and led to loot boxes (AKA surprise mechanics) and season/battle passes. So yes the push back is reactionary but so many globally are screaming no because as consumers we just do not see the value (Real value btw not something made up. I could say the hair on my ass cheeks have some sort of value and come up with all the reasons why but I am sure people on a large scale wouldn’t want it 
.)
Yes you were right about scripts (again credit to you sir) but it does not mean you will be right on everything. Exploring something new to me is perfectly ok but are you thinking in investing company dime into NFTs because it is such a hot topic? OR do you think it is something you can profit off with/without bringing value to your customers? As a customer all I am interested in is what do I get for said goods to keep me happy 
Normally im not one to get into an internet argument but you’ve caught me in a punchy mood.
I have not actually told you not to look at NFT’s check my messages and you will see I have only tried to help you on your customer service. Personally I think that NFT’s are a solution in search of a problem and damaging the environment in the process. If you have an end goal in mind that you think NFT’s can help with all power to you.
I merely suggested that if you come to a forum and ask the people of the forum for there opinion and then when they give you that opinion in reasonable and well thought out terms, you should not then say they are 100% wrong and that they have a bad attitude. You should especially not do that to people who are either paying customers of yours (as in my case) or potential paying customers.
As some one with experience in customer care I know never to get into a public argument as it makes both people look bad and only one of us is trying to sell something. No one is banning you from looking into whatever the hell you want but when people say one thing and then say the opposite a week later they lose trust from their customers. You could have taken that opportunity to tell people “that you appreciate there passion and have no current plans but as you are a cutting edge company you will be exploring the technology with interest” but you instead told the person they had a bad attitude and to mind there own business.
I can take to this response better than the first one and am glad to see the NFT trigger won’t be pulled for nothing. Shall we put this issue to bed?
I do think that while it was good that we were asked about NFTs, the communication afterwards was not ideal - but perhaps that’s as far as it goes. There is no SLR/NFT marriage at present, so perhaps there is no reason to forever beat SLR over the head for a communication misstep when we haven’t seen a single piece of NFT technology in use and hopefully never will. It’s just that the language used made it seem as though SLR were scouting as much as possible to involve NFTs somehow, but it seems that isn’t true and it’s a case of putting feelers out in case something world changing turns up.
I really am a happy SLR customer (the content often seems tailor made for me) so I’ve no intention to make SLR out to be the devil unnecessarily. Just please remember that whenever NFTs come up, a lot of us feel very strongly about the topic as this thread has shown. By and large, most of us will applaud any attempts to stay away from using them. The userbase will likely remain very sensitive to the NFT question so the previous attempts to ask our thoughts, as well as any future attempts to ask us about them, are all appreciated.
With no NFT technology in sight, I’m happy to leave it alone and just go back to enjoying SLR.
Just for the record the furthest we have got so far is that Layer 1 DeFi infrastructure that can be a basis for our platform isn’t coming any earlier than three years from now. If it’s capable to deliver what promises I can definitely see us being early adopters. It’s fundamentally different from what current phase of NFT and blockchain implementations are.
You can think of it like a low-level distributed network enabling all the interaction we get into a single integral self-balancing system. It makes everyone a part of the game with clear rules and 100% proof of operation.