Allow Custom Virtual Gifts

[azurelunatic]

Title:
Allow Custom Virtual Gifts

Area:
vgifts, shameless moneygrubbing

Summary:
Allow users to send a custom virtual gift if nothing in the shop suits their needs. Users would purchase the "custom" virtual gift, then be prompted to upload a picture or pictures and set a description. Custom vgifts would have separate security settings than regular ones, in case someone did not want custom gifts from strangers (or anyone) but still was OK with regular ones.

Description:
Virtual gifts are coming soon. I understand from dw_biz discussion that the gifts will be carefully selected to be fun and/or uplifting, and thus low-controversy.

Some people, between friends, enjoy the sort of vgift that it might be inappropriate to send to a stranger (for example, LJ's flaming bag on the doormat, the black rose, the finger, the inexplicable octopus). However, those might not be appropriate for general use. This would be a disappointment.

Rather than attempt to have Dreamwidth's owners tread the line between hilarious and offensive, or have a dizzying array of this-is-ok-but-this-is-not options that users could pick, let users pick their own images to send, and let the would-be recipients decide *who* is allowed to send them custom vgifts.

Most of the discussions I've witnessed about LJ's vgifts and their appropriateness start at "LJ shouldn't allow anyone to send these because no one could possibly find them funny" and end closer to "Well, *YOU* and *YOUR FRIENDS* find them funny, but *MY FRIENDS* and *I* sure don't, and people I trust wouldn't send them to me anyway!"

Allowing users to upload their own vgifts would open the door to people with odd senses of humor uploading vgifts perhaps better left to the imagination, but this sort of image shows up in comments/entries/profiles anyway, and there are likewise no restrictions (other than length) on what one may write in a vgift note.

Users would choose vgifts enabled or disabled. If enabled:
Regular vgifts: everyone (allows anonymous), Registered Users, Circle, Access List, Custom Group
Custom vgifts: everyone (allows anonymous), Registered Users, Circle, Access List, Custom Group, No One

I'd suggest Enabled: Registered Users/Access List for the default.


When purchasing a vgift, (depending on the recipient's settings), the sender would (possibly) be able to select and purchase Custom Vgift. Once purchased (or as part of the purchase process), they would be prompted to upload a large image (possibly undergoing some server-side manipulation to resize/crop to the appropriate size), and either resize/crop that image to provide a thumbnail or upload their own thumbnail (could be used for a "wrapped" package), and provide a description as well as gift text. They might have to click a checkbox attesting that they had the rights to upload this and use it as a vgift.

The images would be stored on-site, in a special directory of the user's image hosting space (perhaps the ability to purchase custom vgifts would be a paid feature?) (this would require the image hosting space to be up and running first). On subsequent purchases, they would be able to select from their own previously-uploaded custom vgifts (and might be able to pre-load things into that area to make later purchases easier).

Poll #1031 Allow Custom Virtual Gifts

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 42

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
31 (73.8%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
2 (4.8%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
3 (7.1%)

(I have no opinion)
4 (9.5%)

(Other: please comment)
2 (4.8%)

Comments

[azurelunatic]

We'd have to figure out what happens to the pictures if someone downgrades; we wouldn't want to leave someone with broken-image virtual gifts. Deleting images from that directory would also be problematic.

[7rin]

Make it so that only vgifts can be added to that particular directory?

If the personalised vgifts are limited in size (e.g. in a similar fashion to how user pic's are limited), then surely it'd allow for quite a lot to sit there in storage without having too much impact on the site?

ETA: Meaning, I don't think they should vanish just because someone no longer has a paid account, although they should probably not be allowed to use them again until they do have a paid account again.

[azurelunatic]

Yeah -- I was thinking that it should not store pics larger than the full vgift size, and perhaps once you've used it as a vgift, perhaps it should be locked in place and not (easily) deletable?

If purchasing a custom vgift is dependent on having a paid account at the time, that would be safeguard enough.

[kareila]

Speaking as the person currently working on implementing vgifts, I can say that I'm designing the system for this to be technically doable. I'll leave it up to others to debate the pros and cons of actually letting people do it.

[azurelunatic]

Wheee!

[althea_valara]

I really like this idea.

What would make it even shinier is if the "view virtual gift" page also had security settings on it. 'Cause I can imagine wanting to show everyone the regular vgifts I've received, but wanting custom vgifts shown only to my access list.

[cheyinka]

Would it make sense for virtual gifts to be visible only to those that can give them? For example, if I want standard gifts only from my circle, and custom gifts only from my "won't send me goatse" custom filter, only my circle should be able to see the standard gifts I have and only people who I've decided "won't send me goatse" should be able to see my (non-goatse) custom gifts. That way there's no "but you let THEM give you gifts, why not ME?", and there's not another pair of options to set.

[althea_valara]

Yeah, I thought of this after I posted my comment. I think that would be a good, easy solution.

[azurelunatic]

Hmm.

Whereas I don't mind showing off my shinies to everyone, as long as I don't get goatse'd anonymously. (A little goatse-ing between friends is nothing.)

[yvi]

How about having a radio button on every virtual gift:

Show on profile page to:
* everyone
* access list
* registered users
* just me

Show on v-gift page to:
* everyone
* access list
* registered users
* just me

[7rin]

I could live with this. :)

[snakeling]

I have a problem with DW hosting the images if people upload pictures whose copyright don't belong to them, as it might put Dw into trouble.

[azurelunatic]

That would be a problem with any sort of image hosting DW offered, wouldn't it?

[snakeling]

Not necessarily, because with image-hosting à la Scrapbook it's pretty clear that the images were uploaded by the user and that DW is just providing the space and the interface. With vgifts, it would be harder to distinguish between the official ones and the user-uploaded ones.

[zvi]

Not if every user loaded one is automatically tagged with a pre-fix or something in its unique ID which indicates that it is user-loaded.

[phoenixsong]

DW already hosts user-loaded images "whose copyright doesn't belong to them". What's the difference between copyright on a vgift and a usericon?

[archangelbeth]

This was my concern as well. Perhaps making sure that custom vgift images are marked as such...?

[cesy]

"No one" should be an option for regular v-gifts as well, for those people who don't like the v-gift system at all.

[azurelunatic]

That would be vgifts enabled/disabled, the idea being if you did not like default vgifts you would probably not want any custom ones either.

[sofiaviolet]

I would use the fuck out of this, not gonna lie.

[ninetydegrees]

As long as some DW official has to approve of them before they go live... Because I can imagine some people's idea of fun is not US laws' idea of fun.

[ninetydegrees]

Also, I think it should meet some size/format/etc. requirements.

[zvi]

IAMNAL, but Dreamwidth actually has more legal protection if it is not vetting things before they go live. If they publish everything that gets uploaded, then they are just a service that users are using. If they pick and choose what goes through, then they are publishers (i.e., exercising control), and responsible for the content.

[ninetydegrees]

Good point. It doesn't sit right with me but good point.

[triadruid]

I share your concern, but it's a real fiddly point in the current law.

[azurelunatic]

That's an issue on LJ with userpics, scrapbook, entries, and comments. Report-when-noticed-and-remove seems to be working decently in most cases; there should therefore be an easy path for the ToS team to remove a vgift for ToS (no illegal content) violations.

[ninetydegrees]

I realize now that I mistakenly thought custom gifts would be made available for other users to purchase. My apologies.