Resident Government: It's Coming Soon to a Sim Near You
If you aren't part of the Octocracy and selected for the SL Views, the feted focus groups where 8 people get to be brought to the Lab all expenses paid, if you have other stuff to do in RL and can't get to the Lindens' office hours, if you haven't been around SL for the last 2 years to know what the Lindens have up their sleeves, then you need to hear this: the Lindens are contemplating putting Ban-Link in the client.
THAT is their governance plan. They haven't announced it; they claim to be getting "input" -- yet if their past practice is anything to go buy, it's already precooked, and it is just a question of finding out how much people will howl. They'll be doing it, or something very like it. Pay attention.
If you read about Ban-Link only in Mark Wallace's review, then go and read my critique of it specifically in his comments here. Ban-Link isn't being thought through because the Lindens are just interested in finding a facile system that residents like to do the dirty work of governance, and they don't want to think about recourse against such a harsh system because that would mean work -- and more complex systems of governance for them. It's really an awful situation.
Many won't howl. They'll be glad to have anything that "deals with griefers". If you complain about how this is being done, you'll be told you are aiding griefers, that you want people to be griefed.
None of this is being discussed in any kind of broad way, even in the old limited managed democracy of the town hall or the community round table or the forums. It's just going to be put over on us, and the job now is only how to figure out how to press for recourse.
The propaganda about Ban-Link put out by Travis Lambert, who is dining out on a long-trusted and prominent position in SL as manager of the Shelter, a newbies orientation area, is that it is based on "trust".
It's not supposed to be some big grab-bag of ban lists. It's supposed to be managed by "trust," where only those entities that are large enough and have a reason to get on Ban-Link can get on it; and then only those groups you "trust" and find have useful and adequate ban lists for your purposes will be those you use as your aggregate ban.
Of course, it doesn't work like that in practice. In practice, if I write something critical of FlipperPA Peregrine, who first engineered my banning from the SLCC, then caved to pressure to reverse it and claimed it was never in place -- then I'm banned not only from Flipper's land, but from all kinds of unexpected places -- large rental sims, boat yards, clubs, the odd residence. Why? Becuse FlipperPA is in Ban-Link, and has his whole list in there, and all the other members just grab it -- because they grab everything.
I IM the people and ask why I'm banned, and I'm told that in the group, when they chat about these things, Angel Fluffy, a notorious hijacker of the voting tools and anti-democrat in SL, tells everyone "I'm a notorious griefer". I ask the people banning me if they know Flipper, or why he might have banned me -- they have no idea. They grabbed the list. So it goes. To the credit of some people, once you explain, they immediately take you off. They don't want bannings for blog expression. Most aren't that enlightened, however.
In a world of anonymous fucktards and chance empowerment of mediocrities without accountability, the Ban-Link concept is in awful hands. The Lindens are now institutionalizing it. Most people are sleeping through this. They don't realize THIS IS RESIDENT GOVERNMENT.
Because this is how residents control others -- by banning them. Here's our conversation kicking this around, but I also urge you to visit the Sluniverse.com discussion as well and get involved -- I'm banned from Sluniverse.com or I'd join you there : )
19:27] You: Twitter
[19:27] You: I'm going to SLURL it
[19:27] SLurlchatter v0.12: http://slurl.com/secondlife/Refugio/125/121/69/
[19:27] Khamon Fate: I've not twittered
[19:27] Khamon Fate: I'm too lazy.
[19:29] Khamon Fate: What are we discussing?
[19:29] You: Look I have decadant art even
[19:29] You: life
[19:29] You: love
[19:29] You: you know
[19:30] Khamon Fate: Robin is taking over the marketing dept.
[19:30] Khamon Fate: again
[19:30] Khamon Fate: Basically regained the position she had back in 2004
[19:31] Khamon Fate: She keeping the community relation hat too.
[19:31] You: I need furniture tips in here
[19:31] Cocoanut Koala: you could buy mine
[19:31] Cocoanut Koala: cept it wouldn't match
[19:31] Khamon Fate: Don't know nothin bout no furniture. I never decorate houses, I just stand in them.
[19:31] Khamon Fate: Hi Coco
[19:31] You: Hi Della
[19:32] You: Ok Khamon what's our topic?
[19:32] You: "Resolved: There is no such thing as a community in Second Life."
[19:32] You: hmmm
[19:32] Khamon Fate: The restructuring of LL management isn't good enough?
[19:33] Cocoanut Koala: this is my favorite chair
[19:33] You: oh is that a topic?
[19:33] Khamon Fate: Resolved nothing
[19:33] Della Street: Hello Khamon, Hello Coco, Hello Prok
[19:33] You: yes I have it on the group setting too now
[19:33] Khamon Fate: Hi Della
[19:33] You: is LL management restructuring?
[19:33] Cocoanut Koala: hiya della! how's perry?
[19:33] Della Street: dead
[19:33] Cocoanut Koala: lol
[19:33] Khamon Fate: There are communitieS in SL
[19:33] Khamon Fate: thousands of small functional ones
[19:33] Khamon Fate: thousands more propped up ones
[19:34] Khamon Fate: But there is no commuuuuunity per se, no singular spirit, nothing to "support" or rally around
[19:34] Della Street: hi Vitaly
[19:34] Cocoanut Koala: however, there are those who claim they ARE the community, and speak FOR the community,
[19:35] Cocoanut Koala: and try to act AS the community.
[19:35] Khamon Fate: Despite their best efforts, we can't even agree to fight common enemies
[19:35] You: well I've just been reading Castronova's book Synthetic Worlds on governance, and it's completely WRONG
[19:35] You: he actually thinks the most important governor is the NPC faction
[19:35] Khamon Fate: How much effect do those people and their claims have on our virtual lives Coco?
[19:35] Cocoanut Koala: way too much
[19:36] Cocoanut Koala: its very exclusionary
[19:36] Ina Centaur gave you 2007spring sLiterary Magazine Inworld Edition.
[19:36] Khamon Fate: He thinks that because he believes they prop up the virtual economies
[19:36] Scope Cleaver: Hello all :)
[19:36] Khamon Fate: Hi Scope
[19:36] Cocoanut Koala: you don't get to be part of the community unless they say you are, and you don't get that unless you agree with them
[19:36] You: did anyone get to that meeting that first Chadrick then robin held in office hours about governance?
[19:37] Khamon Fate: Not me, Robin talked a lot today about Daniels shared ban list project.
[19:37] Cocoanut Koala: what?
[19:38] You: When I was at this conference in NYTC called VW 07 I asked Joe Miller who is a chief Linden in charge of the platform, and he claimed they were
getting out of the governance biz
[19:38] Khamon Fate: Robin talked a lot today about Daniel's shared ban list project.
[19:38] Khamon Fate: That's apparently going to be a feature.
[19:38] You: but of course I pointed out to them that if they GOM Ban-Link they are making a very political act and very much making a government
[19:38] Khamon Fate: "feature"
[19:38] Cocoanut Koala: what?
[19:38] Cocoanut Koala: what does that mean?
[19:38] You: I just found out from another big rentals agent that they are having a meeting with the Lindens who do abuse report stuff
[19:38] You: to give them their "intel" on griefers
[19:39] Khamon Fate: Nobody understood my explanations that banning only accelerates the problem
[19:39] You: and what's amazing is that Michael and Daniel are taking the meeting
[19:39] You: maybe we should ask for meetings like that lol
[19:39] You: I wouldn't waste their time telling them about the same 3 W-hat alts
[19:39] You: that are all their friends anyway
[19:39] Cocoanut Koala: wait a minute
[19:39] Cocoanut Koala: you mean they are putting something in the game so we can share ban lists?
[19:39] Cocoanut Koala: like an official banlink?
[19:39] navets Potato: thanks
[19:40] You: what would it take for them to GOM Ban-LInk Khamon?
[19:40] Khamon Fate: That's my undertanding. I'll quote myself saying But Robin, there are loads of impatient, fed up, immature land owners in Second Life.
[19:40] You: well what will be the recourse? and do they pronounce this as the de facto government?
[19:41] Khamon Fate: How many new residents are gonna come off the pad with guns blazing and no idea whey they can't go anywhere?
[19:41] Khamon Fate: They do that in Slate all the time. I talk to them. 99 times out of 100 they act like real people when I treat them like real people.
[19:41] You: I had a griefer come to me the other day and say he was sorry he was a dick when he was new and firebombed my mall but now he's older and he'd
like to be unbanned, so I unbanned him
[19:41] You: lol
[19:41] You: how can that scale?
[19:41] You: that's why I don't join Ban-Link
[19:41] You: I refuse
[19:42] You: I will only ban locally for actions I can see personally for reasons that make sense
[19:42] Khamon Fate: But I see and read in the forums people just hit the ban button then IM them to gloat ha ha I own the land and you're screwed.
[19:42] You: well I see big landlords threatening people ALL the time
[19:42] You: "I will get you banned all over SL"
[19:42] You: I hate that, it's unreal
[19:42] You: it's everywhere
[19:42] You: it's why I'm banned in many places because of mindless cut and paste banning
[19:42] Khamon Fate: Ban link, Bah, I rarely ban at all, then just for a day or so.
[19:42] You: or use of Ban-LInk
[19:42] Khamon Fate: It's a stupid, childish tool
[19:42] You: this sofa is too decadant I think
[19:42] You: it's too fin de siecle
[19:43] Cocoanut Koala: Banlink - a scourge on civilization
[19:43] You: I need something more 20s
[19:43] Scope Cleaver: lol
[19:43] Khamon Fate: Are you calling us old?
[19:44] You: I think the basic principle of governance with the Lindens is that they decide the line between what they will govern and we will govern
[19:44] You: example: RL disclosure
[19:44] You: if that remains an offense
[19:44] Khamon Fate: Nobody here understands me either. What a minority I am.
[19:44] You: they must govern it, not us
[19:45] You: Ian have a vodka dude
[19:45] Khamon Fate: It's not a game, people's feelings are at stake and that deserves some level of honesty and openness.
[19:45] IanLee Patton: :))
[19:45] IanLee Patton: cheers
[19:46] You: nothing beats the Linden's Corbusier Sofa
[19:46] You: it's a Sofa for all Seasons
[19:46] IanLee Patton: heh cant stay though gotta get tae bed
[19:46] Khamon Fate: Hi Gonta
[19:46] Gonta Maltz: Hey, everyone!
[19:46] Khamon Fate: And it doubles as a nice bed.
[19:46] You: yes
[19:46] IanLee Patton: :)
[19:46] You: and a fortress against griefers
[19:46] You: I find it has multiple uses
[19:46] You: sturdy, low-prim, rezzes well
[19:46] Khamon Fate: Especially if you push two together
[19:46] You: yes yes
[19:46] You: they bridge across sims even
[19:46] You: see no one will ever make the world as good as Lindens
[19:46] Khamon Fate: Amazing
[19:47] You: so we 're all poor substitutes
[19:47] You: no one will eVER make a couch like Albert Linden, God bless him
[19:47] You: wow this rug sorta works
[19:47] Khamon Fate: I'm too poor to afford land. Let's talk smak about land brokers.
[19:47] Khamon Fate: This rug very works
[19:47] Khamon Fate: well done
[19:47] Della Street: :)
[19:47] You: well I wonder if anybody follows Ashcroft's thing
[19:47] You: it's filled with complex toggles and switches
[19:47] Khamon Fate: ha ha ha surely not
[19:47] You: I hope to God the Lindens aren't going to code it up
[19:48] You: What he's doing now is scouring the groups and inviting people to join his group
[19:48] You: so all my alts and fake groups everywhere are getting invited
[19:48] You: I should have them all invade Ashcroft's thing
[19:48] Khamon Fate: Do they serve rabbit stew in Moscovian Tea Houses?
[19:48] Cocoanut Koala: what is Ashcroft's thing?
[19:48] Scope Cleaver: What his thing?
[19:48] You: So Ashcroft now has 100 people
[19:48] You: well he has a thing called Local Governance Something Group
[19:48] You: and he is drafting complex Governance systems
[19:48] Jamie Palisades: howdy all
[19:48] Khamon Fate: Hi Jamie
[19:48] You: and I go to the meetings and say, you know, first of all, we need this group's governance to be better
[19:48] You: to have more than one officer?
[19:49] You: to have the right to distribute notices?
[19:49] You: I mean, those 2 things are good to start with
[19:50] Gonta Maltz: isn't that how it should be?
[19:50] Khamon Fate: It seems that all those little governance projects burn out without making any real impact.
[19:50] You: well you can go read his voluminous ideas, but they boil down to having a system where people cede land controls as a bulwark against griefing
[19:50] You: they do
[19:50] You: but they persist in some form
[19:50] You: Neualtenberg and its offshoots still keep generating stuff
[19:50] You: and noting that they are "the first democracy" etc
[19:50] You: I see Desmond did an April Fool's Democristan on his sims lol
[19:51] You: I think limiting the powers of LL is the start tho
[19:51] You: separation of powers
[19:51] You: or some very weak facsimile
[19:51] You: where they decide whether or not they will police the Big Six or not
[19:51] You: Daniel Linden is wavering on this
[19:51] IanLee Patton: sorry prokovy gotta run
[19:51] You: he's saying he'll let the Goreans police their own
[19:51] Khamon Fate: What's the Big Six?
[19:51] You: the Community Standards
[19:51] You: they call them that
[19:51] You: like no hate speech, etc
[19:52] You: that means that if I'm on a Gorean sim and somebody hates on me, I can't whine to Daniel Linden
[19:52] Jamie Palisades: So it comes down to *ceding* their LL right to enforce the rules on owned sims?
[19:52] You: he will re-route the complaint back to my Master, and I'm shit out of luck
[19:52] You: well that's what i want them to articulate
[19:52] Khamon Fate: I'm not allowed on Gorean sims generally 'cause I'm not human
[19:53] You: I'd like that in writing
[19:53] You: right
[19:53] You: and they can say, well, you want the Big Six? Don't go Gor.
[19:53] You: the exit clause concept
[19:53] You: which I find insufficient for worlds
[19:53] You: it's scary to read how little good theoretical writing is done on that
[19:53] Jamie Palisades: arguably, a multiplicity of enforcement styles would get us better data and more choice, eventually
[19:53] You: it is almost all owned by the ludologists
[19:53] You: imagine, Ted Castranova is saying that the NPC is the best form of governance1
[19:53] You: that customer service agents are rarely seen so they don't govern
[19:54] Khamon Fate: Perhaps they should own all the land
[19:54] You: that you can't control guilds and their excesses -- so don't!
[19:54] You: etc
[19:54] You: he's SO out of touch
[19:54] You: that's why we have to really hoot and holler and get the Terra Nova people to focus on this stuff better
[19:54] You: they are stuck in games
[19:54] You: Raph Koster is back from Eyetech or whatsis and spouting game rules and concepts learned from closed worlds of games
[19:54] You: It's so far beyond that now.
[19:55] Khamon Fate: We can rent land for the NPCs and when we have a problem in the sim, we can appeal to their rule-based expert system to make a ruling
[19:55] You: The Lindens are already coding up stuff and nobody is paying attention.
[19:55] You: well apaprently in games, you tell me, I don't know
[19:55] You: there are factions
[19:55] You: and if you are in that orc faction
[19:55] Cocoanut Koala: what are they coding up?
[19:55] You: that NPC will be nice to you and not kill you
[19:55] You: tools to enhance governance
[19:55] Scope Cleaver: Has that been made public?
[19:55] You: welded into them, will be the ideas of Angel Fluffy, or Ashcroft
[19:55] Cocoanut Koala: well i wish they would let us in on them
[19:55] You: no
[19:55] You: they say they are working on them
[19:56] You: they are talking admiringly of Ban-Link
[19:56] You: so I imagine that is what they will emulate or GOM
[19:56] You: but they haven't said
[19:56] Jamie Palisades: enhance "govenance" or "enforcement"?
[19:56] You: and that's part of the job
[19:56] You: getting them to come clean on the program here
[19:56] Cocoanut Koala: they['ve got this notion that the machine rules all
[19:56] Khamon Fate: Coco it helps to go the office hours. They talk about them there and take some input, even some criticism.
[19:56] You: good question Jamie
[19:56] Cocoanut Koala: where do i find the office hours?
[19:56] Jamie Palisades: the forums were governance ...
[19:56] You: well Khamon, you know, office hours in California come when I go to RL work or something
[19:56] You: and they don't publish the transcripts
[19:56] You: have you noticed they haven't had a single think piece on the blog in about 120 days?
[19:57] Jamie Palisades: ejector buttons for dress codes would be "enforcement" ...
[19:57] You: it's all "Whoops, we thought we fixed that...oh we're just about to fix that...stay tune for the fix"
[19:57] Cocoanut Koala: ive noticed they haven't had any workshops in over a year
[19:57] Khamon Fate: http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=mvktahmo6mjpvpkkkdnmabmghg%40group.calendar.google.com
[19:57] Cocoanut Koala: and only two town halls in the last 6 months or thereabouts
[19:57] You: what's that Khamon?
[19:57] You: yeah
[19:57] Cocoanut Koala: thanks, khamon!
[19:57] You: but my bet is they are done with town halls
[19:57] Khamon Fate: The office hours schedule on the website
[19:57] Khamon Fate: It's also somewhere inworld but I don't know where.
[19:58] Gonta Maltz: how are we to bridge the gap between this point, and to where LL has provided the means to govern ourselves? There was an uproar about
copybot, and LL shouted that they need to develop a new, community-driven, IP scheme
[19:58] Jamie Palisades: the town halls didn;t scale well .. but they haven;t found a proper scalable substitute either
[19:58] Khamon Fate: I've given up on diseminating information inworld
[19:58] You: wow
[19:58] You: aren't you FIC!
[19:58] You: how did you get that? lol
[19:58] Gonta Maltz: who? what?
[19:58] Khamon Fate: who? what?
[19:59] You: the Lindens' office hours
19:59] You: it seems an inefficient way to do things tho
[19:59] You: why are they doing it that way?
[19:59] You: they can't write 3 paragraphs about their plans for the blog???
19:59] Khamon Fate: Oh, it's a link from the Linden Village web page that's on their blog
[19:59] You: the point is in the vacuum created by this weak federal government, you have the balkanized states making warlords have ban-link anyway LOL
[19:59] Jamie Palisades: isn't this just income stratification, Prok?
[19:59] You: so how can recourse to Ban-Link be devised?
[20:00] Jamie Palisades: They;'re talkin' plenty to their concierge level clients, I think
[20:00] Khamon Fate: I'm planning to just stay in my own damn sim.
[20:00] You: you mean those with the time to sit in Linden office hours ?
[20:00] You: well I'm concierge level
[20:00] You: but I don't have time to sit in their office hours normally
[20:00] You: I do sometimes
[20:00] Khamon Fate: If people don't want to be community oriented, to Hell with them.
[20:00] Jamie Palisades: yup saw you at that pitiful 14 feb event
[20:00] You: I never see concierge people in those meetings, it's just random assorted newbies and whatnot
[20:01] You: yes that was a sterling example of how you can have multiple instances of the same....laggy freeze-frame lol
[20:01] You: I'm going to defect to Whyville.
[20:01] You: I love the Whyville guy.
[20:01] Jamie Palisades: I suspect that Linden's urge for input is mostly sated one on one these days
[20:01] Khamon Fate: Haven't looked at that.
[20:01] You: the way he said 3 out of 50 staff work on programming, the rest work on process
[20:01] You: well what happens is that these meetings are just flotsam and jetsam
[20:02] You: and they'll be somebody still not getting the memo about first land
[20:02] You: or saying they don't understand why their view is ruined by idiots with towers
[20:02] Khamon Fate: It's the direct emails they sit around and talk about.
[20:02] You: hey, that's a garden perennial
[20:02] You: direct emails?
[20:02] Khamon Fate: I'm a garden perennial
[20:02] You: well they have the Community Round Table list, are you on that Khamon?
[20:02] Khamon Fate: ha ha ha
[20:02] You: yes I know
[20:02] You: i thought of you first
[20:02] Khamon Fate: I am, it's worthless
[20:02] You: well but they had a very important discussion last year
[20:03] Khamon Fate: Do you want me to sit in a vase?
[20:03] You: where most of the people were for publicizing names of the perpetrators
[20:03] You: I found the zeal to do that awful
[20:03] You: not names of those who file complaints however
[20:03] Khamon Fate: That goes around the forums ever so often too.
[20:03] You: well now I have had a chance to put it in to practice myself
[20:03] You: I now have the names of the perps
[20:03] You: because that's how tenants want it, they won't put their own names
[20:03] Khamon Fate: But there's the great sacredness of the divine anonymity to consider.
[20:03] You: however a handful will become worse
[20:03] You: and it does deter them
[20:03] You: but that discredits them
[20:04] You: griefing is over-stated
[20:04] Khamon Fate: very
[20:04] You: if you read my police blotter you see that
[20:04] You: one mall firebombing, or one particle storm
[20:04] You: and maybe somebody went on somebody's sex balls
[20:04] You: that's a regular complaint
[20:04] Khamon Fate: Most initial griefing is just a misunderstanding of how the world works
[20:04] You: well that's why I'm for having a flexible attitude toward those like that who bomb first on their first day
[20:05] You: they just are following James Linden and Philip Linden's instructions on the promo video
[20:05] Gonta Maltz: like spanking a new-born baby
[20:05] Khamon Fate: And even serious griefers will generally just talk a while and go away if my reaction is to talk to them like they're human beings
[20:05] You: well I don't talk to people who send me a dossier of my RL information and a picture of my door like human beings
[20:05] Khamon Fate: Sometimes I get really upfront and personal with them, where do you live? do you like kittens?
[20:05] Cocoanut Koala: i agree with that about the griefers, by and large
[20:05] Khamon Fate: They run RUN i tell you away
[20:05] You: I put them on the police blotter and ban them strategically
[20:05] You: I don't think I want a Ban-Link dull axe approach
[20:06] You: I find that if I put a list of people who I've banned, every single tenant will ban them
[20:06] You: so now I put lists saying "ban recommended" and "don't ban"
[20:06] Cocoanut Koala: i hate banlinks with every fiber of my being
[20:06] You: yes but we have to find a way to sort out griefing Cocoanut
[20:06] You: because everyone then leaves and says "you don't deal with griefers"
[20:06] You: I had this tenant who had intruders in her bed while she was with her husband
[20:06] Khamon Fate: Coco and Travis have been talking about it on SC for weeks.
[20:06] Gonta Maltz: I was banned by an outlier member of furry group, and I was banned from 15+ sims
[20:06] You: her husband in RL who is deployed
[20:06] You: and this is the way she meets him
[20:06] You: in SL
[20:07] You: and to have that sort of intrusion is terribly upsetting to her
[20:07] You: that's how people are, and I respect that
[20:07] You: to have some strange asshole men come on her sexballs
[20:07] Cocoanut Koala: well they finally reformed banlink, so im no longer concerned
[20:07] You: so I say, eject them and forget about it
[20:07] Vitaly Szymborska: when in that situation
[20:07] You: but she wants them banned and incinerated
[20:07] Vitaly Szymborska: swell then she needs to buy land and restrict her ban lines no?
[20:07] Cocoanut Koala: lol
[20:07] You: well that's what I am forced to say
[20:07] You: then my rentals are not for you
[20:07] You: because I have MORE complaints from those who get red lines and bouncing from your maximum security compound
[20:07] You: buy an island and put one up
[20:07] You: but this is a community
[20:08] You: we don't want to fly around with red lines
[20:08] You: but the anger and hurt people feel over this intrusion is TREMENDOUS
[20:08] Khamon Fate: That's what I mean, too often the reaction to a griefer is just as childish and vindictive as the original griefing
[20:08] You: I mean it REALLY fuels them.
[20:08] You: well if they are paying your rent and tier, Khamon, you accommodate it
[20:08] You: but for me, I refuse to make compounds
[20:08] Khamon Fate: Will the *real* asshole please stand up
[20:08] You: if I have to make compounds it's not intersting and stupid
[20:08] Gonta Maltz: hire the AN :D
[20:08] Vitaly Szymborska: true.. there has to be a knowledge though of what you can and cant do in SL privately and what the expectations are and some havent
figured that out yet.,.. the whole land situation is screwey in my opinion
[20:08] You: no thanks, I don't want RP kiddies
[20:09] You: well I have a lot of cards about privacy and griefing
[20:09] You: I hand them out to newbies and new tenants
[20:09] Khamon Fate: But Vitaly we don't educate people to that effect
[20:09] Vitaly Szymborska: true
[20:09] You: I find everyone wants to ban unverifieds
[20:09] Vitaly Szymborska: you have to learn on your own lol
[20:09] You: then whoops they make an unverified friend
[20:09] You: and they ask to uncheck that
[20:09] You: it's NEVER used for any length of time
[20:09] Khamon Fate: I asked Robin today if this new system was going to be coupled with some explanation to new residents of general community ethics inworld?
[20:09] You: the concept that it is unverifieds who grief is belied by my police blotter lol
[20:09] Khamon Fate: Well no, they hadn't thought of that.
[20:09] You: no of course not
[20:09] You: that would be soft stuff
[20:09] Vitaly Szymborska: but the truth is if there was a notecard that evryone got when they joined you would still have people who said they dont know it or dont
read it
[20:10] You: but Khamon, I really have to object at this way they are putting this shit over on us
[20:10] Cocoanut Koala: what new system, the new stupid banlink system they are thinking about coding?
[20:10] You: you got to an office hour and you get information?
[20:10] You: the other 5 million can't know ?
[20:10] Khamon Fate: Yeah Coco
[20:10] Khamon Fate: That's how it works.
[20:10] You: Does anyone object if I put this conversation up on my blog?
[20:10] You: because people don't know they are about to put this over on us
[20:10] You: thanks to Travis.
[20:10] Cocoanut Koala: oh dear
[20:10] Gonta Maltz: no problem, Prokofy
[20:11] Khamon Fate: The Lindens can't inform us any better than we can inform each other. That's been a vast hole in the wora'uld for years.
[20:11] Cocoanut Koala: i always sound much more erudite when i know im going to be read
[20:11] You: this isn't a scheduled meeting, just a chat which is why I ask
[20:11] Cocoanut Koala: and here i say stuff like "I hate banklink with every fiber of my being"
[20:11] You: but Khamon, hell, they could put up a blog for God's sake
[20:11] Cocoanut Koala: and "you mean that stupid ban link system"
[20:11] Khamon Fate: ha ha ha
[20:11] You: yes I hate it too
[20:11] Cocoanut Koala: just cut me out of it, okay?
[20:11] You: so we need to form the Ban-Link Appeals Committee
[20:11] You: and wrestle them to the ground I guess
[20:11] Khamon Fate: Oh Cocoanut be brave, be open, be free
[20:11] You: shame them for what they'll be doing with it
[20:11] You: and be banned, khamon!
[20:11] You: Travis will wind up banning critics I'll bet
[20:12] You: he's been hugely stubborn on this
[20:12] Cocoanut Koala: hehe
[20:12] Cocoanut Koala: no
[20:12] You: and that's how people get when Lindens' fuel them
[20:12] Khamon Fate: Yeah be banned, I'm gonna end up that way for spouting off.
[20:12] Gonta Maltz: would there be a fair way for LL to hire a 3rd party?
[20:12] Khamon Fate: Might as well just host my own sims for me and my friends anyway.
[20:12] You: Gonta you mean go the Stratics route?
[20:12] Gonta Maltz: (sorry, I didn't mean to change the rug)
[20:13] You: too late!
[20:13] Khamon Fate: There *was* some talk of an appeal process and of opting into and out of ban sharing groups.
[20:13] Khamon Fate: How did you change the rug?
[20:13] You: magic
[20:13] Cocoanut Koala: i would have just had a heart attack on the spot if i had been at that office hours
[20:13] You: Coco have you pushed the debate with Travis any further on SLuniverse.com?
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: no, he did what i wanted
[20:14] You: which was?
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: i won, i exited
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: made the whole thing invisible to others
[20:14] You: ?
[20:14] You: exited what?
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: you can't put in your name now, presumably (I haven't tested it yet) and find your name
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: the conversation
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: i exited the conversation
[20:14] You: but Cocoanut, we would WANT to find our name
[20:14] You: ?
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: now, you have to put in your name only, and get a pin number or something
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: well, you can find YOURS
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: but now the whole world cant
[20:14] Cocoanut Koala: only the people in the dumbass system
[20:15] You: hmm well I honestly don't know what is better
[20:15] Cocoanut Koala: so, I won, I left
[20:15] You: but what I'd like to know is whether I'm in it and BY WHOM
[20:15] Cocoanut Koala: you will
[20:15] You: if they make the entire list visible, everyone will include it always, no questions
[20:15] Cocoanut Koala: if you get the pin number or whatever
[20:15] You: the whole concept of how it is "trust based" is fake
[20:15] Cocoanut Koala: they wouldn't make everything visible
[20:15] You: everyone grabs whatever they can, they fear griefers so much
[20:15] Cocoanut Koala: so now its all hidden (or should be)
[20:15] Cocoanut Koala: except from you yourself or me myself, about us
[20:15] Cocoanut Koala: so . . . thus it is now irrelevant, therefore i am now happy
[20:16] You: well it would be better for the public to be able to scrutinize the sillyness
[20:16] Cocoanut Koala: i do win some, ya know
[20:16] You: of how they ban people for no cause
[20:16] Cocoanut Koala: I won the SLCC one for example
[20:16] You: but that has the downside of creating a giant mega ban list for everyone then
[20:16] Cocoanut Koala: well it is going to happen, it is still in there,
[20:16] You: I don't know what you mean by "won" and "exited"
[20:16] Cocoanut Koala: i just can't look up joe blow's name and say, "oh gee, i see he is banned, he must be a bad person"\
[20:16] Cocoanut Koala: i mean i got what i wanted!
[20:17] Cocoanut Koala: i leave the convo after that as a rule
[20:17] Cocoanut Koala: i should bug more lindens
[20:17] Cocoanut Koala: to get what i want there
[20:17] You: well the question is whether Lidnens will actualyl take over Ban-LInk
[20:17] You: so that on our panel, we can opt into somebody's ban list the way we do groups or something
[20:17] You: that could really change the face of SL in ugly ways
[20:17] Gonta Maltz: there should be some type of peer review with bans.... but people'd have to be motivated to attend their "jury duty"
[20:18] You: and this will be happening without people discussing it or being able to understand it
[20:18] You: well they won't until it affects them, then they care
[20:18] You: what annoys me is the way they flog the concept of "trust"
[20:18] You: that if Flipper has a trusted reputation and trusted ban list
[20:18] You: then everybody ports his ban list
[20:18] You: he puts me on it because I criticize him on the forums
[20:18] You: and then every other person with a rentals thinks I'm a bomber and crasher
[20:19] Gonta Maltz: Maybe LL could demo several systems on the same grid?
[20:19] Khamon Fate: Almost, they can after a few more updates.
[20:19] Cocoanut Koala: LL will just stick us with the system they think is "best" for us
[20:19] Gonta Maltz: see what people like, what they adopt
[20:19] bboop Ayoob is Online
[20:20] Cocoanut Koala: then cling to it stubbornly till the end of time
[20:20] You: I will go on trying to use consensus that is reached with live people in real time, not with switches that operate like guns, ban/no ban
[20:20] You: sometimes you want to flick a switch and ban someone doing an obvious griefing thing
[20:20] You: other times what's more important is a business boycott
[20:20] Khamon Fate: but only for a day, they won't come back after that anyway
[20:20] You: well exactly, why keep it up?
[20:20] You: why keep all a tenant's bans in place after they leave their rental?
[20:20] Khamon Fate: There's really no reason to maintain long lists of bans perpetually
[20:20] Gonta Maltz: so allow people to flick switches on their own land... but unversal banning would require arbitration
[20:20] You: but they do
[20:20] You: it won't Gonta
[20:20] You: they already have it operating
[20:21] You: it already functions on hundreds of sims
[20:21] You: and they are proud of it
[20:21] Khamon Fate: That's a pretty rug
[20:21] You: and if you complain, they say you are aiding griefers
[20:21] Gonta Maltz: I'm out in the dark then
[20:21] You: so that's what's ugly about all this
[20:21] You: you can't complain, or you are railroaded
[20:21] Mephistopheles Thalheimer: surely ban-link will just force the use alt-griefers
[20:21] You: it isn't being discussed in any methodic way by Lindens
[20:21] Gonta Maltz: could you point me to where I could find out more about the ban-link?
[20:21] You: it's on the Sluniverse.com forums
[20:21] Gonta Maltz: alright
[20:21] You: Coco led a long debate about it
[20:22] You: coco do you have a link
[20:22] You: I never go there, I'm banned from Sluniverse.com
[20:22] You: lol
[20:22] Cocoanut Koala: no
[20:22] Cocoanut Koala: just www.sluniverse.com
[20:22] Cocoanut Koala: which i no longer participate in, by the way
[20:22] Jamie Palisades: well, your point is that that banning is bad, but that linking it amplifies its negative effects .... and makes it harder to apply 'strategically' to
refinforce the right behaviors
[20:22] Cocoanut Koala: i think banning is fine
[20:22] Jamie Palisades: *that that > not that, sorry
[20:22] Cocoanut Koala: when done by an individual
[20:22] Cocoanut Koala: on his own experience
[20:23] Cocoanut Koala: but not when just shared with everybody
[20:23] Cocoanut Koala: who takes your word for it, or, worse, shares your prejudices
[20:23] You: the alt griefing may increase yes
[20:23] Jamie Palisades: I'm reminded of those behavior experiments where the reward/punishment is random .. eventually the rats just stop *caring*
[20:23] You: what I think they need if they have this much power to close off whole swathes of SL land
[20:23] You: is definition of what griefing is
[20:24] Cocoanut Koala: lol jamie
[20:24] Cocoanut Koala: very astute
[20:24] Khamon Fate: This rat stopped caring.
[20:24] You: if griefing is writing a blog saying somebody's an ass, then I'd like it revisited
[20:24] You: yes Jamie they rely on us not to care
[20:24] You: I see from their calendar that they are also holding meetings on mysecondlife.com
[20:24] Jamie Palisades: is it a "definition" that's needed, or a more subtle escalation and rehabilitation protocol?
[20:24] You: I asked to be in that group, never heard back
[20:24] Khamon Fate: What is mysecondlife.com
[20:24] You: so they meet, they decide things, if you weren't chosen, and can't force your way to meetings, you're SOL
[20:24] Cocoanut Koala: what is mysecondlife.com?
[20:25] Jamie Palisades: focus group
[20:25] You: it's some kind of web based thing they are shaping now around SL to make it more myspacey I guess
[20:25] You: but who knows?
[20:25] You: if you aren't cool, you aren't chosen for it
[20:25] Khamon Fate: I didn't think that was up yet
[20:25] You: then it is all decided for you
[20:25] You: this is what I hate about Second Life
[20:25] You: people imagining this is a platform for democratic governance and "progressive politics" and the Daily Kos and the Edwards campaign
[20:26] You: but in reality, if you live and work here, you are treated like a serf.
[20:26] Jamie Palisades: hmmm
[20:26] Jamie Palisades: serf
[20:26] You: paying quit rent
[20:26] You: but unable to affect decisions affecting even your land
[20:27] Jamie Palisades: usually "serf" status is related to *property* rights issues more than policing style
[20:27] You: well Jamie what I mean is that we are mushrooms, kept in the dark and fed bullshit.
[20:27] You: better?
[20:27] Cocoanut Koala: lol
[20:27] You: they do not universally inform the population
[20:27] Cocoanut Koala: i would say that pretty aptly sums it up
[20:27] You: they have stopped posting important things on the blog
[20:28] You: they have stopped having community round tables
[20:28] Jamie Palisades: I own land in Los Angeles ... it is allegedly a democracy ... but they still get to limit the things I do to defense my land
[20:28] You: in their place are "office hours"
[20:28] You: sigh
[20:28] Khamon Fate: serfs under the Linden Royal Court yes Prokofy you've chided me for saying that in times past
[20:28] Jamie Palisades: >defend
[20:28] Khamon Fate: But that's what you have to play here, royal court politics, if you want to be heard
[20:28] You: Jamie, did you get to decide that instead of stabilizing the platform and making teleport work or reducing the number of changes that always bring new
bugs, we had to have now the ability to go on the web, find our friends, and teleport to them?
[20:29] You: I don't want to teleport to my friends
[20:29] You: I want to just teleport PERIOD
[20:29] You: and I couldn't teleport for 3 days
[20:29] Khamon Fate: I won the teleport thing
[20:29] You: while I got MOTDs bleating about how I could teleport to my friends
[20:29] You: how so?
[20:29] Vitaly Szymborska: lol
[20:29] Khamon Fate: I won the group tools as well
[20:29] You: I thought I won the group tools
[20:29] You: lol
[20:29] Cocoanut Koala: well hey I won the WHOLE OF SL!!
[20:29] Khamon Fate: You told me I won them
[20:29] You: oh?
[20:29] You: how?
[20:29] You: well I won them too tho
[20:29] You: you won part of them, I won part of them
[20:29] Cocoanut Koala: by sheer presence lol
[20:29] You: I got the ball rolling
[20:29] You: but how did you win teleporting?
[20:29] Cocoanut Koala: lol
[20:30] Khamon Fate: Although, I thunk you did. They're much more like your proposals than mine
[20:30] Jamie Palisades: yes .. in RL democracy there is *some* attenuated ability to influence government infrastructure priorities
[20:30] Khamon Fate: Oh, they gave us p2p
[20:30] You: I fail to see why group tools aren't enough to handle griefing.
[20:30] You: Take the buggyness out of them, streamline them
[20:30] You: they work pretty well
[20:30] You: with p2p comes grey squares
[20:30] Khamon Fate: I didn't win leaving the hubs in place for new residents to have localized areas to travel to til they got acclimated
[20:30] You: what can we do to put the proposal to them that recourse is needed for Ban-Link?
[20:31] You: they will say "we are putting governance into the hands of residents"
[20:31] You: we should demand that there is an appeals system with Lindens in it somewhere
[20:31] Khamon Fate: I agree a lot of this could be added to group tools, but that would put control in the hands of the resis as teh Torley calls us
[20:31] You: Khamon, how will Ban-Link physically appear? on group tools? or land menus?
[20:32] Khamon Fate: That I don't know
[20:32] Khamon Fate: Ask Daniel, he's coordinating the effort
[20:32] You: well Jamie are you willing to care about Ban-Link recourse? or do you want to go on saying real life has limits on your land too?
[20:32] You: I mean, I guess when you experience it yourself, you'll be motivated
[20:32] You: once you eat a red line, you say, hey, wait
[20:32] Jamie Palisades: Recourse.
[20:32] You: to whom?
[20:33] You: they've just given the power to the resis
[20:33] You: so too bad for you
[20:33] You: you didn't buy the view
[20:33] You: buy the land, buy the ban tool
[20:33] Jamie Palisades: :) I like the phrase 'eat a red line", too. It's evocative.
[20:33] You: or shut up
[20:33] You: yeah
[20:33] Jamie Palisades: Network effects and distributed systems *do* create new governance challenges : the ban-link issues are very much like ...
[20:33] Jim Lumiere is Online
[20:34] Khamon Fate: Who runs mysecondlife.com?
[20:34] Jamie Palisades: ... blacklist spam databases. Around which a whole set of liabilities, rules and practcies have developed.
[20:34] Vitaly Szymborska: good analogy Jamie
[20:34] Mephistopheles Thalheimer: good night everyone
[20:34] You: well Jesse Linden posted a thing somewhere
[20:34] You: saying if you wanted to be in his club and discuss it, to IM him
[20:35] You: but of course I did and was ignored lol
[20:35] Cocoanut Koala: night mephis
[20:35] Della Street: lol
[20:35] You: thanks for coming Mephis
[20:35] Jamie Palisades: Because these aggregated, non-curated info sources have *some* value but also create new types of it'-snobody's-fault errors too
[20:35] Della Street: goodnight Meph
[20:35] You: but Jamie these are aggregated
[20:35] You: that's the problem
[20:35] You: in the Linden world, they view them as aggregated
[20:35] You: they only need whatever shows up -- it's fictional
[20:35] Jamie Palisades: GIGO
[20:35] You: it's for show
[20:36] You: what does GIGO mean?
[20:36] Jamie Palisades: garbage in > garbage out
[20:36] You: I have to say I find the thought of curated info sources frightening
[20:36] You: but I suppose the phrase fits
[20:36] You: ok, well we don't all think and talk in tekkie wiki speak
[20:36] You: GIGO
[20:37] You: even tekkies never say that anymore
[20:37] You: interesting, that
[20:37] Jamie Palisades: well a noncurated info source, in this case, would be just the sum of all raw ban lists ...
[20:37] You: anybody follow what they are doing with the new voting beta?
[20:37] You: but it is curated
[20:37] You: by each person making a subjective decision to ban
[20:37] You: ostensibly on the basis of trust
[20:37] You: but of course that's bogus
[20:37] You: because fear drives them to collect as many banlists as possible
[20:37] You: the concept of the trust is just the propaganda around it
[20:38] Jamie Palisades: I *think* the aggregation is lilkely to compound errors
[20:38] Khamon Fate: Now we just roll our eyes like Margaret Russell and say "users"
[20:38] Khamon Fate: *sigh*
[20:38] You: yes
[20:38] You: but we know what Lindens will do about recourse
[20:38] You: do you want a good example of how they provide recourse to the community?
[20:38] You: look at the SLCC banning of Prokofy
[20:38] You: I give you recourse
[20:39] You: recourse consists of Jeska shrugging at Virtual Worlds 2007
[20:39] You: and saying "it's not my decision, it's the committee's"
[20:39] You: and Flipper saying, "it's my lawyers' advice"
[20:39] You: only when people OUTSIDE that hothouse community of FIC in SL
[20:39] You: with influence
[20:39] You: say "Why are you kids banning somebody like it's a game???"
[20:39] You: then they stop
[20:39] Jamie Palisades: ...so ... wil malicious false stuffing of an innocent person into a ban list, just to get 'em silenced, become a cardinal sin under the Six Rules
O'Phil ?
[20:39] You: so see how recourse works?
[20:39] You: no
[20:39] You: it won't be a sin
[20:39] You: it will be the NORM
[20:39] You: already is the norm
[20:40] You: it's like the ageplay thing
[20:40] Jamie Palisades: here's once datacentric remediation approach:
[20:40] You: they didn't say "we're saying this is wrong because we're a company with a public image to worry about and RL laws"
[20:40] Jamie Palisades: *once > one
[20:40] You: they say "our community finds this broadly offensive"
[20:40] You: it's the triumph of the non-state actor over the rule of law
[20:40] You: it's very worrisome in general terms for the long term development of the Metaverse
[20:41] Jamie Palisades: ... every entry has to be authorial - If I get the "Prokofy is banned" datum, it comes with ...
[20:41] You: I don't know what once over one MEANS in practical terms
[20:41] You: but it doesn't Jamie
[20:41] Jamie Palisades: .. the data that it was Jeska (whatever) who entered in, on 1 Dec 2006.
[20:41] You: it doesn't come with "clear on this if it fits YOUR grid of bannable offenses"
[20:41] You: like "shooting in a no-weapons zone" and not "calling Flipper and asshole"
[20:41] You: see?
[20:41] You: but see that's just what Cocoanut worked to get taken OUT
[20:41] You: and I still don't get WHY
[20:42] You: I think we need to know who banned, and their reason
[20:42] Cocoanut Koala: yes, i didn't win on that
[20:42] You: each entry has to say "banned Dec 1 2006 by Flipper because I was criticized on his blog"
[20:42] Khamon Fate: Did y'all see this? "It's not always clear to us whether a 3-D simulation of a casino is the same thing as a casino, legally speaking, and it's not
clear to the law enforcement authorities we have asked," (Ginsu Linden) Yoon said.
[20:42] Cocoanut Koala: because Travis was adamant that "no definition of griefing can ever be arrived at"
[20:42] You: Cocoa but I still don't think you're getting the issue here
[20:42] Cocoanut Koala: and also, "this isn't about griefers anyway after all"
[20:42] You: you don't want the public to see names
[20:42] You: but if the public can't see names, we can't have the public to pressure them on the idiocy
[20:42] Vitaly Szymborska: but who will have the time to go through the whole list anyway and sort out which ones on the ban list they are going to ban or not?
[20:43] You: Vitaly, that's just it!
[20:43] Cocoanut Koala: i think their irrelevancy will take care of their idiocy
[20:43] You: they grab the list en masse and don't sort
[20:43] Jamie Palisades: from a user point of view, even if I don;t have efficient comparable data on the *offense*, I would still like to know *who* banned X
Person. That way if someone's a profligate over-user of banning, I can discard their data pote
[20:43] You: and that's why I think Ban-LInk to be credible needs to have numeric codes even if they love coding
[20:43] Vitaly Szymborska: so even if they had all that info it would be irrelevant
[20:43] You: a code 04 is a bombing, a code 07 is a caging, etc
[20:43] You: force them to define the offenses
[20:43] Cocoanut Koala: with banlink, jamie, you can know that IF you are a part of banlink
[20:43] You: not "I dont' like his face"
[20:43] You: See, that was the fight over that guy William
[20:43] Cocoanut Koala: which - of course - you CAN'T be, because it is not open to everyone
[20:44] You: anyone can ban william on their land for not liking Wililam's face
[20:44] Cocoanut Koala: you have to be APPROVED
[20:44] Cocoanut Koala: and of a certain SIZE
[20:44] You: but if I am to put William on the whole frigging thing I need a rational reason
[20:44] Cocoanut Koala: finally i got them to say I could go in with others to make up one group
[20:44] Cocoanut Koala: even though we were not a big venue like it was originally for
[20:44] Cocoanut Koala: but then again, it was originally for griefers, too, now it's not
[20:44] Jamie Palisades: so would this be bad, Coco, if it was competely transparent?
[20:45] Cocoanut Koala: No, i wanted first for it to be completely transparent
[20:45] Cocoanut Koala: but all that happened was they got ever secretive
[20:45] Cocoanut Koala: to the point where you could find a person's name (not yourself) but NOTHING else!
[20:45] Jamie Palisades: probably afraid of liability for misbanning
[20:45] Cocoanut Koala: that's when I went for the hide-it-all, its better than this approach
[20:45] Cocoanut Koala: theoretically, it was hidden because griefers would use it for prestige, but that didn't make any SENSE even, cause they still could
[20:46] Cocoanut Koala: now they cant
[20:46] Khamon Fate: Are banning and ban lists going to be all the hot topic for the next few weeks?
[20:46] Jamie Palisades: some of those spam blacklists have had their butts sued off for "false positives"
[20:46] Cocoanut Koala: yes, Wilhelm and I made quite a point of that
[20:46] Cocoanut Koala: they pooh-poohed it
[20:46] Cocoanut Koala: said they could not be sued
[20:46] Cocoanut Koala: but secretly, i think they were worried
[20:46] You: Wilhelm yes, sorry correct that name
[20:46] You: well Jamie, who is to sue? where? this is lawless Second Life
[20:46] Khamon Fate: They're apparently saying that about the FBI investigating the virtual casinos too.
[20:47] Vitaly Szymborska: exactly.. getiing your important business email through servers is a bit different than SL and where you can and cant go
[20:47] Jamie Palisades: Vitaly, all that means is that the stakes usually are lower in SL
[20:48] Cocoanut Koala: I do believe LL is going to have a hard time telling the government, "that's not our concern," ove the things like gambling
[20:48] Cocoanut Koala: "We don't want to be involved" isn't going to be much of an excuse
[20:48] Vitaly Szymborska: I think so too
[20:48] Jamie Palisades: if (let's say) all of a sudden the American Apparel, IBM and BBC sites can;t hold their events because of signficiant defectives in sim access
caused by screwy joint ban lists?
[20:48] Cocoanut Koala: that seems unlikely
[20:48] Jamie Palisades: Bet your *own* butt that *something* will happen. That's the first lesson I learned as a lawyer. It's the money.
[20:49] Vitaly Szymborska: ok.. the ban lists put in place by SL or a 3rd party? SL we're talking about right?
[20:49] Vitaly Szymborska: SL putting in ban lists doesnt make sense to me in the first place.. its like almost an oxymoron
[20:49] Khamon Fate: Are you implying that Second Life is all about money rather than supporting the commuuuuunity of residents?
[20:49] Jamie Palisades: both are possible :) if SL does a crappy job, others might supply their own, better moderated DBs
[20:49] Jamie Palisades: nyuck, nyuck Khamon
[20:50] Cocoanut Koala: i think it means they will put in TOOLS that allow US to create gigantic ban lists and share them automatically with each other
[20:50] You: narf narf
[20:50] You: yes
[20:50] You: that's what it means
[20:50] Cocoanut Koala: see , the way Banlink works, is all the people allowed in it
[20:50] Khamon Fate: How does one interpret Philip's boistrous speech and immediate exit from the VW conference?
[20:50] Cocoanut Koala: have this machine they put on their lands
[20:50] You: and recourse means...asking Jeska
[20:50] Cocoanut Koala: automatically updating the whole thing.
[20:50] Cocoanut Koala: Well, that looks "shiny" (i.e., code-y) to the lindens, therefore, they figure it must be good
[20:50] You: he doesn't want to sell advertising space inside SL? he already has more companies buying islands than he knows what to do with
[20:50] You: so it's up to THEM to get advertising business, not him
[20:50] You: so he went to the Clintons' thing because he wants political power, not advertising dollars.
[20:50] You: did I answer your question?
[20:50] Vitaly Szymborska: they gve this place where anyone over 18 presumably with a computer can come and interact for free even and then say because
someone said you did something they didnt like you cant go to certain places
[20:51] Khamon Fate: That really bothers me because now everybody understands he's just playing with his toy and not at all concerned about the wora'uld
[20:51] Jamie Palisades: don't be too impressed. Lots of Swedish college students I know could hack up the "machine". The interesting bit ...
[20:51] Jamie Palisades: ... is all about who owns and managed and uses the lists, and how accurate they are
[20:51] Cocoanut Koala: i certainly understand that Khamon
[20:51] Cocoanut Koala: also, he's out burnishing his "visionary" image
[20:51] Khamon Fate: That used to be my private little knowledge ha ha
[20:51] Cocoanut Koala: he no longer even sees us
[20:52] Khamon Fate: I got way burned on the old forums for saying such things
[20:52] Cocoanut Koala: i got incinerated!
[20:52] Cocoanut Koala: haha
[20:52] Khamon Fate: Yes thank you Prok you answered my question
[20:52] You: I like the slogan on Jamie's avatar: You shall never bother others / you shall be both fair and kind / and whatever else you do / I shall not mind
[20:52] Khamon Fate: Cocoanut Powder
[20:52] Jamie Palisades: *sigh* startup companies at this stage are TYPICALLY a bit psycho and erratic
[20:52] You: well Jamie this is like year 7
[20:53] Cocoanut Koala: well i don't buy that excuse
[20:53] You: how long do you get to plead "start-up"?
[20:53] Vitaly Szymborska: lol
[20:53] Cocoanut Koala: anything in business this long ought to be able to
[20:53] Khamon Fate: ...earn money?
[20:53] Khamon Fate: ha ha ha
[20:53] Jamie Palisades: Oh, thanks Prok, I ripped it off with permission from a Norwegian CSci Student
[20:53] Cocoanut Koala: ought to know what they are doing by now
[20:54] Jamie Palisades: From the "huge money raining down from the sky, everybody hoping for the IPR to get rich" point of view?
[20:54] Jamie Palisades: It's now
[20:54] Khamon Fate: I told a new girl today that it took two years to build a successful, profitable business in SL
[20:54] You: Khamon, his toy can't be as fun if he can't get people to believe that it's real tho
[20:54] Jamie Palisades: Tragically, few people remain stable under torrents of tantalizing stock option profits
[20:54] You: he's like Papa Karla
[20:54] Jamie Palisades: Bummer Khamon
[20:54] Khamon Fate: She informed me that she didn't have two years. Her rent is due next week.
[20:55] You: or whatever his name is, you know, the Pinnochio guy
[20:55] Jamie Palisades: That's got to be discouraging to the average newcomer
[20:55] Cocoanut Koala: when I came into SL, it was about us
[20:55] You: that is so over with no Coco
[20:55] Cocoanut Koala: now we are just an impediment
[20:55] You: *now
[20:55] You: so the question is whether big corporations will take care of us
[20:55] You: IF we need taking care of
[20:55] Cocoanut Koala: i refuse
[20:55] You: let's make a field trip to Sears!
[20:55] You: anybody?
[20:55] Cocoanut Koala: to be taken care of by them
[20:55] Jamie Palisades: hmmmm
[20:55] You: let's go surprise Sears
[20:55] You: see if they're home
[20:55] Cocoanut Koala: sears is here?
[20:56] You: I need a vacuum cleaner
[20:56] You: yes yes
[20:56] You: they're here
[20:56] Della Street: i need a bush whacker
[20:56] Cocoanut Koala: what the heck IS all this starry eyed-ness about the corporations, anyhow
[20:56] Khamon Fate: Are you kidding? People in a corporate sim? They've probably hired BigJohn to man it for them.
[20:56] Cocoanut Koala: you'd think they were famous celebs or something
[20:56] You: well I never knew
[20:56] You: but IBM is related to Sears
[20:56] Khamon Fate: The Donald Trump sim ha ha
[20:56] You: somehow
[20:56] Cocoanut Koala: and to THINK I MISSSED Dean Koontz!
[20:56] You: not sure how
[20:56] Vitaly Szymborska: it just valodates that the RL sees SL thats all I think
[20:56] You: so they have the sim with Sears
[20:56] Cocoanut Koala: if i had read my email i would not have, i'm on his email list
[20:56] You: and it's sorta, you know, blue and white looking like IBM is
[20:57] You: not like my Sears
[20:57] You: traffic: 417
[20:57] You: but hey
[20:57] Khamon Fate: You're on Donald Trumps email?
[20:57] Cocoanut Koala: to hell with sears
[20:57] Cocoanut Koala: sears works for ME
[20:57] You: Prok's Seafood is only 80
[20:57] You: you have to work at traffic
[20:57] Khamon Fate: Zha (IBM) participates in the community. She comes to office hours.
[20:57] Vitaly Szymborska: no matter the traffic the pay their money and bring the name to SL lol
[20:57] You: search the word "news"
[20:58] You: Reuters: 892, Pharos Lighthouse, home of Prokofy's InfoNut: 748
[20:58] You: I'm creeping up on Reuters
[20:58] Cocoanut Koala: i dont know how any real-world company has any place whatsoever in a community of residents
[20:58] You: Adam, be very afraid
[20:58] Khamon Fate: When are we gonna have Mainlander meetings and talk about Mainlander stuff like being able to see top colliders?
[20:58] Cocoanut Koala: they are advertisers, we are their eyeballs
[20:58] You: Nous, ce'st Bayrou is the top news thing these days in French, it's great
[20:58] Cocoanut Koala: what is that place?
[20:58] You: it's Sarkozy's campaign or something
[20:59] You: or like a French WA or both lol
[20:59] Cocoanut Koala: politics?
[20:59] You: yes but also SL stuff
[20:59] You: I have to get back to work
[20:59] Khamon Fate: I have to sleep.
[20:59] You: but thanks for all coming and being stimulating and cool and jaded intellectuals
[20:59] Khamon Fate: Nice seeing you all.
[20:59] You: next time I will have absinthe I promise
[20:59] Khamon Fate: Stalk you later
[20:59] Jamie Palisades: Nice to chat. Thanks for the call. Ta all.
[20:59] Cocoanut Koala: lol
[20:59] You: c u
[20:59] Vitaly Szymborska: take care all
[20:59] Cocoanut Koala: bye everybody!
[20:59] Della Street: i need too sleep too
So when the banlink thing is used by bottom-feeding camping sex casinos they'll be able to give the residents in the sims they're crippling the shaft as well as the finger. Because it's those kinds of people who are going to pally up with the ban link types, putting themselves across as very serious and businessy with "security concerns".
My actual, real problem is more to do with the mechanics of SL:
If you go to the find person thing (to add people to groups, or to add them to parcel bans) and you mistype or don't click the name, and choose "select" without stopping to check, instead of the name you chose going on the list/being invited to group, it picks the top card in your calling cards folder. Guess who gets five group invites a week and has been accidentally banned from one friend's land already (that I know of) due to this.
Now I wonder what happens when someone who has my card gets careless that way, and then one of their 100L$/hour minions is doing the scoop on the ban list to upload to ban link or wherever and I end up on the list. All because of a click error.
I already think the system is horrific on idealogical grounds, but those two things are the main *practical* problems of it for someone like me (who doesn't grief anyone, but gets grief or has careless friends and a name beginning with A).
Posted by: Ace Albion | April 04, 2007 at 04:35 AM
Second Life is entering a 'warring states' period. Prepare to fortify your private islands. Here come the 'ban wars.'
Posted by: Mikyo | April 04, 2007 at 09:03 AM
It's a losing battle Ace. A banlink tool is going to be incorporated into the codebase.
There's not much war to it Mikyo. Most of the encounters I've witnessed or been told about go something like
hi what U do here?
PUT THAT GUN AWAY!
it's pretty cool, fires real bullets bam bam
YOU HORRIBLE GRIEFER LOWLIFE!
BAN MUTE
later that day...
hi i'm new why am i banned here?
you must be a griefer
i was banned from a place today for firing my gun
see, your a griefer and nobody wants you around
but i was just showing how it worked
MUTE
The earlier story tracks back to 2004 and I've heard gosh must be thousands of iterations from both sides. My considered opinion is that most of the people doing the banning are no more mature, socially adept, or community oriented than hard core griefers.
The later version I've only been hearing since people started sharing ban lists so there are many fewer of those so far. It may not become a common scenario; but I expect it will.
Banning has fragmented the population into tiny, secluded communities of "trusted" friends. This feature is going to further that effort to the extent that we'll all be happy to embrace open sourced servers to build our own grids to accomodate ourselves and our close, trusted friends.
So ends the wora'uld. But frankly, the only people who'll suffer are the ones depending on a steady stream of strangers flying through the grid to buy their stuff, land included.
Posted by: Khamon | April 04, 2007 at 09:46 AM
mature, socially adept, or community oriented
REAL GRIEFERS, NOT THE EPITHET THAT GETS THROWN AROUND BY 12 YEAR OLDS, ARE ORGANIZED, INTELLIGENT, AND OVERLY SOCIALLY SKILLED.
Posted by: UNCLE JIM BOB | April 04, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Just wonderful. I've always opposed shared ban lists (back in the ancient times of text-based mucks, I was a wiz on one of the only mucks of its theme that DIDN'T share bans between themselves) because you never know how deserved the ban is unless you are the one doing the banning.
The idea of bad bans occuring is ESPECIALLY prevalent in tightly knit subgroups who tend to punish outsiders for even the most minor transgression....imagine this scenarios
1) On your own land, you ask a couple goreans to can the 'master/girl' talk and kneeling bit because it bothers you. Being hyper-self-important about their rights to play anywhere (as seen in old forum posts), they complain to other goreans how you're 'against their lifestyle'. Some gor sim admin ban-links....you're SOL...no appeal.
2) You had better avoid the furry sims like the plague! Many furs actively dislike human AV's. Pop into the wrong sim in the wrong AV, some mental defective that thinks they are actually a wolf trapped in human form (theirians, I believe they call themselves) ban-links. Again, no appeal.
I can see clubs and businesses others being circumspect about ban-linking...they have a reputation to maintain and bad bans could hurt their cash flow...but some of the fringe elements of the SL population, the ones that feel under seige (Gor) or have elements that dislike outsiders (furs) are gonna go nuts with this in a vendetta-like manner...they have NOTHING to lose, no rep to protect.
Ban-link is the beginning of code-enforced balkanization of SL.
Posted by: Maklin Deckard | April 04, 2007 at 10:45 AM
I would be interested to see a bit more detail of Robin's mention of banlink. I presume this was during this "office hours" governance meeting and thus would have been in chat - I would be grateful to Khamon if a transcript of the section could be made available.
As for BanLink I've made my position fairly clear on it in the past; it's fine and indeed probably very useful when used between a small number of similar groups who have similar problems and know each other i.e. when trust is meaningful, but once expanding beyond a certain point the model can easily result in the worst sort of large-scale automatic cascade banning situations, if the right trusted lists are involved. At least at the moment if people want to irrationally ban individuals based on rumour they have to take the time to look up their names and add them. But that point has been made before.
I didn't realise that there were meetings on specific topics during these office hours periods actually, I thought they were just, well, times when one could go and bother Lindens about things and they wouldn't mind too much.
Posted by: Ordinal Malaprop | April 04, 2007 at 11:57 AM
Sorry I don't have a transcript Ordinal; but Robin deferred details to Daniel as he's heading the team that's designing the banlink implementation.
Office hours are sometimes just what y'all wanna talk about chat but are also opportunities for Lindens to open a topic for input. They're good "meetings" to attend if you can be inworld when they occur.
I wasn't kidding in the above transcript though when noting that the Lindens can't feed us information or gather global population feedback any more easily than we can. It's a glaring feature oversight that's been apparent, and unaddressed, for the duration of the project.
Balkanization, yes I like that word. It lends an aire of importance and understanding to one's discourse. And yes it will, totally, push us even more in the direction of setting up environments for us and ours and noone else. Sure we say we don't mind people wandering through and attempting to collaborate; my goodness aren't we socially enlightened. But that's not what I've observed happening over the past few years in Second Life.
Posted by: Khamon | April 04, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Daniel is heading a team that is designing a banlink implementation and WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT IT.
This is why to play SL means to get gob-smacked nearly every week by some hideous new development.
It generally turns out that someone with a pet project or peeve gets cozy with a Linden friend or two and before you know it, we're all stuck with something awful.
That methodology sucks.
coco
Posted by: Cocoanut Koala | April 04, 2007 at 01:55 PM
Cocoanut Linden Lab and the Second Life project have always worked that way. It's unfair to suddenly jump out of the water and cry shark when you've been willingly paying the fee and to swim alongside it all this time.
And the methodology doesn't suck, all politics and businesses operate this way. Granted the pipedream of a "better world" has been touted by our CEO; but no democratic utopian wora'uld could grow out of this palace courtyard garden.
Posted by: Khamon | April 04, 2007 at 02:20 PM
"Many won't howl. They'll be glad to have anything that "deals with griefers"."
Well you're right about that. I'll be a land owner someday and I'll be clueless about how to deal with the issue.
Why don't we try something new here.
Instead of yelling at LL, who won't back down because they could care less what we say about new features, why don't we equip people with easy-to-understand tools to "deal with griefers".
So here I am - a clueless, low attention-spanned land owner, what are you going to do RIGHT NOW to make sure that tomorrow I don't see Ban-Link and say "well it's the only thing out there!"
For example: why don't you write an article for the Herald entitled "How to deal with griefers". Make it SHORT, and a basic 1-2-3 step-by-step on handling these situations.
I'd read it. And when they develop this weird "bantrust" tool in the client, I'll ignore it in favor of what I *already know how to do*. If the article has basic, practical and SIMPLE alternatives, I'll ignore this new stuff.
Of course, if there are no other tools, I'm a pretty lazy guy and won't really be interested in what the whiners have to say about how awful this tool is... quickest, easiest solution here I come!
(I'm speaking metaphorically and would never use something so idiotic as Ban-Link, just using myself as an example.)
Onder
Posted by: Onder Skall | April 04, 2007 at 02:22 PM
Khamon: the client now logs all chat on one's own machine, so you should be able to find a transcript in the location indicated when you go to the "Communication" tab of your Preferences window, in a file called chat.txt (unless you have turned that off, clearly).
Posted by: Ordinal Malaprop | April 04, 2007 at 03:07 PM
I'll hadn't looked for that Ordinal having thought that the client only logged when I initiated a capture.
Onder I do hope that LL have enough collective sense to pair the banlink project with an orientation feature that will help to educate newcomers that it exists while explaining to them that this environment is not the standard shoot-em-up MMORPG type game they're used to playing?
I can tell you simply how to deal with griefers, the same way you deal with eight-year-olds. If you need practice, babysit the neighbor's kid over the weekend. They'll grief the hell out of your house and schedule if you let them. The difference is, you see them as a little human that has to be treated with some degree of dignity and respect. Avatars, on the other hand, especially newly born ones, are apparently just so much cardboard and who cares how they feel when they interrupt our immersion?
Hell I've been banned and muted for walking in on a sexual encounter while exploring a castle build in a sim without my minimap on. That wasn't the first time, or last, that I've been pettily kicked off a sim. Now, I'll find myself unable to access half the grid for committing such a minor faux pas. I finally understand that most people don't really come here to share and collaborate in a compellingly continguous world. No more exploration for this sprite.
The good news is that the masses are getting what they want, the ability to create small worlds and lock out everyone that falls short of their mold. LL have listened and responded to the majority and the whole debacle just may prompt faster development of standalone VW products. So I really shouldn't complain eh.
Posted by: Khamon | April 04, 2007 at 04:11 PM
Ordinal,
When I wrote Robin and another couple Lindens lately about the governance issues, asking them WHAT the content of them is and WHAT their plans are, they referred me to the office hours. I couldn't come. So I asked them to articulate what they are doing. They haven't done so. Haven't you noticed that there hasn't been a single think piece from the Lindens in ages and ages, it's all fix-it stuff? That's scary. Here Robin is even given a promotion, and there's no announcement of it? Not even with Blue Linden pinch-hitting? They just don't care. They love Ban-Link. That I've established indirectly. Philip was the first to propose it in fact. He said the community would be doing this, and the Lindens wouldn't be able to stop them, and well, it's their land, they can do what they want. Ban-Link is DEFINITELY something they love. They love it already by default, by tacitly endorsing it; they need to do SOMETHING in the way of "tools" (which is the only way they understand governance -- yes/no switches) and they LOVE to talk about how "we are making the tools to empower residences to control their experience" blah blah -- and this is a natural for them. You already can ban the hell out of people -- why not be social and have social media and ban the hell out of people *together with others* in a social, crowd-wisdom sort of way?!
Go back to the second SL Views, during the SLCC II in August 2006, when Khamon was present. Travis unveiled Ban-Link then, and it was pre-cooked, Robin presided over it an approved by default by not questioning it, and of course choreographing it to appear in the first place.
And nobody is complaining, really. That is, a few people have taken on Travis on Sluniverse.com, but he's very defensive and very aggressive about it. I've had many inworld encounters with him, sending him my concerns, and he's deflected them. I've had to go and fight each individual ban battle on my own, struggling to convince strangers who have banned me that they need to unban me -- on principle, to try to stem the tide of what you have aptly called "a cascade of bans".
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | April 04, 2007 at 06:51 PM
>I didn't realise that there were meetings on specific topics during these office hours periods actually, I thought they were just, well, times when one could go and bother Lindens about things and they wouldn't mind too much.
They turn into meetings on specific topics where information is given out by default, whoever shows up.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | April 04, 2007 at 06:58 PM
I've always said it was Balkanization. Communist Tito with his political prisoners on Goli Otok will suddenly look good, trust me, when a Serb tells you he will gouge out a Croats eye with a rusty spoon - and you stand on the cusp of the mass murder of thousands.
Virtual worlds aren't anything like the horror of RL, but since Second Life is merely a prototype or rehearsal for the virtualization of real life in the future where we all will life and already spend a lot of our time, *it's worth bothering with*.
I've always called the private island/ban thing "the archipelago of egos". Such egotistically run Little-Prince-type planets could be enlightened and benign, but they are more likely to be weak and subject to memes organized by just a few malevolent tyrants.
Onder, I realize it's fun for you to be a contrarian, but please, spare me.
I have massive amounts of experience dealing with griefers and massive amounts of cards that I write and rewrite and rewrite again.
I have a "How to Deal With Griefers" card in short generic form and long form for specific Ravenglass features. I'll be happy to publish it here.
I have a card "Privacy and Security in Ravenglass" which I had to everyone and just plain "Privacy and Security" for the infohubs.
I have developed my own solution, which is the police blotter. It achieves a lot of things. It helps people feel their complaints go somewhere, first of all, as the Lindens do nothing and have all but ceased processing abuse reports.
It helps people realize that in fact there aren't that many griefing incidents and if you look at my number of square meters and number of customers, the griefing isn't that great. Sure, some asshole may seize on that as a franchising opportunity but people are becoming more and more aware of how to deal more effectively with griefing -- job one is to break the attention cycle so logging off or flying away and not engaging is the first form of defense.
Most people are bothered not by griefers, but by poor trespassers who don't have the money for houses and sex balls and therefore go and squat on other people's. This angers people no end. By publicizing the names of people who do that, howeve, you help drive them away and you empower people to individually ban them. It's a far from perfect system, but naming and shaming in a community where you can gather information effectively based on verifiable attacks, it works.
I don't claim that it works like a nuclear weapon or yes/no switch, which is what the Lindens and tekkies want it to do, but it works well enough.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | April 04, 2007 at 07:07 PM
Khamon,
I realize you're cynical by now, more cynical than us, but Cocoanut is right. The Lindens have never put over something this big, with such little consultation. They have had 0 consultation with the greater public, and only sat with 8 people in a glorified focus group, one of whom was the scripter of Ban-Link. So that majorly sucks.
The covenants groups of more than a year ago had a few sessions, Daniel said he was going to lean toward having everybody handle their own abuse reports, some of us complained this was awful and would leave many with no recourse, and that was all we heard.
The Lindens tend to not talk about anything they think will cause friction or resistance nowadays, they don't want to deal with it. They don't care. CNET and IBM and such want to make sure they don't have flying penises. They don't want to bother to do simple stuff like turn on autoreturn, or make groups for events, they don't want to staff and manage sims. They want simple, easy, buttons to push.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | April 04, 2007 at 07:11 PM
Yeah estate owners are gonna start handling their own abuse reports. The liasons and live helpers will be instructed to refer those complaints to the estate owner.
I *am* more jaded than teal, can't argue that point. But a statement of sudden surprise that LL are just doing whatever they want, whenever they want, however they want is at least two years overdue, even for you and Coco. Y'all didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday and you've both been quite observant and vocal during your tenure. So spare me the shocked indignation; it wears like a drama crown.
Oh and if you'll permit me a moment of honest, up front clarification, Robin didn't engineer Travis' announcement at SLCC. One of the panel dropped out just before lunch and Robin asked the rest of us if we knew someone who might fill the seat. Travis was at the con, and an obvious Mainland supporter so a couple of us chimed his name right away. It was wholly impromptu and just happened to grant him a few minutes on the platform. Who knew he was going to revolutionize the wora'uld?
Posted by: Khamon | April 04, 2007 at 10:47 PM
I completely don't buy any of that Khamon. They knew perfectly well what Ban-Link was before that meeting. Travis wasn't born yesterday, and they weren't either. They were happy to give him the airtime. They invited him precisely because of his work on Ban-Link and running the Shelter. Please, I can't buy that this was so fortuitous as you say.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | April 04, 2007 at 11:07 PM
You don't believe me. You're calling me a liar. Wait, I'll look surprised.
Posted by: Khamon | April 05, 2007 at 12:11 AM
I take that back. You can't believe me. You have to call me a liar because the plain truth contradicts your preconceived notions which trump the experience of an actual participant.
At least you're kind enough to insult me in that sophisticated roundabout forum griefing style that you do so well. Actually, Cristiano does it better; but you're style isn't half bad.
Posted by: Khamon | April 05, 2007 at 12:20 AM
No, it's not *about* you, Khamon, please.
It's not that YOU are at issue and it's not that I don't believe what you are saying. That's not what it's about. I can't believe *the Lindens* didn't set this up. That is, they invited Travis precisely to talk about it. That they knew about it long before.
My point is that I don't believe they suddenly learned about this on the spot, fortuitously, just because Travis piped up and became a presenter.
Don't always assume the worst about your fellow Second Life residents, Khamon.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | April 05, 2007 at 12:48 AM
Hi Prok,
Yes, I agree, I love being contrarian, but as you well know, it's a very useful perspective. :)
What you wrote above was EXACTLY the kind of thing that needs wider publication. Sure, it all seems "obvious" and "out in the open" to you, but for the average joe it's a completely hidden perspective.
I'm going to copy/paste what you wrote, because it contrasts so well the kinds of things that get written about this stuff that aren't nearly as useful. When the new tool comes out, copy/paste the following into the Herald... it will make all the difference:
"I have massive amounts of experience dealing with griefers and massive amounts of cards that I write and rewrite and rewrite again.
I have a "How to Deal With Griefers" card in short generic form and long form for specific Ravenglass features. I'll be happy to publish it here.
I have a card "Privacy and Security in Ravenglass" which I had to everyone and just plain "Privacy and Security" for the infohubs.
I have developed my own solution, which is the police blotter. It achieves a lot of things. It helps people feel their complaints go somewhere, first of all, as the Lindens do nothing and have all but ceased processing abuse reports.
It helps people realize that in fact there aren't that many griefing incidents and if you look at my number of square meters and number of customers, the griefing isn't that great. Sure, some asshole may seize on that as a franchising opportunity but people are becoming more and more aware of how to deal more effectively with griefing -- job one is to break the attention cycle so logging off or flying away and not engaging is the first form of defense.
Most people are bothered not by griefers, but by poor trespassers who don't have the money for houses and sex balls and therefore go and squat on other people's. This angers people no end. By publicizing the names of people who do that, howeve, you help drive them away and you empower people to individually ban them. It's a far from perfect system, but naming and shaming in a community where you can gather information effectively based on verifiable attacks, it works.
I don't claim that it works like a nuclear weapon or yes/no switch, which is what the Lindens and tekkies want it to do, but it works well enough.
Posted by: Onder Skall | April 05, 2007 at 01:39 PM
It would seem at first blush that the Lindens would rapidly discover the form of governance which holds sway over them...the depopulation of SL and the translation of $L to dollars with which people will join services which cater less to the lowest common denominator of Social Maintenance. Once a sufficient number of newbies throw their hands into the air and split, and enough seasoned members get tired of trying to get removed from universal ban lists, the lack of participation and inversion in the population growth will cause some re-consideration on the part of those making these decisions...
Posted by: Edward Anderson | April 05, 2007 at 01:51 PM
Yeah Edward that's was said about the (re)introduction of p2p teleportation as well.
Posted by: Khamon | April 05, 2007 at 02:12 PM
Why can't we edit these posts? Feel free to grammar my correction.
Posted by: Khamon | April 05, 2007 at 02:13 PM