Mixing RL and SL Politics

There was great controversy over whether or not we should mix RL and SL politics in the Neualtenburg Projekt. This controversy arose when an antiwar and anti-Bush rally was planned in the city to mark the one-week anniversary of the U.S. presidential elections.

There were concerns that mixing RL and SL politics could interfere with attempts to create a legitimate SL government. Conversely, there were arguments that the city should be a politics-friendly, free-speech zone for both RL and SL meetings. I feel both viewpoints have merit.

Please cast one or more votes and then discuss your submission. I feel confident that we can come to a compromise and create a policy for future events.

~Ulrika~

No surprise here. I believe political rallys OF ANY STRIPE can and must be held in Neualtenburg. I subscribe to the belief that RL influences SL whether we like it or not.

With a United States administration currently in place that appears likely to impede freedom of thought on the internet how can we not?

Much grief was given that our first political rally was of a leftist stripe, I'd encourage alternate viewpoints to also hold a rally, or meeting or whatever form of event they would like. Hell hold a no RW politics rally --to claim the left leaning faction is attempting a coup of the project is meaningless if we are the only voice raised.

I make no excuses for the direction that I would like to take Neualtenburg --and come elections in January all Neualtenburg citizens will be able to vote on the direction we take. If I were attempting a coup I certainly wouldn't be putting THAT up for a vote.

Thankyou,

Kendra

Hey could you guys share with us how you make a poll? iv been trying forever!

Again you miss the big picture. The grief as you so put it wasn't over the event having a leftist stripe. The reason for the arguement is because you took it upon yourself to do this without letting anyone in the group know until the last minute. Real life makes it way into SL in many ways and it would be irresponsible of me to say that real life politics wouldn't flavor any of our opinions. Likewise I think its irresposible to show any one view over another. If we had set up a constitution and agreed to how things would run beforehand as should have been done then this wouldn't be an issue. I've said in the past I think both real life American political parties are asshats but within them both are good ideas that have gone astray.



Leftist again was never the point ...and voices were raised or did you miss my posts?

which also brings to bear if yours is the only voice that has say then why bother raising my voice. I know this project had an agenda friom the start I read it and understood it...but when you claim to want a government and not have the voices speak then you want something other than what was stated. A foundation is a great thing to have but if it can't be abridged then the house will never grow.

As for elections in January I already know the outcome. You and Ulrika will be elected to the highest posts and the parliment or body of other elected officials will nod their heads a lot.

I also want to make sure anynone watching knows that this has nothing to do with the land tier I have allotted to the group. I do think though that citizens should be required to have aproval of the group and or political body before they hold any events.

Considering we only thought to have the event at the last minute, I guess that would be understandable. Despite your opinion -- we didn't have a long awaited agenda to do this.





Then I say again --SHOW your's. To say I can't voice my opinions simply because you haven't makes zero sense to me.



So where has your input been? The threads for the constitution have been open for some time. The ability to stage an event has been there for some time. Frankly, I'm not going to sit still just waiting for you to contribute before I'm allowed to do so. If you're serious get the other members together and vote for my censure. There's an action you could take. You do nothing but complain that I am doing something.





To paraphrase you --You know damn well I meant IN THE CITY.



strawman arguement --I have said quite the opposite. EVERY CITIZEN has the right (and DUTY) to be heard.




When did I say I wan't no other voices heard. Again strawman --I have said exactly the opposite --I want ALL voices heard --including my own.




You're assuming that I even want a position in the Government of Neualtenburg. I'm way to busy setting up an Artist's Guild to be involved in administrative duties. My interests are in the beautification of the city, and the creation of native Neualtenburg artforms.

.

I never was of the opinion that there was a long awaited agenda to do this...Last minute or pre planned don't you think it would have been better to get the feel of the community before going ahead and posting this event. Unlike oktoberfest this event was one that could have and might have directly effected the city and its citizens in a negative way. Again this isn't about leftist or right wing ideologies...its about common courtesy and respect for the others point of view.





Again I never said you can't voice your opinions but when you do so within the city your opinions can easily be construed as that of the populaces opinions...not just your own.



I haven't been as involved as I would like to and there is no excuse for that. I never asked you to sit still and wait for me to contribute..nor would I. Although my contributions to the project thuus far have been small and only in the name of tier I believe that is not thepoint. I don't seek to censure you and thats not an action I would want to take on any terms for any person. My complaint wasn't that you are doing something...my complaint is that you are doing something with complete disregard of the other members. If I were have listed an event praising Bush last week just after the election I don't think you would have let it slide and I bet some of the same arguements would have come about.







yes the right to be heard but not counted...as noted by the event taking place despite group members voicing their concerns.




You didn't say it...your actions did.





You're are correct did make an assumption and I apologise.

I would have organized an IW protest of your event. That's a very different action then the one you took.

I find it ironic that your one post in the Constitution thread speaks about not having too much Government too fast --and yet you advocate Government intervention in civil matters.

no, I advocate respect for other members of the community. By taking it upon yourself to do as you wish isn't Social Democracy ...its Anarchy.

Then I should have to check with each and every member if I would like to hold an event?

yall all just want to fight, could you please take a second and HELP me make a poll?

That would be something for the elected officials and constitution to decide.

All in all I would say no, you don't have to ask permission of every citizen or at all.....but...an event that could cause unpopular backlash to the city and its cicitzens or inflame people to the point that they see it as the views of the city and not of the event holder then yes some structure has to be in place to protect the city's interests.

Suppose a member decides to have a man boy love association event in the city....should he be able to just post it and have it or would you expect some discourse on the matter before this event was held?

Kind of subjective dontcha think? Pre-emptive self-censorship?
You want a constitution? Help write one! It's obvious you have ideas as to what might make a successful Government. (No --that's not a slam --I mean it seriously)



Considering an Anti-War, Anti-Bush rally is both legal (so far) and not against TOS, even in a PG Sim I'd say it's a moot point. As far as I'm aware child pornography would be illegal in even the most mature sim imaginable.

By your own statements in the other thread any memeber should be allowed to have any event .

Whereas I chose a highly controversial event to make my point I can fill in that blank with many other legal events that would cause a stir. Thats the point where is the line drawn? If as you say we can hold events when we want and about anything how about I have a nightly event about satanism? We do hvae a unitarian church after all. Do we really want to let it be a free for all and hope that people still take the project seriously?

Yes, Kendra you should. If you wish to build a cooperative environment where we will all pull together then every event must be a group sponsored event. There need to be rules that members of the City adhere to on all matters, especially those involving how we as a City relate to the outside world. While I applaud your spunk and energy, I deplore your use of Neualtenburg to mock our President. I call for no more events unless they are voted on by the group. The Oktoberfest was fun but even that should have been agreed upon and planned out more thoroughly.

... IF they are rallies for SL political movements and not RL ones.

Ok. I posted in the other thread. I missed the jump over here. Here's my posting from there:

----------

Look. I have no interest in building a Bavarian village for the purposes of fighting RL political battles. There are plenty of SL political battles on the horizon, and I have many other places to fight my RL battles. So, don’t worry about me making some sort of tie between the constitution and the outside world.

HOWEVER, and this was at the root of my arguments about the public war memorial, I will NOT be part of any enterprise that tells me that I’m not allowed to speak my mind.

That’s all. My needs are simple.

I would object to any outside political organization claiming control of Neualtenburg. I think it needs to make its very own priorities and principles. I could even support a restriction on large assemblies – whether or not for political reasons.

But, I cannot be part of a society that simply prohibits me from expressing any opinion on selected subjects.

I would like to have some sort of meeting or discussion focused ONLY on this point. It’s that decisive for me. But I don’t know yet how the constitution is going to stand on this. We haven’t got a constitution yet.

I feel more and more strongly that we were naive to form a group and begin work while putting the constitution off for later. They are correct: we came to this project with widely different suppositions and expectations. There is no reasonability in assuming we’d all “get along” without some shared visions. We need to get to the creation of the community as soon as possible.

Because, in partial answer to something said recently in this discussion, we DO need a constitution. Not as a bunch of extra rules, but as a statement of who the “People” are, and what expectations they share.

Without that step, you are only seeing the beginnings of the end. This is exactly the stuff that fuels the doomsayers’ claim that there can never be an online government.

We don’t need to prove them right by doing a sloppy, half-assed job.

Ya know what --fine.

Tomorrow's Martinsfest is cancelled.

I'll stop work on toys for the Christmas Marktplatz as well since there is no mechanism for agreement on what we can sell or can't sell -- When you guys can assemble and tell me what you've decided is okay for me to work on, I'll get started again.
Heaven forbid Neualtenburg become a city where initiative is rewarded.

I proposed a meeting for this evening in another thread here on our group forum. I believe that this exact topic is going to be the heart of the meeting. Other things can be discussed afterwards, but I really think this one issue and how it is handled is going to be the deciding factor for many people on whether they remain with the group or not.

Here is a link to the thread where I proposed a meeting:
/103/47/27006/1.html

If others can make it, please say so in that thread. I'll go ahead and list a tentative time as well as this *main* agenda item. If enough people respond and say they can make the meeting, I will be happy to get in world and IM a notice to all members so that we can hopefully catch those who are not in the forums regularly.

Ok. Now let me explain my votes.

Yes I believe that RL politics will play *some* part in the formation of Neualtenburg. The main reason being that each person is going to bring to the table their own political beliefs. It is at this table that I think we want to find compromise and form our own political agenda for the project.

Personally I feel like there are enough political agendas to focus on in the SL community, and that we will find ourselves so busy with those that we will have little time to focus on RL politics anyway. I do not feel this will be "role-playing" either. I think our experiment stands a chance of bringing something real and solid to SL and possibly influencing the creation of other governments or expansion of our own. I deal daily with issues in SL that I would like to protest against or rally for. So to me focusing strictly on SL community issues is perfectly fine.

That said, it is obvious that some in the group want to be able to host RL political events in our group city. Yes it can bring notice to the city, and that can be a good thing. It could also potentially be a bad thing as well. And certainly if we are all just standing around building and some start talking RL politics among themselves, I'm not going to object to that. I don't object to it in the rest of SL when I have friends that just break into political discussions. To me that is really not the thought here anyway.

Based on all of this above, here is my compromise thought that I would like to see discussed:

*** Would members of the group be open to a section of the city being labeled something like "anything goes" politics wise. In that section of the city, it would be known that RL political events could be held (among other events)? Designating (with signs maybe?) any event that happens within that event area would automatically be known that it does not necessarily hold the same ideas of all members of the Neualtenburg group. This would be an unrestricted area where events could be held at any time without the need of group approval. The Neualtenburg group tag would not be worn by the hosts of this event (visitors or non-host group members could wear them if they wished).

Neualtenburg group political events outside this area would need group approval first. Non-political events outside this area would not need group approval.***


Would others be comfortable with a compromise like this?

Obviously this can be discussed at the meeting, but I would be strongly opposed to a "free-speech" zone. To my mind Neualtenburg is a City. I honestly don't get this thinking based on "event=citywide opinion".

Perhaps we can designate areas of the City to be Public Areas. Like Town Square for example.

We should designate City owned areas... Like the Cathedral, or the Rathaus where activities need City approval. To my mind the key is what areas of the City are NOT allowed free expression. Free expression should be assumed all other places.

I do understand what you are saying Kendra. And yes, we can discuss this at the meeting. I was throwing out one extream as food for thought. My own brain is trying to wrap around various ideas so that I am better equipped for the meeting tonight. My gut tells me that there just *has* to be a compromise we can come to. Anyway yes, I look forward to discussing more at the meeting tonight.

Before we all meet tonight, I want to clarify a few things in regards to the ideology of this city. All of this can be found in the documentation here but I'd like to call out a few important points.

1. The main goal of this project is to meet Haney's requirement of creating a compelling destination for members of SL which beautifies and preserves the snow sims. All other goals are secondary.
   
2. In the FAQ it is stated that we will create a compelling destination through experimental architecture, culture, and politics.
   
3. The city was designed from it's inception to be a collection of competing groups operating within a framework of social democracy. Thus by design the group should not be cohesive or in agreement. All behavior is limited ultimately by the constitution (and PG ToS of course) which embodies the principles of a social democracy. Those principles support:
   1. Private enterprise, but regulated to protect the interests of workers, consumers, and small enterprise.
      
   2. Environmental protection. The city will protect the beauty of the sims, maintain open space, and enhance the quality of builds in Second Life through the use of covenants and themes.
      
   3. Antixenophobic and nonfundamentalist legislations (antiracist, antihomophobic). All avatars are equal and have a right to be heard.
      
   4. A policy supporting multilateralism and compromise between factions.
   
   
4. Finally, the city and the government exist to facilitate not exploit artisans. The goal is to provide artisans with a stable, honest environment which supports collaborative relationships and provides infrastructure. The goal is to maximize productivity and use the collected city revenue to pay land-tier investors and citizens in the form of improved services.
   

It is these principles that will form the core philosophy of the city. I think they are novel in this game and if implemented will be very successful.


Here are some answers to a few of the questions I saw in the thread:

1. I will not run for political office in the city. After the launch of the government I will stay on as part of the "philosophical branch" (one of several checks and balances) to modify and interpret the constitution to make sure we don't run into difficulties in the beginning.
   
2. I think it's important to remember that we could do none of this if it weren't for those who are donating land-tiers. We are beholden to them and it is my and Kendra's job to convince them that we are on the right path and incorporate reasonable requests into the city.
   
3. Majority (group) approval always silences minority viewpoints and supporting all viewpoints (conformist or dissenting) is a requirement of the city. This requirement exists, as limiting speech beyond PG and ToS is inherently immoral as it arbitrarily limits the freedom of some citizens based on the personal desires of other citizens. I am willing to agree to preventing members of the project management team and the (soon-to-be) government from organizing RL events in the city, though.
   
4. The constitution should be created by a leftist meritocracy not a democratic process. I have tried to handpick people to work on the constitution but as you know we are all busy busy busy.
   
5. You can create a poll if you are the moderator of a group forum.
   

~Ulrika~

Thank you for the breakdown Ulrika! I think it will help greatly when going into tonight's meeting!

Thank you all for voting!

The results lean towards allowing RL politics in the city and not requiring citizens to seek approval to hold a rally. I believe the most important message which arose from this and related threads is to allow RL politics but not at the expense of developing or biasing SL politics.

Results of the meeting which specify agreements made will be posted shortly in this thread:

/103/47/27006/1.html

~Ulrika~