Gratz , SL is now a mob

I know about Clifton.

I was responding to Mulch's statement that the audience was made the butt of the jokes sometimes. They were, and therefore anyone attending anything to do with Kaufman should and probably would have been expecting shenanigans of some sort. In fact, it was part of his draw.

It's still not a valid analogy. Most of us didn't join SL to see someone's idea of "performance art".

Most people joined SL for uncensored freedom of expression

W Hat makes pretty damn good use of the Anarchy of SL

and instead of responding to everyone who went on and on about possible criminal penalties, I agree, throw the book at the guilty party(s).

Leave the ones who haven't screwed up yet to shoot themselves in the foot.

My only problem was the idea of proactively cleansing the resident base

boycotting is a great idea. so is civil/criminal prosecution

and , um, most people didn't even know andy didn't speak with a latka accent. up until just a couple years before his death, people were essentially clueless for what they were in for

and what about the first few waves of atendees who had no clue who kaufman was

and as soon as people thought they had caught on to his act, he switched gears again

he not only played the audience, he played his employers.

so, again, performance art is a pretty good description of "the jokes on you" mentality of W Hat

get ahold of the video called "i'm from hollywood" and look at how angry he made the memphis folks in his rasslin days when he explained hygene to them with instructions for soap and proper use of toilet paper

the funniest thing in that video, to me, was watching the rasslin audience, an audience who essentially knows it is fake, calling for blood and wanting him dead for real

(and correct me if I am wrong, but when tony Clifton opened for Robin Williams at Dangerfields club, they had to put up netting so the audience wouldnt kill him with the bottles they were throwing. They got involved in the drama, hence it wasn't funny to them. Looking back, years later, I get the joke and it was brilliant)

reminds me a lot of W Hats grip on SL

(minus the possible criminal behavior of 1 or a few more co conspiritors)

I think the CS makes it clear that this isn't true.

But this is a broken record - we've talked about what people can and can't express in SL in dozens of threads.


I'm not sure exactly what this means, at all.



Your analogy breaks down because Kaufmann did his antics on stage and TV. These were designated places where actors are allowed to do their thing. Whereas public areas of SL and forums are not. We don't sign on to play *your* game on public land. You're free to do your antics on your land, or where people invite you to their land.


Again, they invited him to perform on their land.


SL is not a TV set or stage. So, no, you're totally incorrect with your analogy.

He was an actor. He takes on different roles. So this role he used an accent. Whats the big deal? Its his job. If he was an actor and played one role all his life and never changed, odds are his career would be a failure. I dont see where he 'got one over' on people, he was doing his job.

Have you ever watched "rasslin"? Many wrestlers are the 'bad guy' and often talk down to the local crowd. Nothing new from Andy, he's just copying other people.

How do you magically know if someone is serious when they say "kill the bum" at a sporting/entertainment event or when they are just caught up in the moment/action and dont mean anything of substance? Have a list of wrestlers murdered ringside by the crowd?

They have a grip on SL? Im in SL. I dont know them nor 'fear' or 'hate' them. Much like your opinions and beliefs about this subject, its way overblown out of proportion IMO.

I agree with Nolan.

coco

Really? I don't think you get to decide for "most people" why they joined SL. Furthermore, anyone who was responsible enough to read the ToS they agreed to when they started shouldn't expect any such thing. This is a privately owned world. There is no "freedom of expression" There is only expression which is allowed by the ToS - and that is certainly not "uncensored". This is not a streetcorner in the Village. Get real - you're really spinning and stretching things now.


I don't want the whole group banned. I don't want people to call lawyers. I don't want criminal charges. I have never stated as such.

What I have said is - if one wishes to associate themselves with a group that ends up in this postion every few weeks, that I think it is reasonable to expect that they may be viewed with a bit of a jaded eye.

I am also of the mind that LL needs to be more pro-active with the members that DO grief - as do the leaders of the group. Their own website says no racism. Yet they didn't enforce that on the caricatured, fried chicken and watermelon eating idiot. Niether did LL - yet LL banned him after this. That speaks volumes. He should have been banned already. We wouldn't be here discussing this now had they done so. He also should have been booted from w-hat for breaching their racism policy.

I am not going to point by point your flawed Andy Kaufmann analogy. It is non sequitur. People chose to go see Andy Kaufman. I am not talking about his alter-ego, and niether were you when you initially brought him up.

Also, I am old enough to remember and watched when Andy first came on the scene. Well before Taxi. It was obvious to me he was playing some sort of oddball character. Remember Mighty Mouse? Elvis? Did you really think that's how he was? Latka? I didn't. I mean - did people think Christopher Lloyd was really Jimmy?

Here's an analogy for you. I go to NYC for vacation - entertainment. Some act comes spilling out of a comedy club onto the street and starts hassling me and others - and make it impossible for use to utilize the environment. I went to NYC for my idea of entertainment, and now someone else decides to impose their idea of entertainment on me. I didn't walk into a club and then complain - they brought it to me, and that is unacceptible.

"Your World, Your Imagination"

I don't recall seeing "unless the forum jackels approve" anywhere around that




3rd time Im reposting this link in 24 hours:

/120/8e/3593/2.html#post23232



and lest you think i am actually defending W Hat because I enjoy greif, well, I enjoy chaos, and W Hat brings chaos to SL

some people are personally targetted, and IMHO, that is a no no.

in some cases (such as last night), the grid was targeted. Again, big time no no

i am actually defending the anarchy system, cuz, well, that is quite the escape from the modern world

and as wrong as last nights attack was, a cleansing and lynch mob for a huge group who share forum space together is pretty much the wrong answer to the W Hat problem

Ignore them and report them. if you hate them don't become them



Whose "game" do we sign up for? What the forum people say is *our* game?

SL is W Hats 3D stage. Check out SA website. Very funny stuff. I am tempted to join the forums but I am not sure if I would be bringing bad karma on myself supporting with my cash.

that being said, I know they are devils and assholes.

SL forums is the almightly holier than thou land, where everyone acts like the critics on the muppet show, and drama is manufactured wholesale so people can "prove" how right and "intelligent" and "well read" and "witty" and "logical" they are, often at someone elses expense

took me awhile to figure out the game on these forums, and there is an old phrase, something about "the devil you know vs the devil you don't know..."

I know they are juvenile rowdy and rude from their website, here, the assholery is well hidden behind bright colors, *hugs*, and funny photo comments. Took me awhile to figure out this forums "community" spirit.



Something about a ton of free lifetime basics given to SA forums, and now everyone getting free lifetime basics...

I know blah blah blah right?



A stage and TV set are entertainment.

SL is entertainment to me (and I am certainly not alone there, even excluding W Hat).

The analogy is quite valid...

Hmmm, 2nd life, 2nd chance. We are all actors here.

Is the guy in the bunny avatar a bunny in real life, or is he playing a role?

But then again "all the worlds a stage..."




been watching my entire life almost, been to 2 Wrestlemanias, and actually have even been in a Pro Wrestling match when I worked in radio, so , um, yes, I "get it"

W Hat are the bad guys.



Well offhand I know Freddie Blassie was stabbed a few times by "fans", New Jack was frequently in danger from the race baiting he played in the south early in his career, and Roddy Piper has talked about having to defend himself (although he is quite a loon so...). This is just off the top of my head, but I am certain I can find more incidents like this if given the time.



you are prolly right. judging from my "biased unscientific" pole, W Hat is not a widespread blight or problem.

this was an isolated incident, which , was kinda my point

No, apparently we signed up for Mulch's "game":


You may like chaos - it doesn't mean others do.

So the SL forums for a group and enjoy themselves often at someone elses expense? Wow I thought you were describing w-hats. They form groups and grief at someone elses expense. When someone griefs an event, they have already decided to take it out on EVERYONE at the event, not just the organizers. So now some of those same people (not all) from the event post that they want LL to take it out on EVERYONE in said griefers group. Why do the griefers get to decide to ruin it for everyone but not the other way around? Anarchy without risk isnt anarchy, its just noise. I still say you are making more out of it than it is. Im not sure if its a convenient vehicle for you to lash out at the forum regulars or just add more worship to your buddies. Either way, you continue to inflate the balloon.

reductio ad absurdium.

By the same logic, it isn't "Your World, Others Griefing You"



Okay, Philip was talking about anarchy as a government structure - which does not mean chaos. You are talking about anarchy as the more commonly used term - chaos - fallacy of homonyms. (i.e. same word, different meanings)


This is a contradiction. As Nolan eloquently stated - we don't choose to play your game or have your antics. If people choose to enjoy your chaos, then it's opt-in. You have absolutely no right to impose your fascist "we can cause chaos wherever we want" beliefs on anyone.


Oh, but targeting more than one person is okay?

Ostrich. Head. Sand.


So what the heck is not a "big time no no"? You contradict yourself. The whole point is the word "targeted" implies griefing. No one should be "targeted" ever.


It's clear you have no idea what anarchy means in the scope of political science. I don't want to sound demeaning - the fact is that it's not an apparent thing, and I didn't know anything about anarchy until someone explained some stuff for me. The fact that "anarchy" is commonly and incorrectly used as a synonym for "chaos" doesn't help.

SL falls under a sort of "small town" anarchical system. People behave fairly well, on average. When someone causes trouble, they are ostracized. There are rules in place to make sure that people aren't ostracized for trivial reasons, but these are ones every person agrees to. The act of removing someone from SL may be Linden implemented, but it is still controlled by the abuse reports that come out of other residents.

And even though there is no formal system of government in SL, a de facto organization based on anarchy exists.

Now, no where in that model is "Hey lets go around and cause chaos". Because anarchy does not imply chaos.


I don't think lynching w-Hat is a good idea, either. However your post has gone so off the track of what would be a straightforward argument that you are defending yourself to things that wind up completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.


Incorrect ... W Hat's land in SL is W Hat's 3D stage. The rest of SL is our stage. Respect this, and ask permission before presuming what's yours.


As are any forums. Heh.


Not hidden - you're close, but not quite. The word is "restrained."

People get upset here, and rather than post "assholery" comments, they prefer to use humor or intelligently worded debate. This avoids personal attack, and yes - many times it is done with open disdain.

Take the Daily Show as an example. Jon Stewart clearly has a great disdain for politicians. But he does not get on the show and personally attack each one. Instead, he uses humor as a way to convey his message in a socially acceptable and less hostile way.


That's a whole nother debate.



Yes, and you own your TV set and choose to tune in.

Everyone else in SL has the right to choose to tune in to W Hat antics, or not to tune in. However, you want to remove that choice from people.

No.

I submit that people are far more free and uncensored than on a "streetcorner in the Village."



I don't want the group banned, i think LL should pursue civil/crimal action as a deterant to future attacks. I stated that. Many times.



Thats fine, if you want to boycott shun them or look at them with a "jaded eye," cool, well within your rights. I don't think they give 2 shits about that honestly, but whatever gets you through the night.



I dated a dark dark black girl, and surprise, she loved fried chicken (churches, not KFC). Correct me if I am wrong, but you are not black, which means you have have no authority to speak for the "black community" on this or any matter (and to be honest, i don't think various black leaders should speak for the "black community".

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=racism

there was no superiority in his avatar, there was no discrimination or prejudice in his avi

the forum crowd attached all thier baggage onto his avi, and gave him exactly what he wanted. I am not saying he didn't know what buttons he was pushing, but i say he was mocking you all far more than the "black community"



If you are basing your knowledge of Kaufmans gimmick on TV, or the Jim Carrey movie, or "mainstream" information, you are missing it.

There are 2 very complete biographies on him. 1 is by Zmuda, his co conspiritor, and 1 is from an independant source. Only by reading both versions can you see the extent he went to mess with pretty much everyone who went near him. Even the same accounts of 2 different incidents as told by someone involved and actually continuing the "work," and another who tries to verify information does it become crystal clear that only, ONLY Andy and Bob were ever in on the joke.

So, again, I am sorry if u "non sequitur" my position, but as someone who researched his antics, and still can't figure out fact from fiction, it was all about messing with peoples heads

W Hat is a low brow, less sophisticated version of an old act.



LoL, never heard of Mimes? Street theater? Ever Been to fishermans warf in san fransisco?

Although, I will admit there is legal precedence to your argument. Ozomatli leads a drum group at the end of their show. I beleive it was Texas where they led the crowd outside of the venue, and were arrested on trumped up charges such as "initiating a riot" when the club full of dancing drumming people spilled out onto the texas road.

That being said, as much as the metaverse group wants this to be some kind of 2nd reality, there are some of us who don't take SL that seriously. It is a game, entertainment, diversion, that allows us to create our own plotlines. I have every right to live my SL the way I want regardless of how seriously the snowcrash crowd is.

Same with W-Hat

If they grief you personally, report them. Otherwise ignore them. They have same rights to build upon this platform as you do.

If they blow that right (as happened last night) boot them and mock them out the door.

I don't even know what I am debating you for. I don't think our position is that much different. I guess old habits die hard.

not quite, nice try

just saying, LL puts few limits on how you can use this platform.



http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anarchy

1.) Absence of any form of political authority.
2.) Political disorder and confusion.
3.) Absence of any cohesive principle, such as a common standard or purpose.

that thread may have pertained to governments, but I suspect that #3 is certainly applicable and that Philip would agree that his statement invoked that definition, and the same way I use it.



I dont have a facist "we can cause chaos wherever we want" beleif at all.

And when you say "we," you speak for you and Nolan right? Otherwise, that sounds a bit facist to insist that your voice is everyones voice.

I just happen to beleive healthy chaos keeps people on their toes...

Let me reiterate (in case you are including me in W Hat when you say "your"...

I am NOT W Hat.



You are right, targetting was the wrong word. But if someone was sitting on community property eating fried chicken and watermellon and you stopped what you were doing to tell him how wrong he was, you took the bait and targeted yourself.

That is a fine analogy to how overblown the forum became.

and he had every right to defend his opinion, no matter how misleading and manipulative he was being in doing so, by virtue of the fact you stopped what you were doing to tell involve yourself in his business

if W Hat targets individuals, groups, or the grid, it is all a No No. Sorry I didnt clarify that earlier



I already posted the definitions I use of anarchy from a poly sci perspective as well as the disorder.

Ostracizing is 100% fine. Boycotting their goods and services, A-OK. Calling for the Lindens to mass execute 400 residents, not ok. That is my thesis, and as off track as I get debating things one line at a time, that is what this post is all about.



agreed!



Point taken and as daily show is required daily viewing for me, but I want to point out that Stewert does what he does in such a way as to avoid confrontation and make people he dislikes feel welcomed as guests.

Big difference in SL forums

That is why that analogy is not valid here.



I don't want to remove that choice, but institutionalizing something removes that choice.

Forcing all SA members out of the game removes choice to tune in or not, which is the thesis for this topic, since my ADD has prevented me from keeping focused.



Please define our

and if you say our is everybody but W-Hat, that is not a choice you can make for me, which is the essence of the "Lynch them" problem that is on topic.

Oh you don't take it that seriously, yet you want to try and extend RL freedom of expression into a private domain?

Rich.

Look, you know nothing of my personal life - don't go there. You know nothing of what I know of Kaufman, and I haven't seen the movie. My, my you like to presume, AND speak for others, don't you?

You don't know my ethnic background, who I may have been involved with or their ethnicity (not that it has any bearing here, as you seem to think), where I may have lived, what I know, what I have read, and where I have been.

Your bizarre "dark dark black girl" statement is specious at best. Would it make any difference if she was lighter black? What the fuck has that to do with anything? Who are you to speak for what should be offensive to others? There were people who have the right to be offended by that imagery who stated they were. You don't get to decide for them what they can and can't be offended by.

I can tell you why you are debating with me. Because you are a hard case who has way too much pride, and likes to be contrary.

Maybe it makes you feel counter-culture and powerful.

I remember your big, chest puffed out entry into the forums a while back - "I can write a lot so you people better be ready" or some such macho crapola. Yeah, then you ended up retracting stuff. You're not going to bowl anybody here over with sheer volume and crassness.

And you're wrong - our postions are very different.

SL is all of ours, not just yours, so quit telling the rest of us how it should fit your view of chaos, anarchy and unfettered freedom of expression.

Thanks, and nite nite. You won't be registering on my radar anymore - have the last word. After all, one with such unfailing logic and literary skill should always have the last word.

*runs up the down stairs* GOD I feel SO empowered! So edgy!

This thread is dead.

Why? Because it's yesterdays news and the fickle screaming baying mob has something else to kick and whine about now?

It's dead I tell you. Dead.

"just saying"? No, you're not "just saying" this. You specifically said that SL was a world where people expected no censorship to freedom of speech. This is far from "just saying" this.


Are you absolutely blind? #1 is what Philip was referring to in your quote, and #3 is what you were referred to. So, as I just said, you were using a different definition / meaning of the term "anarchy" and thus misinterpreted the statement.


from your quote:

Nowhere does Philip allude to chaos at all - he's talking about organization, freedoms of users, and "good" global community standards. Harassing other players with unwelcomed "chaos" fits in nowhere, unless the players opt-in.


That's what you project when you say that "all of SL is W Hat's stage".


"We" specifically refers to all the people in SL who do not want to be harassed by W Hat or any other group unless they choose to go to a W Hat area or welcome W Hat to their land. The sentiments are shared by many in this thread, and the bottom line is that this is a fairly basic, straightforward concept of "Hey, behave in public places" that I have no problem attaching "we" to in my statements.


Really, now?

Care to define "healthy chaos"? When does that include coming to other peoples land and harassing them? Or crashing a sim? Does this "healthy chaos" extend to the real world? On what scale? Is crime good, then? How about natural disasters?

Perhaps it does keep people on their toes - in the way that stepping on a nail reminds you to be careful while barefoot. But if someone is going around spreading nails all around, then you know what? That person needs to stop.


Okay, I never said you were.



That is a fine analogy to how overblown the forum became.

and he had every right to defend his opinion, no matter how misleading and manipulative he was being in doing so, by virtue of the fact you stopped what you were doing to tell involve yourself in his business[/quote]
Well, now ... I stayed out of that particular thread for a reason.


Okay, with that in mind, what exactly would this "creative chaos" be *and* not targetting any person, group, or grid? (And to clarify - I'm speaking any group, not W Hat)

From: someone

Ostracizing is 100% fine. Boycotting their goods and services, A-OK. Calling for the Lindens to mass execute 400 residents, not ok. That is my thesis, and as off track as I get debating things one line at a time, that is what this post is all about.

Alright, i'll bold this for others casually reading.


You have an excellent point here.
Stewart is a saint the way he treats his guests, especially ones he dislikes.
Except - his audience is not always so restrained. Let's face it - Stewart gets to play "good cop" while the audience plays "bad cop".

But I haven't seen any right-winger step onto Stewart's show yet, have you? His guest list is somewhat limited as lots of people don't want a repeat of Crossfire - and be on the receiving end.


Okay, here's where your argument diverges.
You start out with a thread saying there's a mob mentality ...
You state your assumption that it was "1 person".
Other people voiced their opinion that it was more about the mentality fostered by a group.
This is primarily the issue that's been debated since, only you're still back at your assumption that it's 1 person, so the two sides' tangents this discussion has gone down sort of passed each other.
Then you start speaking about how "chaos" and fooling around should be allowed anywhere in SL.

So please be clear - is this "chaos" something that fosters the "individual" griefing?
If so, then you have to consider that there is partial responsibility of the group.
If not, then why bother bringing it up in this discussion? Your best argument would then just be "Well this is one idiot who is acting totally out of line from the group."


As in - your land is your land, my land is my land, and W Hat land is W Hat land. Public land is shared - and that means people should behave like they would in a normal public situation.

But I think the forums represent a very different attitude and mind set than the world does. The forums are place for debate. The forums need some chaos, and yes I think at time the forums have the mob quality.

I know many take issue with this, as noone wants to think thier reasoned opinion is influenced by those around us. But really the mob reaction tends to be a piling on of resaonable Ideas-much like the reign of terror in paris was ultimately the by product of the enlightenment.

Also emotional responses to exaggerated slights, like the proverbial insult "FIC" or "Tekki-Wikkiati," tend to make relatively reasonble people more prone to enter a defensive mode, sustained by others around them. The crowd, and accpetance in the crowed, are powerful motivators. I have been to an Arsenal-Manchester United Game. And as an american, with no previous interest or expereience with professional soccer, I can say that by the half I was ready to trash the city of london in best hoodlum fashion (and now I am a Arsenal Fan!).

However in world we don't, and shouldn't expect to operate in an enviromentment of debate (unless such adebate is a specific event). One enters the forums with at least a partial expectation of disagreement and argument as well as rational discourse. Provocative topics here sometimes generate some very interesting debate before they spiral out of control.

In world, however, I think the expectation of quiet enjoyment is the dominant social dynamic. We don't enter SL to have further debate on topics raised in the forums, and we expect to be left alone to play in world as we wish.

The problem with a group like W-hat is that they bring their brand of in your face gueriila theatre directly into an enviroment wher ethe expection of "quiet enjoyment" is very high. They force us all to participate in their brand of fun, which sadly lacks real commentary behind the pranksterism. Thus what might be looked upon as self expression and parody in the forums crosse the line and becomes mere harassment and greifing.

Thus while I can see the relative merit to an argument that some people in the forums expect us to play the game their way (not that this is conclusively true, however), I cannot abide the actions of a group like w-hat.

Also, things like this past sundays stunt are just disruptive. I strikes me a bit like setting a dirty bomb off in atlanta and saying its not really terrorism, its a parody of terrorism.

I recently had the thought to go after two individuals who wronged me, and so I sent out some enquiries to various lawyers. When I could finally pin one down long enough to get an answer out of him, which was no small task, I learned a few things. Later I learned a few more things from one of Linden Lab's lawyers.

It can cost anywhere from ten to twenty thousand to get a case like this off the ground, and actually making it stand up in court can take you up into the six figure range. The question is, are you a hundred thousand dollars worth of angry about this? If so, you should band together with other SLers and put together a hundred grand to go after this guy. Personally, I'd rather take those thousands and spend them on something that will give me more value than a sense of revenge against some guy that I have no good reason to care about in the first place. Now to be fair, I agree there is some value in deterrence, but the payoff against a hundred grand is not very attractive to me.

If you are not a hundred thousand dollars worth of angry at this guy, well, I'll give you the same advice that was given to me. Let karma sort it out. You get out of life what you put into it. The more habitually unpleasant a person is to others, the more problems they will bring into their own lives, both from the way others will respond, and from the general way they are training themselves to think about their relation to the rest of the universe. You don't have to do anything to them, they already do plenty to themselves.

I know this guy was one of your amigos in another life, even if indirectly, but I think the deterrence value might be worth it (since most likely they won't be able to collect on a civil judgement). I could be wrong. But it would have to be LL who filed the case.

More realistic and effective would be criminal prosecution. There the taxpayer foots the bill.

It is a tough call and arguably could do more damage. But global attacks with impunity cannot be tolerated, from W-Hat or anyone else for that matter.



Yup!

I think there are probably 500 of us who would donate $100 each to see this guy go down, and LL could match us since it's their system.

There's your 100 grand.

I didn't know getting wrongs done to you righted costs so much in your country ! It didn't cost me anything but some gas and a morning off to get a case judged recently.