Open Letter to So Many Anti-Government Whiners

Ha ha. I've explained this a hundred times.

The U.S. has the very same type of system, comprised of three branches. The Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial. Our system is created with analogies to these branches which are mapped to critical functions in SL but more importantly to provide checks and balances to prevent a single group from causing problems. Specifically, we have a Representative Assembly (RA) which is analogous to the Legislative Branch and a Scientific Council (SC) which is analogous to the Judicial branch.

Most of the time, the RA will act as tribal leaders helping to decide as a group where the city should go and how to get there (small and efficient). It is just like a group in SL, except these folks are elected. In a very few instances, if there are disputes or resolutions that are detrimental to the city, the SC steps in and recommends adjustments. It also protects the rules that have been put into place to make sure minority viewpoints are respected and that all actions are ethical.

Thus it is applied, very scalable, and robust to corruption. Best of all it is only one step up in complexity from a normal SL group.

~Ulrika~

Ulrika,

<<Of the most vociferous nay-sayers, I doubt any of them could even describe their country's governmental system off the top of their head.>>

This is unbelievably arrogant, even for you.

For your information, I am conversant with my country's governmental system - indeed on the local level I am part of it.

Kathy,

<<Now can we talk about possible ways that representation CAN work?>>

In your 'you and others like you' comment, you have me pegged as someone who was not prepared to talk about the issue.

I have already said that in the extremely unfortunate event of self-government ever becoming inevitable, I would certainly wish to be involved in its formation.

And indeed, I have already published in some detail suggestions about a possible governmental structure, designed specifically to minimise the risk of corruption.

I imagine that because the ideas were not the same as yours, you ignored and then forgot them.

Ah. My intent is for the rep to bring his own understanding and knowledge to the committee and for him/her/it to speak for himself. Discussions and speeches are recorded as is. Resolutions and statments of the sense of the meeting will be written up and presented for approval from the meeting. Needed changes are made - reapproved - and the whole packet published for the Lindens and the Public.

If there is lossyness in the process, it would likely be in the local meetings. This is a problem that can be mitigated by a good representative, and is a good consideration when choosing one.

The entire process sinks or swims on how well it functions. If there isn't an improvement on communication, resolution, and arbitration, then the "government" is useless and will have to dissolve. If no one shows up to the meetings, then it pretty much has to fail. So, given that people give it a few meetings to get started, I'd exxpect it to either fail or succeed based on it's own merits.

If people feel that the national meeting isn't listening, then they won't send a rep.

Getting people to show up at the meetings would probably be the biggest roadblock to such a plan. I remain of the opinion that we don't need anything like this, but if the day comes where it becomes necessary I'd be open to a plan like yours.

Yes I agree - a union of players who wish to define those bugs and features that are of most concern to them would be a positive and useful possibility. While there is merit to what Chip has said about some of the content of the message being lost, that could be mitigated by the impact of the numbers of people wanting the same features or bug fix. In addition, you take nothing away with this, the old avenues of bug reporting and forum posting are still available.

While I remain focused on Features and Bug fixes, I could see this being applicable to other in world offers that the Lindens come up with. For example, garnering a group to ask the Lindens for another Winter Festival or Burning Man.

The point being that government in and of it's self should be a public service. (In the best of all worlds). Those that choose to represent a group of people, choose to do so because they "serve the public". (Not that we see much of that in real life examples any longer). Nevertheless, I believe that this is what it should be about.

A clear focus on what to fix and what to add to Second Life that represents the majority of people, AND has import to the Lindens, would be a positive public service and still allow the minority an avenue to voice their opinions as well. (Bug reports and forum suggestions and rants). However, when you have garnered a statistic and that statistic says that 65% of all the people polled in world want "X" bug fixes before features (for example), then it would most likely hold weight with the Lindens.

This service is more indicitive of a union than a self-government.

I apologise. I actually read you the opposite way.

Things got a bit hectic. Twice I was denied posting because the system insists on a thirty second wait between postings. I actually thought you said you would NOT want to have anything to do with it.

I try not to ignore others' ideas - even opposing ideas. I do, however, try to ignore personal attacks or people who simply reject an idea out-of-hand because they have preconcieved ideas about what I'm saying, without listening. I hate it when I catch myself doing that as well.

Sorry.

Anyway, let me ask a question. Can you tell me where, in my model, corruption is most likely to appear? I can see possibilities for it in the small local groups - especially if the local groups get big or have money - but the national committee doesn't actually have any money or executive power. And, since they don't make committee decisions except by unanimous agreement, there doesn't seem the likelihood of power blocs.

I do worry about the possibility of local corruption, but that's not something this would have any causitive relationship to, anyway. If the Altarian Confederacy's prime minister is skimming off the member dues, well they'd be doing it with or without a representative committee. Perhaps we could put some sort of standards into the constitution, but I really resist making any rules for the local groups. I believe that the only requirement should be that the group certifies the rep - no other requirements. Once they get to the meeting, we can rules about throwing things (no refrigerators or body fluids) but even if someone was asked to stop shouting, there would be nothing at all to stop them from saying whatever they like in their submitted speach.

I think one of the best guards against corruption is to avoid power. Since we leave all the money and police powers in the hands of the people and the Lindens respectively, I really hope we can keep it to a minimum.

Right. The hardest part will be showing the groups the ways this can help them. Still, if a few show up at the first one, and we can publish all the speeches and consensus, then I suppose we've done the hard stuff. Other than that, it's all advertising, so people know what's going on and how they can participate.

Hmmm. Advertising. I just realized that I have no problem with each group coming to present their speech and finding that a good pecentage is blatant self-congratulation for the group's own enterprises. It fits the bill: it informs, it voices the issues the group finds important, and form their point of view it's good because it gets published and read by the public at large. So what if the ratio of civic involvment to self-service is a bit lop-sided at first? It's a good draw, I think.

Also, I would like to see the committee help develop other useful public services. For instance, a business listing/directory/yellow pages, or maybe a job listing board. maybe even a temp service.

Forseti,

Absolutely. My model assumes not only that it is optional, but that no one is bound to participate even after beginning to do so. If you give it a try, and still aren't confident that the process works, then no one suffers if you simply opt out.

I suppose it could be called a union, except that a union has particular tools that we don't. We aren't going to have official "membership" so we can't compel members to act in unison. In a union, you agree to act AS a union of workers. In my model, you can SPEAK as one, if it works out that way, but we can't tell anyone to agree "or else".

Also, we will have no dues. Hence, no money. If any money is donated, then it will be to a specific task, or program. There will NOT be a general fund or budget. If we need L$1000 to hire someone to make chairs (not that that makes sense since we have so many public spaces) then the expediture will be approved by the whole committee and published - to the penny - in the public posting.

No dues, no mebership, no coercion, no compulsion, no corruption - I hope. We'll have to look deeply at that during the formation.

*raises hand* Whiner here!

I've read it many times.
If you don't want to suggest to people what to do, then why are you even posting that SL should form a government?


I vow that if this government of yours is ever created, I will throw a coup d'etat, topple that government of yours and restore SL back to the creative anarchy it is today.

You have a very good grasp of the point of all this. I believe that there IS value in this kind of organization. In fact, I am just as skeptical about "government" as most of my detractors - I just can't see how to get the benefits without wading into the muck and sorting it all out.

I don't want to call it a union, really, for reasons in my post above. Still, it is meant to fulfill the same goals of collective (albeit non-coercive) speech, and group representation.

Believe it or not, I will say that I have one more goal. Since I am thoroughly convinced that people will inevitably create SOME sort of "government", I prefer to put one in place first that will do what needs - or will need - to be done, while remaining as benign as possible. With the void filled - however loosely - it's unlikely there will be an urgency to create something more repressive.

That's the plan anyway.

Camille, you'll have to work fast. It'll only exist for a few hours a month.

Still, if you canb find a way to topple it, you're very welcome to give it a go.

I think you have to have a head of state to have a coup to overthrow him.

The one with the fork in it?

hehe Ok.

Got it.

can I ask which kind of whiner you are thoguh? I'm trying to keep track. What are you specifically whining about?

I'm the kind of whiner that we don't need one kinda Guy, , but thats just me.

I MIGHT be for a player run government, but I would have to know what its exact powers were, and wether it's decisions could be enforced. It would HAVE to be able to deal with griefers, seeing as LL has the appearance of NOT doing so. That means once guilt had been established, the gov would be able to suspend, fine, or ban players depending on the nature/severity of the crime. Not sure what else they would need to be able to do.

False. I'm not being arrogant, I'm being factual. I doubt most people here are conversant with our country's governmental system. While I commend you for your involvement with local government, one Selador does not all the people make.

~Ulrika~

I agree with you completely Devlin. I didn't know cute little Cherubs were so smart too.

~Ulrika~

Being that I'm very new technically[although I've ran a couple trial accounts in the past but forgot their names so I couldn't register them ARGH!] and I think the government thing shouldn't be endorsed by the Lindens for some good reasons.

First, the company is new as is this product in the relative sense, they have their own 'government' as it were, the ToS and Linden Staff, to make an extra government to be made of non-Linden staff would disrupt the main goal of the company: 1. To make a profit from their product and 2. To ensure no one abuses their product and customers.

Second, since I stated before that Linden Labs is rather 'new' it would be a waste of their funds, which they need most of all to continue this product/service, and that would be a lowering of the experience on SL (Server problems, politics from non-lindens, and etc).

And Third, because all actions are voluntary, in that we all could do something else, to enforce an involuntary action or premise is in my opinion immoral in the most strict use of the word. You cannot force people to join some social club that you call a government because it seems like a great idea.

I rather see the strict adherence to the ToS with Linden Labs handling all that directly without some folks basically rping what shouldn't need some rping to get done like taking care of folks that bog down the servers with uber spawning scripts/objects, and harassment of users on the service. All a government would be is an obstruction toward the goals of the LL team (To make a great and profitable product) and of customers (To enjoy themselves) that follow the ToS.

Thanks, that's just my piece on this.

-- Bridget

Ulrika - you are a brilliant woman and I admire you but your assumption that most people in this forum are not conversant with their own governmental system is in fact arrogant and an insult to their intelligence.

I too have run the political gambit in both Canada and the US. In Canada I worked behind the scenes setting up a computerized GOTV (Get Out the Vote) system for the Socreds and in the US I ran for Republican Central Committee and was elected. Like Lecktor I'm wondering how to get the splinters out of my ass after admitting this one. In my defense, it was 20+ years ago when I was younger, more ambitious and possessed less empathy and wisdom.

Nevertheless, I have been a participant in politics, am well versed on how the both the government and our political system in general works. Which is, why I want no part of it.

I truly am old fashioned and altruistic enough to actually believe that being a representative of any group of people is a public service and a difficult one at that. It is like a giant black hole when it pertains to time, energy and finances. You can never please everyone, you will always fail someone and it is difficult to keep your integrity intact.

I have concluded that despite any organizational talents that I may have, that I am much more useful serving food at the local homeless shelter than I am serving on it's board. Having walked the political plank, I am innately suspicious of politicians and government in general, that does not make me ignorant of it's operation.

If someone could enlightened a small mammal with a walnut-sized brain (me )... what exactly do we need a government for, anyway? Seriously... I don't get it.

Players aren't going to be able to have any authority over each other in-world, simply because there's no way to project any sort of force (well, except llPushObject, but that's not what I mean ).

What problems exist in world that a government with no governing abilities is going to solve?

(I hope this isn't coming across as sarcastic... it's not intended to be...)

Sorry Rose, but like Seladoor you're presenting anecdotal data. My statement that most people here are not conversant with their own governmental system is a statistical fact. Given that most people do not go into political science or serve in public office, they often are equipped with what they've learned in high school.

In 1998 the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) conducted the 1998 Civics Assessment to measure how well American youth are being prepared to meet their citizenship responsibilities. You can see the results below:

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_3/3_2/q2-4.asp
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/

Read the data for yourself. It's actually quite interesting. If you'd like you could even pose some of the questions to people in the forum to see if there is a correlation. If you want to call me arrogant for pointing out the facts then go right ahead. *shrug*

The reason I'm familiar with this is that a healthy democracy should provide all citizens with the education required to serve in the government right out of school. If that education is not provided, then groups of individuals (read that as poor in the real world) will have difficulty entering the government, affecting change in their communities, and thus perpetuating the cycle. It's one of those class-issue things that you'd expect me to be all up in arms about.

~Ulrika~

Player governments are so we can do Zoning.

Keeping clubs, ugly builds, and lag scripts out of a sim.

You kick people out of the sim / group to enforce the rules.

Dude.....for the free government cheese program