Player Run Conflict Resolution

I don't think a binary yes-or-no poll on the topic of SL government captures the complexity of the question space regarding helping LL with conflict resolution. Thus, I've spawned another poll.

In think one of the best ways to help LL thrive is to offload some of their user moderation and conflict resolution load onto willing players. There have been several suggestions for ways in which we, as players, could assist LL. There might be multiple solutions that LL could implement in parallel.

Vote for all choices, which you would approve, support, and participate in. If you choose "other" please elaborate.

~Ulrika~

I would vote for the type you suggested in the *Neualtenberg is necessary* thread, i.e., a randomly selected jury, if LL does indeed someday make it required for players to handle their own disputes. It's the only way I've seen suggest heretofore to avoid cliqueish influence on the verdicts. I will never be for an elected panel or any sort of "tribunal" with pre-selected individuals who handle disputes, even if it they were termed positions.

The first and most important aspect of player resolution is that it is fully opt in and in no way is tied to Linden labs.

This is a hard concept to get across to people and there is a slippery slope fear as well. The only thing we can do is keep on pounding it in.

Beyond that, I think it's the only way. People need to be free to be governed by themselves and not a benign dictatorship. The former is obviously more difficult, but sometimes life just is.

Other: See the Devo song 'Enough Said'

Here's a hint : a great big ring and lots of weapons.

It won't solve anything, but I guarrantee it will be fun to watch.

No changes.

The problem I see with putting conflict resolution in the hands of SL users, is that you must also put the power to carry out judgements in the hands of the users, or else the whole thing would just be limp and useless. Playing house.

This is in regards to an SL sanctioned system. Assume that each option would be SL enforced.

~Ulrika~

Well .. banishment is pretty powerful, I think.

Thats kewl Ulrika

no changes, by now everyone knows my feelings on this subject

We really need a no changes & player run conflict resolution option

That's why I asked people to select as many options as they agreed with.

Note too that this is not a majority-rules vote but rather a poll which captures the attitude of the general public. In the end if it turns out that 25% of the people would agree to localized user governments as a form of user conflict resolution, that means that LL could see a 25% reduction in complaint load by supporting this. All it would require is the backing by LL of a particular government to make decisions binding. As people get used to this idea and benefit from it, public opinion will shift and the number of governed locals will grow.

As a matter of fact, have you noticed the change in opinion from just a few months ago? It's gone from a rabid rejection of government to a cautious acceptance.

~Ulrika~

I would disagree, I would look for an increase in complaint load on LL, the complaints would increase because the loosing party involved would lodge complaints against any player ran resolutions. Let's face it, only LL's rules count, not some panel of players.



I will never believe that LL would ever give control to a group of players. This in itself would cause many more problems than it could ever solve.

Why do you insist on this? The majority of the people had said no, and no loud and clear, what can't you understand?

Personally, I think so long as I'm not breaking the TOS, and the gods on high deem that I've done no harm, anyone that wants me to change what I do on my own land can go (four letter word describing intercourse) themselves... And if my neighbour isn't breaking the TOS, and the Lindens deem they have done no harm, they can feel free to tell me to do the same.

Then again, in my neck of the woods this doesn't happen... maybe because when we moved into the same place we took the time to get to know each other and form a real community bond.... Even with the diversity we have, in goals, drives, even what constitutes 'fun' - I'd say Taber is one of the tightest groups of people living together in SL.

Point: if people got to know each other a lil better - maybe acted a lil more polite, and perhaps didn't use the digital medium as a cop out to act like assholes (as opposed to asshats), we'd see a lil less of these disputes needing arbitration pop up.

Alas, there is no ruling the company can make that will ever make SL 'asshole free' - and it's gonna be the assholes that force them to make decisions that will erode our freedoms within the world.

Siggy.

Well, according to the poll as it stands currently, 60% of players would be willing to consider a system different than the one we have today.

Note that it doesn't have to be one way or the other. There certainly can exist multiple forms of player conflict resolution implemented by the Lindens. If one of the new ones isn't right for you, I'm sure the old one will continue to exist. As users with an interest in this game's future, you should support LL's initiatives to improve (or achieve) profitability. It would be tragic if your collective selfishness and fear of change endangered the very game we all so cherish.

~Ulrika~

Perhaps it has something to do with this:


If Philip intends to grow SL to a million residents, then they will need a hundred times the current staff to police it. Maybe a hundred and fifty people.

Right now, LL is a visionary development company. That function will be dwarfed by the sheer size of this new resident management division. Do you think LL wants to be in the business of operating SL or to stay in the business of developing it?

And are you aware that your last question is quite condescending? I am perfectly able to understand these issues. Please consider the possibility that there are subtleties here that you have not completely grasped.

hmmmm, now opposing what you suggest makes the people against this selfish and are fearful? I think not, I for one love SL and would simply hate to see it degrade into some player ran kangaroo courts.

Arent you the same person who very recently said you wanted a government only for those who want it? Or have you now changed because you see a possibility to make it grow?
I suspected this from the beginning, Ulrika. No way would you be satisfied to keep it in Neualtenburg. Your ego wont allow this.

Try helping SL instead of trying to push what youi want, become a Mentor, an Instructor or Live Help, dont try to ruin what so many have spent month after month trying to build.

SL has very few problems with griefing and cheating compared to other places. Constantly crying wolf doesnt change this fact. Disputes so far have been fair and although there have been mistakes its very well run as it is now.
I can simply foresee the squables, fighting, griefing and disputes compound if this was ever ran by players.
Perhaps when I start paying players monthly it could be considered until that time LL is the one we all pay for this service. I trust them to do so, and will continue to do so.

Well my goodness, how do other online environments do it without player support, especially when they have upwards of 500,000 players? Lineage has 4 million plus. I think some folks are imaging a problem here that doesn't really exist. Are player conflicts that rampant? Is LL so backwards that they won't staff up to meet the size of the subscription base? It seems like common sense to me. Also there are no expansion packs, there are no quests to be added. What LL has to keep them busy is adding more sims, improving existing systems, stamping out bugs, and resolving a few conflicts. The "game" is already made. Is that to say some portions do not need some improvement? No. But they have a lot less to worry about than other environments that have to add new content constantly to keep hordes of people interested. Here WE add that additional content. I really think this is an imagined problem, possibly by some of those to whom *player dispute arbitration* represents fun, which is why it scares the heck out of me.

I also voted for "No changes". As mentioned in the other threads, I believe that LL should have the final word in conflict resolution and other topics related to the purposes of a government. As much as I love the SL Community, I am a member of said community, but I am also a paying customer. As a paying customer, I believe that another customer should not have any sort of control/power of my rights, my account, land, etc. (especially when it comes to conflict resolutions in which bannings or suspensions are in order) and that this power should go solely to Linden Labs. As much as people complain that Linden Labs has not been fair in certain issues, imagine all the conflict that could ensue if other players were the ones making these decisions (I can already imagine the drama that would follow).

If a government is what people want, then I vote for a monarchy and I would like King Philip Linden to be sole and absolute ruler.

I actually said that in the very statement that you just quoted:
~Ulrika~

I would like to ask those in favor of player doled out verdicts exactly what powers they think should be given to said players? Warnings? Suspensions? Bans? If you say no, then any such entity is a paper tiger and just a bunch of useless red tape and bureaucracy. If you say yes, what about the first player that feels they have been treated unfairly in a game that THEY pay to play who contacts a lawyer and claims unfair treatment? if you say you don't know what those powers should be yet, isn't all of this rhetoric putting the cart before the horse?

actually Ulrika, it isnt the same. Now your saying you want players to choose among multiple player ran dispute resolution forms. Its completely different from what you used to say. Which was keeping this concept to those who only wanted it.

Here's a thought, Kats (I love your forum picture by the way). What if LL always had the final say? What if a randomly selected group of SL mentors or a local government tried to settle the problem and if they could not, it would be passed up to an LL representative?

I feel that the optimal solution is not one or the other but a compromise between methods and scope. I feel that in our city, we could improve upon the quality of arbitration by allowing a true hearing judged by a jury of ones peers. Perhaps in your sim you would choose something different or even maintain the status quo. How do you feel about that?

~Ulrika~

In other words, more inconsistency than we already have under the Linden system. Is that not going backwards?

It is the same, if I say it is. They are my words.

I am telling you now that nothing should be forced on the people of this game if they don't want it. That's why there are free areas like Jessie, cities like Neualtenburg with a strict theme, and private lots for individuals to do what they want. That's the great thing about SL, we don't need to have the same rules for every square meter of land.

I support choice. Personally, I'd like the choice to an alternate method of binding arbitration within my group to improve on what I see as deficiencies in the current system. If you do not see a deficiency then I support your right to maintain the status quo. I hope I'm being clear.

~Ulrika~