An interesting bit of hypocrisy

I happened upon an unannounced meeting this evening which disturbed me a bit.

This meeting was arranged by a group calling themselves the "Metaverse Justice Watch" or the MJW. They claim to be an open group, but at their organizational meeting they specifically said they wanted to keep certain "types" out of the group. They also wanted to request the Lindens remove all "press" from this meeting. Though the voice vote on removing the press appeared to pass they ended up not actually asking the Lindens.

I find the parallels with another FICtional group to be enlightening. I have highlighted a few interesting bits from the meeting log, particularity Robin's comment about residents in good standing, which you will notice directly effects certain officers in this group.

This meeting was supposedly open to the public, and it was held in the Linden recruitment center, but it was not announced, and Anshe Chung was voted the speaker at their organizational meeting before the group moved to the conference area.

Following the chat log is the note card distributed to everyone in this "open" group.


The meeting notes:

Anshe Chung: Alrighty, are we somewhat complete for now?
Robin Linden: I'm sorry there aren't enough chairs -- there are more people than I anticipated.
Anshe Chung: It is very nice how fast you were able to arrange to meet us. This is something we appreciate.
Philip Linden: standing isn't as hard here in SL
Philip Linden: It was great of you to organize such a gettogether.
Anshe Chung: I would like to start with introducing our group, how we view SL, what we would like to help to achieve for SL
Anshe Chung: We make some basic assumption
Anshe Chung: Such as, like you, we don't see SL just as a game or replaceable service but as one standard platform and world
Anshe Chung: We also take you by your word when you say "Your world, your imagination"
Anshe Chung: And we share your analogy of calling Second Life one "country". Which we see us as residents of
Anshe Chung: Most of us here have invested considerable time, emotional capital, social capital and financial capital in this country
Anshe Chung: This is what we feel makes us stakeholders. More like you and in contrast to e.g. merely tourists, users, consumers, players etc
Anshe Chung: In an extreme case, having to leave SL could mean for somebody who is so deeply engage and dependent on various levels:
Anshe Chung: 1) leaving his/her social environment
Anshe Chung: 2) giving up his/her friends
Anshe Chung: 3) loosing his/her job or main source of income
Anshe Chung: 4) loosing investment
PetGirl Bergman: .
Anshe Chung: We feel that with this new medium, in contrast to normal game worlds, we reach one level where being removed from SL might get close to some African immigrant in the USA who spent there 10 years building a career suddenly sent back to Africa
Anshe Chung: So all this makes us very interested in helping you to make SL the best and most successful place possible
Anshe Chung: We all love you for creating this place and providing these opportunities.
Anshe Chung: Now moving from a game to a country in our opinion make it necessary to take a closer look at a few things that in a game you would just not take as seriously
Anshe Chung: A game is supposed to be something for fun that you can walk away from when it stops to be fun
Anshe Chung: A country is a place to live, in SL maybe not physically but still very much socially and economically.
Anshe Chung: Things such as justice, security and basic human rights suddenly begin to matter to us
Anshe Chung: Now, you are honestly the best possible leader for this country that we could imagine to have, and there is many good people who support you.
Anshe Chung smiles at Robin
Anshe Chung: And of course you are yourself still the biggest stakeholder in SL.
Anshe Chung: But this place is growing and we know how busy one can get. In Russia Gorbatchew was one great leader, but to the normal people the system, the rules, the bureacrazy mattered even more
Philip Linden: indeed
Anshe Chung: This is why we are here to enter in a dialogue with you: to help you with your goal to make Second Life the best online world to live socially, invest, work - not only in technical terms but also in terms of justice, security etc
Anshe Chung: We identified 5 major areas of concern sofar:
Anshe Chung: Privacy
Anshe Chung: The question of impartiality of Linden employees
Anshe Chung: Transparency of law enforcement
Anshe Chung: Protection of resident investment
Anshe Chung: And independence of media and political groups
Anshe Chung: These are all fields we would like work with you
Philip Linden: how would you like us to work together?
Philip Linden: I agree these are great high level topics.
Anshe Chung: One way could be to have regular meetings and discuss concrete topics or issues
Anshe Chung: We could also make suggestions, provide observation of things that we feel could/should be optimized
Anshe Chung: There has been a number of things that we observed in the past that made us think and lead to us see some potential
Anshe Chung: Potential for making SL even better
Anshe Chung: For example the question of what Lindens should do or should not do with their Linden accounts or alts may be interesting
Anshe Chung: Now that we moved away from one small beta world to something much bigger
Anshe Chung: For example should somebody use his/her Linden avatar to pose in an ad campaign for resident business?
Anshe Chung: Should Lindens join/endorse resident groups? Especially if those are businesses or political groups?
Philip Linden: If I may suggest...
Philip Linden: What might be a great way to work together,
Philip Linden: would be to make these meetings the discussion points
Philip Linden: for a specific presentation,
Philip Linden: which is itself a well-formed document that has already been passed
Philip Linden: around within the community,
Philip Linden: and has therefore been thought through and has received some support
Philip Linden: We could then use these meetings as a place to debate whether to adopt the presented topic or feature or policy.
Philip Linden: What can help us,
Philip Linden: is the methodical examination of a topic,
Philip Linden: a complete design for policy or functionality,
Philip Linden: and a first pass at gathering community support,
Philip Linden: which culminates in this sort of meeting.
Philip Linden: I suppose this would be like the process of adopting law in most governments...
Philip Linden: a process of preparation and debate followed by an open decision.
Philip Linden: We could go that way... something to think about.
Philip Linden: back to you anshe.
Anshe Chung: Yes, I believe that is pretty much what we had in mind as well
Anshe Chung: Whereas need to note that we are very much based on people who consider themselves stakeholder in SL
Anshe Chung: So we are less representative of the "casual player" which of course we also meet in this world
Anshe Chung: As I suggested we have some major areas of concern and if you like we could schedule meetings topic by topic and we could detail our observations/ideas/suggestions in presentations such as you suggested
Mulch Ennui: may i have the floor?
Eloise Pasteur: Can I ask, who will start the balls rolling for the discussion papers and just how we're going to disseminate them?
Philip Linden: I think that would make sense.
Philip Linden: Because you as the community would be choosing the issues,
Philip Linden: and the specific proposals,
Philip Linden: and we would meet in this sort of public forum to give our feedback,
Philip Linden: and to debate a final decision where appropriate.
Prokofy Neva: I think what we're talking about are very basic ground rules though, not a proposal on this or that feature.
Philip Linden: I think the thing that would be really helpful and revolutionary,
Philip Linden: is for you to decide the topics, not us.
Mulch Ennui: what about an official polling sim to be used as a venue with chambers and such, provided by LL
Margaret Mfume: Are there currently guidelines for Linden employees and their alternates?
Mulch Ennui: he forum and web tools are ineffective and hardly far reaching
Shasha Suavage: yes kind of like a sl capital
Mulch Ennui: es, then we can publisize topics in world with placards that have landmarks to vote, and a chamber for discussing
Philip Linden: That could be a good direction.
Philip Linden: Again, though, I would ask this group for a specific design.
Philip Linden: We could then help with the construction and land and the like.
Philip Linden: I think that an opportunity is for you to participate more deeply in design
Philip Linden: this means a fully thought out proposal,
Philip Linden: which we can all read and discuss a bit,
Anshe Chung nods
Philip Linden: prior to meetings like that.
Philip Linden: like this.
Anshe Chung: Fine. So after this meeting we as a group would start to prepare one topic and work on a design for you
Anshe Chung: But we might need somebody to talk in between and to ask questions
Robin Linden: It sounds like you would like to have a dialog about Linden lab policy, as well as feature design?
Anshe Chung: Such as we don't know for example what existing guidelines for employees you might have in place already
Anshe Chung: Yes. I think focus would be more on policy even
Eloise Pasteur: Do you have a structure to your internal discussion papers for policy and features that we could use?
Philip Linden: We have no specific structure.
Philip Linden: We use what form is appropriate for the topic.
Tony Beckett: is there an employee handbook that can be made public??
Eloise Pasteur: OK, thanks.
Prokofy Neva: Is there an employee code of conduct of ethics that has been drafted and can be discussed?
Philip Linden: Yes there is both a handbook and specific rules around conduct within SL
Mulch Ennui: ethics and conflict of interest is a place we would like to start
Philip Linden: Robin and I can work to excert the pieces that are OK to distribute,
Philip Linden: if not the whole thing.
Philip Linden: As you might imagine our overall employee handbook has lots and lots of stuff
Philip Linden: dental plans, etc
Anshe Chung: Yes, that would be very helpful
Philip Linden: but we can extract what matters and use that as a starting point if you like.
Tony Beckett: ty
Prokofy Neva: We're concerned about conduct in world while in uniform and out, not so much mental and dental.
Philip Linden: I think that would be OK, but I will talk with Robin.
Alliez Mysterio: tyvm
Prokofy Neva: Sounds good.
Anshe Chung: We may also be able assign some of us to sign an NDA with you if that would be concern for some parts.
Philip Linden: No,
Philip Linden: I am not a big fan of NDAs.
Philip Linden: I think that things this group may do should be uniformly public.
Philip Linden: Therefore we will look at what is OK for all of SL to read.
Robin Linden: Plus, that would put this group at an unfair advantage relative to the rest of the community, which it sounds like we're trying to avoid.
Philip Linden: Exactly.
Anshe Chung: Yes, this makes sense
Prokofy Neva: Yes the point is to get it public for all not just a select few, that's how it will have relevance.
Britsurfer Bauer: freedomof information is the key for all parties
Philip Linden: Having a group like this be the ones to disseminate and explain this kind of policy
Philip Linden: to the SL community would be a great thing.
Philip Linden: If I may also add:
Philip Linden: If we make something like this effective,
Philip Linden: there will doubtless be the issue of how one becomes a member
Philip Linden: as a resident,
Philip Linden: of the folks who site around this tabke.
Anshe Chung: Yes
Mulch Ennui: open enrollment
Hiro Queso: Its open membership
Philip Linden: let me suggest the following:
jewlz Cosmo gave you Snapshot.
Philip Linden: you guys come up with a solution to that,
Mulch Ennui: we have discussed structuring our group
Katt Kongo: ao on
Mulch Ennui: preliminary
Philip Linden: and we will require that we will participate
Margaret Mfume: t presentation of our ideas
Philip Linden: only to the extent that your choices are fair and open
Philip Linden: I would suggest...
Britsurfer Bauer: we welcome your involement
Philip Linden: that perhaps you require a commitment in time and energy,
Philip Linden: as the way to filter who is to come here,
Philip Linden: as that may allow this to both open and focused and effective
Shaun Altman: agree
Philip Linden: just a thought.
Anshe Chung: Time, energy and stake
Philip Linden: my personal feeling is that stake, however,
Anshe Chung: Whereas we need to work on a practical method to count those
Philip Linden: cannot relate specifically to money or to land.
Anshe Chung: No, it is more complex
Mulch Ennui: time energy balances stake
Philip Linden: that decision has been a poor one for many other countries.
Philip Linden: But let us leave that to you guys as a group to decide.
Prokofy Neva: But we do need to make sure that money and land still count *as much* as content that is put in inventory.
Robin Linden: I agree with that. Any resident of SL should be able to participate or not, as they choose -- it should be a right of residency in good standing.
Eloise Pasteur: I suspect we need to discuss that, and you'll probably find different representatives for different areas
Anshe Chung: Yes, we will go to work on this as one group and then see how broad one base we can represent in front of you
Philip Linden: So it seems
finn Jensen: I do not see we ask for favouritism, but clear guidlines and fairness; that is something that nobody should have anything against
Philip Linden: that the next step is to choose a topic for the next meeting,
Philip Linden: propose a membership structure,
Philip Linden: and for use to get you some data on the current employee policies (if that is to be the next topic)
Margaret Mfume: that was the initial focus decided on
Anshe Chung: That is great. So I think we should manage to have this ready for a meeting in aproximately 10 days to 2 weeks from now
Anshe Chung: Do others here agree with me?
Philip Linden: We will be ready when you are.
Anshe Chung: Great
Mulch Ennui: yes anshe
Margaret Mfume: agreed
Sansarya Caligari: yes
Hiro Queso: yup, am sure we can get something organised by then :
Hiro Queso: )
Eloise Pasteur: Yes, agreed
Britsurfer Bauer: agreed
Alliez Mysterio: agreed
Shasha Suavage: agreed
Tony Beckett: her here
Robin Linden: Who shall I give the policy docs to ?
Shasha Suavage: Anshe please
Robin Linden: KK
Mulch Ennui: they are free to iseminate correct?
Shaun Altman: I'd love a copy if it's in notecard or email
Mulch Ennui: diseminate*
Margaret Mfume: Could we have the employees guidelines sent to Anshe for our initial review?
Philip Linden: What we give you will be free to distribute.
Mulch Ennui: kk
Robin Linden: We will only give you things that can be shared with anyone
Hiro Queso: if Anshe is ok with that
Hiro Queso: ?
Shasha Suavage: thank you Philip
Philip Linden: And let us all live by that rule.
Britsurfer Bauer: that great phillip and robin
Anshe Chung: I am fine with it. You could also just drop on each officer in our group
Anshe Chung: However you prefer do it
Shasha Suavage: and ty also Robin
Alliez Mysterio: We appreciate your time
Philip Linden: This was a great first meeting. Perhaps historic!
Eloise Pasteur: Thank you Phillip and Robin
Hiro Queso: thnx Philip and Robin, really appreciate it, and hope this is the start of some cool things
Hiro Queso:
Mulch Ennui: yes thank you for being available to us residents
Michael Foo: I would suggest any materials given here be made available either in the library section of our inventory or on the SL website
Sansarya Caligari: TY Philip and Robin
Mulch Ennui: it puts u at a distinct advantage over other platforms
Robin Linden: You're all very welcome!
Prokofy Neva: Perhaps you will one day sign a Magna Charta lol?
Philip Linden: thank you all.
Hiro Queso: lol
Britsurfer Bauer: lol
Eloise Pasteur: lol
Tony Beckett: lol
Anshe Chung: Yes, SL is so exciting
Shaun Altman: Thank you from me too. I have high hopes that great things will come from this beginning!
Philip Linden: It would be so inspiring to have a document like that!
Philip Linden: Well I guess to be official...
Eloise Pasteur: You mean you will, the baron's signatures weren't the important ones...
Philip Linden: call to adjourn till next time?
Eloise Pasteur:
Eloise Pasteur: seconded
Prokofy Neva: Thakns for coming Philip, Robin and Pathfinder
Hiro Queso: sounds good to me :
Hiro Queso: )
Robin Linden: Thanks for pulling this together!
Prokofy Neva: thanks everybody else for making the time
Mulch Ennui: until next time
Britsurfer Bauer: aye
Philip Linden: Thanks to you all. Very inspiring.
Philip Linden: Bright spot in a somewhat dark week.
Philip Linden: Be well!
Anshe Chung: Thanks for listen to us. And really looking forward to the next step
Sansarya Caligari:
Shasha Suavage: Be well
PetGirl Bergman: tack and for me god night))
Robin Linden: Cya!
Hiro Queso: tc Robin :
Hiro Queso: )
Mulch Ennui: bye
Eloise Pasteur: bye
Sansarya Caligari: Congratulations everyone !


the notecard:

INTRODUCTION

o We see Second Life as a standard platform and world, not a game or a replaceable service.
o We take you by your word when you promise "Your world, your imagination".
o We share your analogy of calling Second Life a "country".
o We are the residents of this country.
o We have invested time, emotional capital, social capital and financial capital in this country.
o This makes us stakeholders. We are not merely tourists, users, consumers, players or customers. We live our second lifes here, and for some of us many aspects of our first lifes are dependent on our second lifes now.
o In an extreme case, having to leave Second Life can mean to somebody 1) leaving her social environment 2) giving up her friends 3) loosing her job / main source of income 4) loosing her investment. It may be comparable to deporting an immigrant from Africa back to his home country after he spent 10 years in the USA building a successful career, social circle, home.

All this makes us very interested in helping you to make Second Life the best and most successful place possible. We also love you for creating this place and providing all these opportunities.

Moving from a game to a country in our opinion make it necessary to take a closer look at a few things that in a game you would just not take as seriously. A game is supposed to be something for fun that you can walk away from when it stops to be fun. A country is a place to live, in SL maybe not physically but still very much socially and economically. Things such as justice, safety and basic human rights suddenly begin to matter to us.

Now you are, honestly, the best possible leader for this country that we could imagine to have. And you are still the biggest stakeholder in Second Life as well. But this place is growing and we know how busy you are with many things. We all know how Gorbatchew was a great leader in Russia, but despite all his power he just couldn't be everywhere and the normal life felt by the normal citizens was much more defined by the system, the rules and the bureaucracy.

This is why we are here to enter in a dialogue with you: to help you with your goal to make Second Life the best online world to live socially, invest and work - not only in technical terms but also in terms of justice, safety and other political terms.


AREAS OF CONCERN

o Privacy
o Impartiality of Linden staff
o Transparent law enforcement
o Protection of resident investment
o Independence of media and political groups


DETAILS AND SUGGESTIONS

PRIVACY
o Regulations for access to chat logs
o Who has access?
o Under what circumstances?
o Notification of residents about who viewed their chat logs and for what reason

o Invisible Lindens
o Who can use invisible mode?
o Under what circumstances?
o Notification of residents about which Linden used invisible mode in which location and for what purpose

o Linden alts
o Query to Phil: what rules bind the behaviour of Linden alts in their "off-duty" time?


IMPARTIALITY OF LINDEN STAFF
o A linden wearing the designated Linden last name is considered to be an official of the company and is not entitled to benefits of residency
o Regulations for the use of Linden avatars
o No using of Linden avatars in resident ad campaigns
o No Linden avatars in groups related to resident business, media or political organizations
o No using of Linden accounts to help businesses in ways not available to their competitors

o Linden alts
o No Linden alts in groups related to resident business, media or political organizations

o Linden related people
o Regulations for relatives, major investors and otherwise Linden dependent/related people
o Transparency: revelation of the relationship of certain individuals to Linden Lab and their staff

TRANSPARENT LAW ENFORCEMENT

o Right to a jury of one's peers, notification of the charges against one, and who has brought suit, right to counsel, right to find facts and present one's defense, public notification of punishments in a long-term archive for precedent-setting value

PROTECTION OF RESIDENT INVESTMENT

o Recognition of investors and service providers as integral part of the Second Life economy, as much as Linden Lab has already recognized content providers and their rights.
o Responsible management of L$ sources and sinks by Linden Lab to ensure long term stability of currency value
o Management of land as non-consumable investment in Second Life. This means that old regions receive regular upgrades and that land is not subject to technical aging. Land should have somewhat stable value not just in short term but in terms of 5 years or 10 years. The considerable monthly maintenance fees should make that possible.
o Clear guidelines and communication concerning possible situations of Linden Lab going into competition to resident businesses.
o Process for fair compensation of residents damaged by actions/changes originating from Linden Lab. Adjudication process for claims.

INDEPENDENCE OF MEDIA AND POLITICAL GROUPS

o No involvement of Lindens, neither as Linden nor as alt, with any resident media or political groups
o No involvement of relatives or close friends of Linden Lab employees either
o No financial, technical or marketing support from Linden Lab for any resident media or political group that is not made available on equal basis to other media or political groups
o Linden Lab is of course allowed to run their own media when it is easily recognizable as non-resident media

Just... wow...

That's a lot of text, thanks for highlighting the interesting stuff. What part is hypocrisy, though? I'm not sure what the contradiction is that I'm supposed to be looking for.

A collection of powerful and intelligent people, a couple of duck-squeezing, cause-seeking activists, a couple of attention-seeking prima donnae, and a whole lot of bad karma waiting to happen.

If this group gains even a scintilla of power, I quit. I will not tolerate becloaked lobbyists meeting in secret to persuade the Lindens, and if they're going to be afforded extradordinary amounts of access to the leadership of SL then I'm seriously going to contemplate leaving. For all the complaints about the fictitious FIC, this organization appears to be infinitely worse and considerably more real.

I'm beginning not to care, though. SL will become just as fucked up as TSO, and we can all just move on to the next in a long line of Metaverse-like programs.

I confess, while some of the specific points in that notecard aren't disagreeable, I do dislike the "we = more money, so we're more better!" bit.

Newsflash: Without the mass of "players, tourists, etc" coming in, Anshe Chung and such mean jack and squat.

Eh, the only way it's going to bother me is if any single person, who is peaceable and well-behaved, is forbidden entry. Otherwise, meh, if you care about SL enough to meet with others and talk about it, more power to you. Citizenship is a good thing.

I am not one to scare easy, but the implications presented, if true, completely freak me out.



While I agree that residents should have the ability to petition the Lindens in this manner, debating core policies and other practices that affect all of us should never be subject to the opinions of a small group of people, especially in a meeting not generally announced.

This line of reasoning follows for opinions presented on these forums. Crucial decisions should always be presented in a form made clear to as many residents as possible before they happen. If we are to have an open dialog, that initial dialog needs to be presented to everyone.



I would like word from the participating Lindens on this one before I form a more concrete opinion.

Citizenship nothing. Look at those people who attended the meeting. Look at what they do in life. Read comments like "This is what we feel makes us stakeholders. More like you and in contrast to e.g. merely tourists, users, consumers, players etc". This isn't about protecting anyone. It's about securing their places in SL. It's about ensuring that they can continue to profit from the artificial scarcity of land. This isn't a group devoted to justice. This is a group of high-profile profiteers who are afraid that their way of life is endangered.

The GOM debacle has scared them. They need to get some surety that the Lindens aren't going to just wipe their businesses out tomorrow.

what he said.

haha double newsflash:

Nobody there means jack or squat anyways.. .least not to me.

So a group of folks think they have a larger 'stake' in SL.. B.F.D. Good for them..

They can have as many meetings and such as they want - whatever makes them happy in their SL..

But none of it will mean jack to me... Won't change why I'm here, or what do.. and I think the day that somone with a different last name than 'Linden' tells me what I can do/say/or anything else in SL is the same day they should slate a 'second asshole' slider as a feature.

Seen it all before - storm in a teacup, just a bunch of people playin el politico.. and if it floats their boat - more power to em.

(of course one can't overlook the irony of one of the members who has a very vocal hate on for both 'select groups' and the Neuatleburgerwhatsamigigi Project - hehe hypocrisy at its finest!).

Ditto for me. Ardith pretty much stated how I feel as well after reading this.

This is just incredible.

I see some the biggest howlers about the supposed FIC were at that meeting...

How very interesting, and Enabran, I *think* that that is what was meant by "hypocrisy". Editorial please correct me if I am wrong.

Oh, the intentions are obscene, I can understand that. The best part was Anshe suggesting that the proceedings be protected by a non-disclosure agreement. That was definitely worth a smile. But I'm not worried about this silliness influencing Linden Lab. They're professionals, they're not going to be screwing anybody in favor of a few landowners with delusions of grandeur.

I agree completely. While I didn't like one of Anshe's comments, who cares? It won't effect how I play SL, and if I ever get tired enough of it being "all about money" I can move on to other things. I think Second Life is great for it's social and creative values. So far, those are still around. To me it's just folks trying to feel important, or trying to take an active role in shaping SL. But as we've seen in the past, one newb can walk into the world and change things noticably in a short period of time.

Ahh, yes, that makes sense. A little dense tonight.

Being forbidden doesn't really play into it, it's the not being told it's happening.

If I form a group tomorrow that is dedicated to the interests of myself and like-minded individuals, can I have unannounced meeting with the highest level Lindens as well?

Will my group get to critique LL internal policies?

What is the real purpose of this group?

How a many times have we heard "..because a select group of SLers (FIC) has the Linden's ears.."?

The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.

Actually, I am kind of glad this happened. This is exactly the type of thing needed to illustrate what the real problem is.

I'm curious as to why the following exchange of views wasn't highlighted from the transcript above:

Philip Linden: I think that things this group may do should be uniformly public.
Philip Linden: Therefore we will look at what is OK for all of SL to read.
Robin Linden: Plus, that would put this group at an unfair advantage relative to the rest of the community, which it sounds like we're trying to avoid.
Philip Linden: Exactly.
Anshe Chung: Yes, this makes sense
Prokofy Neva: Yes the point is to get it public for all not just a select few, that's how it will have relevance.
Britsurfer Bauer: freedomof information is the key for all parties
Philip Linden: Having a group like this be the ones to disseminate and explain this kind of policy
Philip Linden: to the SL community would be a great thing.
Philip Linden: If I may also add:
Philip Linden: If we make something like this effective,
Philip Linden: there will doubtless be the issue of how one becomes a member
Philip Linden: as a resident,
Philip Linden: of the folks who site around this tabke....
Mulch Ennui: open enrollment
Hiro Queso: Its open membership
Philip Linden: let me suggest the following:
Philip Linden: you guys come up with a solution to that....
Philip Linden: and we will require that we will participate
Margaret Mfume: t presentation of our ideas
Philip Linden: only to the extent that your choices are fair and open
Philip Linden: I would suggest....
Philip Linden: that perhaps you require a commitment in time and energy,
Philip Linden: as the way to filter who is to come here,
Philip Linden: as that may allow this to both open and focused and effective
Shaun Altman: agree
Philip Linden: just a thought.
Anshe Chung: Time, energy and stake
Philip Linden: my personal feeling is that stake, however,
Anshe Chung: Whereas we need to work on a practical method to count those
Philip Linden: cannot relate specifically to money or to land.

Summarizing, Philip Linden states that the process must be open and disciplined, and any sort of filtering process cannot relate to wealth, ownership, or personal popularity. Others in the group - though perhaps not all - agree with him.

Further, though Robin Linden's comment - "Any resident of SL should be able to participate or not, as they choose -- it should be a right of residency in good standing." - could be alarming in one context, we don't know what context she was speaking from. She might - might - have defined "residency in good standing" as not currently banned and having a good history of payment to the company.

Anshe Chung's comments are ingratiating to the Lindens, self-serving, and fairly silly - but then what do you expect? I'm more concerned that that group chose her as spokesperson; that demonstrates a lack of common wisdom necessary to push through the agendas the group was discussing. But as far as the Lindens go, I see corporate diplomacy toward customers, coupled with some fairly firm pronouncements about a completely level "political" and/or "legal" system. I've been critical of Philip Linden on some issues in the past, but here I think he handled the situation very well. I hope he continues to define some firm and basic egalitarian standards.

So I won't panic yet.

I am npt sure what to think of this. If it was an open meeting, why are people just finding out about this now is my first concern. Then I read past your select highlighted areas and found stuff you left out like:

Philip Linden: No,
Philip Linden: I am not a big fan of NDAs.
Philip Linden: I think that things this group may do should be uniformly public.
Philip Linden: Therefore we will look at what is OK for all of SL to read.
Robin Linden: Plus, that would put this group at an unfair advantage relative to the rest of the community, which it sounds like we're trying to avoid.
Philip Linden: Exactly.
Anshe Chung: Yes, this makes sense
Prokofy Neva: Yes the point is to get it public for all not just a select few, that's how it will have relevance.

I am just curious how these select people were chosen to attend the meeting.

once again, I find myself agreeing with a cactus. This is unbelievable.

Now i believe in roswell, too.

Who elected these people? I do not want them being delegates for me. Why did this happen? I am very confused.

Possibly because the thread is about highlighting the hypocrisy of a couple of the individuals present. Would have to have Editorial speak to that to be sure though.

I guarantee you if this had been another group, that didn't include the two most prolific SLers present that spoke at this meeting, we would hear about how pernicious it was, regardless of the content of the meeting.

The strangest thing about to me was that they actually got Philip and Robin to attend. Anshe must carry considerable weight with SL. Wonder if she bought LL?

Oh, didn't you get the memo Lo? They have invested more money in SL, therefore they are "stakeholders", not just mere mortals like the rest of us serfs.

It only stands to reason they should be able to get their fingers into LL's internal policies regarding employee conduct! *groan*

(edited)

I was on the phone earlier today with a well know person who asked me if I was invited to this meeting tonight. I asked what meeting, and said no I wasn't invited. I didn't give it a second thought.

Not only am I a stakerholder in Second Life, I consider myself a major SL stakeholder and have been since the day I joined!

As a major stakeholder in Second Life, I am committed to openness and the free flow of information - thus I request the following:

1) The name of this group
2) The officers names
3) The founding officer's name
4) Members Names