An interesting bit of hypocrisy

I don't think I ever stated that there was a cabal. I'm merely stating that the statements made that the group was open, that the meeting was open are silly in light of the following:

1) Where was the announcements Second Life wide that there was going to _be_ a meeting? If you can show me a forum announcement or a worldwide Linden announcement transcript, I will desist from stating this. The nebulous claim of being announced in a Town Hall meeting, based upon the fact that it didn't make it into Town Hall transcripts that I, having missed the meeting, could read doesn't hold much water.

2) If it was so open, how were a select group "invited" to join?

3) Why is it now that an officer recall is being held _after_ news of the group hits the forums?

These are all the things that make this look more sinister than what it really is (or I'm assuming what it really is, how do I know, as I am merely a tourist and "game player".

I just couldn't help but enter the fray before it got locked lol!

From reading through most of the posts here, what amazes me is how all sides are wanting the same thing in essence, for the residents to have a bigger hand in how LL sets policies and such. From reading it, it does look like a lot of poor choiced words were used during the initial meeting , some people are just bad at finding the right words during a conversation or get ideas and ideals muddled up in their heads and spout out the worng words for a particular meaning. I think as residents of SL we need to stop yelling at each other for forming opinions, we need to show potential future residents that this is a different world to exist in. Imagine a newbie on a trial account reading how we flame each other for speaking their minds, now imagine the potential revenue lost as they cancel their account. One lost account isn't much, but imagine them dropping by the hundreads, thousands, now count your P&L margins after that potential outcome. SL is supposed to be a different world, an escape from the things in RL many of us are forced to deal with such as illnesses, being wage slaves or other reasons. This cannot be much of an escape if it mimics the real world bit for bit. If we keep up at this pace, LL may just decide to pull the plug and say "sorry, it just isn't worth the hassle anymore, we are damned if we do and damned if we don't" (they do have that right it is in the TOS as it is their service, I have also seen many companies in RL do this for the same reasons, not worth the hassle).
Also, here is a solution to dealing with those in control, as with RL, we know voting, protesting and complaints don't work. Here is something that works, vote with your wallet. Stop buying their products or services, one or two is nothing but if it were done in the thousands, it would work. Anche (sp?) is only that big because WE buy the products, I don't see LL buying up her land, it is all in our hands, so in essence we created the problem by allowing the factor to be put in place. And to be honest, it is human nature to lean a bit towards those that support you the most in one way shape or form for example money. Anche (again, sp?) spends a whole lotta real money on her virtual gamble, so it is human nature that LL is gonna give her more weight even if it is not a concience thing that is being done, any type of support helps fill in one of our basic needs, it is like feeding a stray dog, it will always come back because a basic need is met. LL has a basic need of money to stay open, Anche helps to feed it and the cycle grows. But imagine, if we stopped buying Anche's land or renting? Imagine what would happen to her empire per say. It would crash like a box-o-bricks and she might even be left high and dry with no income to support it and it would be a downward spiral. Anche may be a land baron trying to protect her intersts, but I think any one of us would do the same if we had that much at stake. I don't own a whole lotta land, but I have been a resident for quite a long time and I intend on staying regardless of what happens. I love it here, I like all of you who I have met and chatted with. I love being able to create and doing things like fly an airplane or fall and not die. This forum is also a blast too! It has made a boring day go so much faster at times. So let us not allow ourselves to kill SL by our bickering and infighting, we want this world to be ours, then we need to act like it and work as a community to solve problems, not by using underhanded tactics like slander and liable (sp? and meaning?) , we also need to stop the flaming because someone has a different opinion, it is a basic right regardless of what law exists.(yes, you can flame me all you want to , I have come to expect it at times, but I do make one request, at least flame me for something real like bad spelling or grammar).

Sorry if this was long winded and may have not gone anywhere It was a Jerry McQuire moment (again sp?)

It is not surprising that Prokofy asked the person to stay, given that Prokofy is himself part of the press.

Or the one-trick porny group??

Im really confused about why you are so insistent that everyone wait for your interpretation of what happened before they comment.

Are you saying/implying that the transcript that we can all read for ourselves is in error, or has been tampered with or is in some other way faulty?

Because unless that is the case, I don't know what else there is to "explain" about what happened at the meeting.

Now, I would like some commentary from the participants about the events leading up to this meeting. Will you share that with us?

Thanks,

One basic problem with communication and representation is nicely illustrated here:

Katt's response:

And Mulch's reply:

If I had to guess, I'd say they weren't even at the same meeting.

For lack of time right now, I gave up reading carefully on page 11, but here are my thoughts:

- in fact – let’s face it; I’m just going to skip the rest for now; I see it is at 24 pages. I can always come back later.

-------

I never saw it as a representative assembly of any kind, but as a sort of lobbying group or special interest group for promoting fairness in SL.

The meetings have come so fast and furious that I wasn’t even aware of them till they were over. I wasn’t at the Town Hall, and I didn’t know about the Philip meeting (though I knew it had been requested) because I didn’t get on the game until after it had happened.

When I read the transcript, I also understood the part about the non-disclosure agreement to be that Anshe was asking if the members of the group needed to sign one, if we got to see policies, and Philip said no, it was ok, everyone would see only what anyone could see.

The “stakeholders” thing isn’t real important to me, and I take it to mean practically anyone who has a stake in the game, rather than just getting on it every Friday night to dance and chat with friends. I have virtually no money and little land, but I guess I would consider myself a stakeholder based on having an interest in what happens, and most importantly, an interest that SL be fair to all.

Again, this has NOTHING to do – in my view – with being any sort of government or body of elected representatives. If it had, I wouldn’t have joined it. It is the agenda with which I agree.

I don’t know who wanted there to be no content creators included. I think it’s probably in error to focus on that one opinion. I’ll point out that I am nothing but and only a content creator.

As for potential limitations of members, seems to me the group should be for those who agree with its purpose. That only makes sense.

I don’t think anybody thought they are better than anyone else. What *I* think is that it’s high time some of the matters that I signed on for – which were listed to Philip in the meeting I missed, I think - received attention. And what better way to receive attention than to form an interest group around them?

Again – the group is not a government and was never intended to be a government. It represents interests people have in common. My interest is, as always, justice, fairness, and equal opportunity for all.

Recall for founder? Another reason this sort of thing shouldn’t be possible. It just means anybody who doesn’t like a group’s existance can join (or a number of anybodys) and throw the whole thing into chaos.

To my knowledge, there was no intent on anybody’s part for the group never to be “found out.”

This is a diverse group, with the only common interest being justice, as defined by the points currently on the agenda. I have great expectations that this group will finally be able to achieve something in the way of making SL fair to all. I hope anyone with the same desire will join.

I just woke up not long ago to find all this, and I have a lot to do today, so I won’t be able to post much after this one, in case anyone has any comments, or desires, as many often do, to take on me as a person or my character and motivations.

coco

I've always been a huge fan of www.theonion.com -- I don't think even The Onion could have exceeded the irony level of this story. Maybe they would have included more f-words?


I was going to use the word "arrogance", but I think it requires a degree of benign arrogance to lead in the first place. Where I'm struggling here is the notion that any of the people in the transcript aside from Lindens have ANY credibility as leaders, whether it be Anshe's land empire or Prok's incessant rantings. I always thought leaders became leaders because of their appeal to the average citizen -- sorry, I mean "tourist". I see familiar names there, of people I really do like, but I keep wondering who elected them?


Javier has it. The image has stuck. Time to form another elite group but this time don't tell anyone, so it can stay elite.

Two people seeing exactly the same thing will have different recollections of what happened. I assure you we were both there.

To address a couple of points --

I referenced the FIC because of the myth of a favored group of residents who are somehow pulling strings behind the scenes to their own advantage. In the context I brought it up, I was suggesting that rather than worrying that the first mythical group is being replaced by a second, let's focus on how to create better dialog among residents, and between residents and Linden Lab.

Philip and I are always happy to meet with groups of residents, to the extent that time allows. Surprisingly, very few ask.

I don't see a meeting of this type replacing the Town Halls because it isn't very effective at reaching a large number of people.

The challenge in my view is to find a way to allow everyone in SL to participate in discussions that might directly affect them. It's not the meeting that's important, it's the process for identifying the issues and reaching some concensus on a solution that we should be focused on.

Rather vague but I like it. I assume Philip is of the same mind ?

I'm familiar with Rashomon.

Lynn - I don't write for the SL Herald. I post on the SL Herald.

I have no personal interest in GOM. Or in people who own lots of land. I do have a personal interest that SL be fair to all, and I agree with what was put on the agenda.

coco

I must say thanks to Robin for dropping in on this thread. I also must give kudos as it could be a potential flame fest on her now for the very fact of dropping in. It is things like this that do show us that the Lindens do listen to us, not just to find reasons to ban us. In a nutshell , every post on this thread has said the same thing at it's core, what we all want, is for the Lindens to listen to us all equally when it comes time to make policies that affect all of us and not choose representatives based on wealth or other status. The interesting thing is, most of us do not see that we want the same thing in our posts, just are expressing it in different words.

If I've learned anything from this thread, it's that the excuse "it was all happening so fast" is possibly one of the lamest ever. It's like declaring "my crinolines were all in a whirl and I was nearly overcome by the vapors."

Two things, in response. Meetings? So fast and furious? So there's been more than two? Don't you as a group member feel slighted that you were not waited for? I mean, aren't you an officer?

And, um, what if I did only use it on Saturday nights to dance and chat with friends? I'm lesser than others with defined "stakes" in the game? It's THESE comments Coco that make your "non representative government group" look different than what you guys are all stating it is.

I didn't post that as an excuse, Pol.

In fact, I don't need to MAKE any excuses. Excuses for what, anyway?

The purposes of this group are ones with which I agree, and I will work to see them come to pass. If the group ever gets purposes I don't agree with, I will quit it.

This is a group. If there are people who don't like it, they aren't forced to join. If there are those who do agree with the agenda thus far - as I do - then join.

Read the points listed (somewhere in this thread, I think). If you agree those would be good things, then join.

coco

Prokofy: "I'm setting up an interest group to fight for justice to curb the injustices against those in power, namely the FIC. See it however you like. The facts remain, you cannot go on ruling our world."

The fact that the first time it comes out into the open that groups are allowed to meet with yourself and Philip (I honestly believe that most of us had no idea) coincides with the formation of this "anti-FIC" group and with what I quoted above from the organizer of said group (he said that just today), makes the whole thing sort of eerie and surreal. He sees this group he formed, and the meetings with you and Philip as tools in some sort of power struggle with the mythical "FIC".

I trust that you and Philip won't be played or swayed by this jingoism, but can you see how this may look to some?

I'm not responsible for what Anshe - or any member - says. I read the points; I agree with the points. I VERY MUCH want those points to take place.

That is why the group exists. There is, of course, no rule requiring that each member agree with every statement every other member makes.

Yes, I'm an officer of the group. And I wish I had known about the meetings. (Which I would have if I got on the game early in the day, rather than after 9 at night, as usual.) But no, I don't have to be present at the meetings to be assured that the other officers and members will represent the agenda to the best of their capability.

This "stakeholder" thing - as far as I can tell, it's being made too big a deal of. I personally consider every member of SL to be a stakeholder, and I believe what the group is trying to achieve will benefit everyone. But like I said, it's not that big a deal to me. The agenda is what is a big deal to me.

coco

I wasn't talking about you. I don't care what you do, and I'd fully expected you'd be in line this dodgy MJW proposition.

Be aware that Anshe used the word "we" no less than TWENTY-ONE times in her opening.

I think most people in SL would agree with much of the agenda. I can't speak for everyone though, and of course neither can you, nor can this group. I think that is a lot of what people are upset about. That a group forms an agenda, an agenda that states ideas that will affect all of SL, however all of SL will not be able to be involved in every aspect of this group. The open meetings and open enrollment, sure, but what about the other meetings? The meetings of the officers only?

And even if *you* have no other agenda in this group other than what is stated on the notecard, it is quite clear by the comments of other officers in the group, that there *is* an alternate additional agenda. How do you feel about being a part of a group that would propose to speak for the good of all of SL while basing itself mostly on the opinions of a few?

As someone who cares deeply about SL and has worked on various things in the world. As someone who has given my input to the Lindens in various forms, do you honestly think I would be welcome to speak at these meetings? Could someone like me ever make it into an officer position in that group? If you think so, then you do not know your other officers that well. I know of only one that has ever shown me personally any respect about my opinions.

Good post and good questions, Pendari. (And here I still sit, letting my real work not get done, lol - but I SWEAR I will quit soon.)

1. If most people in SL would agree with the agenda, that would suggest the agenda is a good and popular one. That would in turn suggest more people will join the group. And that, imo, would be a good thing.

2. If some people in the group do have an "alternate" agenda, that doesn't affect me. That isn't listed in the agenda. And even the agenda itself - although I agree with it all, to varying degrees - there could be something on it I outright disagreed with, and I would still be in the group, if, overall, I agreed with the agenda. (As in, you don't have to agree with every point on a party platform to belong to that party. You can always work to change the point/s you don't like.)

Any "hidden" agendas - I don't worry about them, and won't, until they become part of the actual agenda. Then I will weigh them.

3. The group - any group, irl or in SL - is together because of agreement on the central purpose. No group is ever required to be completely homogenous on all points and all motivations for supporting those points. If that were so, no group could ever exist.

4. Yes, you would be welcome to speak at the group, and you would be welcome to get elected as officer (not sure how that works).

But it goes without saying - or SHOULD - that the purpose of the group and those in it is not to be a giant debating ground. Members are naturally expected to agree with the basic ideas of the group.

Those who disagree with the basic ideas (not saying you personally do) are, of course, free to form another group in opposition.

5. Let's not forget that the group is incapable of forcing Linden policy of any kind on anyone. It exists as a platform for members to express common desires, common needs, and a common point of view to the Lindens.

If you like the agenda, join.

coco

Make up your mind, you used language in the last post to signify that you felt that people that log on Second Life more than "Friday nights to dance and chat with their friends" have a stake. Thereby, creating the assumption that those that do log on Friday nights do not have as much of a stake. It is the comments made, offhand or not, meant or not, that are undermining the very goals you purport to want. If you think you are acting in the best interests of members of Second Life, don't state things that make it seem that there are classifications. Also, you may want to keep reading the thread, because one of your "members" is going around calling those not at the Town Hall meetings lazy. Also undermining your group's efforts. *shrug* You can talk around in circles, all of you, and say that you're not, but when your posts go from point a, back to point a, back to point a, instead of point a to b to c, well it looks like a circle.

Ok, so I picked the worst week ever for a vacation, and I didn't read past page 14...

BUT I CANNOT WAIT TO JOIN THIS FUCKING GROUP!