An interesting bit of hypocrisy

Well I know one of the founders isn't talking about inclusion.... more about exclusion!

And the spokesperson made it pretty clear that some folks deserve a lil more justice than others

(Damn your eyes Nolan!)

I am surprised to see you taking part in what is just a lobbying group for various special interests. I can respect your individual efforts to bring about change and your expression of opinion. However, this is entirely something different. The whole thing just reeks of the exact kind of favoritism you are always rallying against, and a group trying to control SL to their view (something you are quite a vocal critic of, only to take part in). It's not much fun being on the other side of the maginifying glass, is it? Whatever good intentions this group may have had (and I don't believe that they do, honestly, given some of the principal people involved), the way that all this has been handled ensures that they will never be effective at bringing about anything except controversy.

PS - you don't speak for each other, yet someone with probably the greatest need to protect their self interests is the spokesperson for the group.

I think most of the folks replying here have little or no abject animosity (myself not included) for those individuals, and are simply upset with the way Anshe and Prokofy are presenting this.

Indeed Siggy and Nolan...

Both have alternate agendas than what other group members seem to want.

One details it loudly as always here: http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/

I am honestly shocked that anyone who claims to really care about SL, and its future, would compromise it by supporting a group like this.

Did you read it all Pendari?? SSDD!

Yes, you could be way off, and so could I.

If others in the group have a different agenda from mine, and if I also disapprove of whatever agenda they might have, then I will say so then. Until then, whatever other secret agendas they may have is irrelevant to me - what counts is what the STATED agenda is.

The question of whether this is a "country" or a "game" or a "platform" or "okra" is also not important to me in terms of the goals of this group. What is important to me - and LONG overdue, imo - is fairness, in the ways listed on the agenda.

If you read the agenda - those points listed in this thread somewhere - as I did, and if you agree with them, as I did, then the group might be for you. If you don't agree with them, or pretty much don't care one way or the other, then the group would not be for you. (You, as in anyone.)

coco

I am too, though admittedly, very little shocks me these days when it comes to this kind of stuff. Spend a little time at the bottom feeding garbage pit known as the SLH reading the comments (if you can stomach a lot of them), and you start to get a clearer picture.

What is "secret" about saying that content creators should have to pass some litmus test before their opinions count?

What is "secret" about saying that people who spend more should enjoy a status more akin to that of the Lindens than of "tourists, users, consumers, players etc"?

Those statements are out in the open. Anshe's in this thread, and Prokofy's on his blog entry today. Do you agree with these sentiments?

Not inconsistant when you think that one comes into a game expecting, at the very least, that it will be fair and just.

Ever since I came into SL, I've been appalled how fairness receives such short shrift in so many ways. To give just one example, when I first suggested more profiles and avatar pictures should be put up on the web site than just the same few, I was told by practically everyone else on the thread (if not literally everyone else) that this would be wrong.

THAT'S why I am in this group. That, and many other examples like that. In addition to broader issues.

I have nothing particularly against Anshe, and nothing particularly for Anshe. You may be viewing the group as "Anshe's," designed to promote her goals, but that is not how I view it. (And I don't think that is how she views it, either.)

My motivation is to promote fairness. Regardless of whether this is a game or a platform or anything at all, it should be fair.

I read the agenda points and agreed with them. That's why I'm in it.

coco

so I've read and read and I'm sick of reading..
personally, I thought the town halls were the meetings that were supposed to create a better SecondLife? Where everyone is able to join if they choose, and where you can voice your opinion on things.. the fact that this group obviously gets preferential treatment is rather disturbing.. I can't think of any other group that would get Lindens to join a meeting that was planned in advance, much less one that was "put together at the last min." I think that the lindens handled it rather well, and I'm glad the idea of the NDA was opposed..

as far as the whole "stakeholder" thing goes.. I don't believe that anyone.. not even people who make their livlyhood and have major investments in the game.. should be above anyone else.. when you walk into this game.. your eyes wide with wonder at the new world around you, you should have the exact same rights and status of citizenship as say.. a land baron.. I'd like to think that the lindens are just humoring these arrogant people and that they'll not gain any special rights over an average jane like myself (who am I kidding?) and honestly, if this turns into anything more than humoring them.. I'll be cashing out and leaving..

the idea that pisses me off most is that these people call themselves "representatives" when the only thing that they are representing is themselves.. they sure as hell don't represent us "Casual players" which is evident in the way they condescend..

we the "casual players" (you know.. the commoners..) have safety in numbers..

I wish someone who knows Kathy Yamamoto better than I would bring this thread to her attention. She's always got a lot to say about representative government in SL, and I'll bet she'd have a thing or two to say about this seeming thinly-veiled power grab attempt.

Remember, Anshe and Prokofy are not the only ones presenting this. I'm presenting this, too, and so are others - either here, in this thread, or as members of the group.

coco

Wow, I actually had to work today. I missed all the good drama dangit!

Can someone summarize what this is all about?

Anshe is the founder. Anshe was the spokesperson. Anshe used the word "we" - i.e., the group as a whole, 21 times in her opening speech to the Lindens present. I would suggest, if you wish to avoid future debacles such as this one, that you speak to Anshe about using the "we" word so liberally.

I would also suggest that if you are going to accept an invite into a group, that you should find out if your ideals fall in line with those of the person who conceived it, and the person who founded it.

I am a content creator, and not a BIG content creator, either. I don't know about this litmus test you mention, but whatever it is, I doubt I would pass it, and was not required to pass any litmus test.

The fact that other members may have differing ideas on litmus tests or whatever, doesn't negate the goals, as stated, of the group itself. Those goals and that agenda I support. I don't need to agree with every last member's every thought on everything.

Nor does anybody, in any group.

coco

Ah but they directly had the Lindens ear. Big difference. Anshe threw the word "we" around like candy. So if there is no "we", why have a group at all?

By golly. I was reading the Second Thoughts aforementioned and had to stop suddenly to wipe my brow with a ice-cold handkerchief. It says, at one point, "We want to know whether it's ok for Lindens to use their position of power to seek sexual favours as Lindens or as alts". But .. but .. surely they're not allowed to have bits? Or maybe they have special Linden bits, of only token dimensions, and most certainly unworkable. Otherwise, when I get to one of these meetings, how shall I resist?

A Delicate Maiden Needs to Know!

*shoots self*

***rifles through Ingid's pockets, looking for a wallet.****

I don't consider any of this a debacle. I consider it the first glimmer of hope I've seen in a long time.

That Anshe was selected to be the spokesperson for the group in the meeting with the Lindens was explained earlier.

coco

I dunno what the test is, Prokofy is talking about it, but not defining it on his blog. He is very much taking responsibilty for teh group over there, i think it would behoove you to read it.

And yes, you may not pass it, but you still get to be an officer! Interesting to say the least that a self described content creator who just happens to be a long time frind of Prokofy's enjoys that status! So tell us Coco, what were the criteria you had to meet? Or were there none for you? Inquiring minds want to know...

I think it's great that about 20% of SL has viewed this thread in the forum... since late last night .
The forums arn't so useless i guess.

Artful Dodger, do you agree with the sentiments of Prokofy and Anshe, the creator and founder (respectively) of your group?

Do you agree that those who spend more on SL should enjoy a more "Lindenesque" status? (FIC if I ever heard of it)

Do you agree that content creators should be the only "class" of people who have to face screening in order to be counted amongst those whose opinions matter?

For me it's all here, directly from Mulch's mouth to me:


Msg. #52:


To which, I responded at Msg. #53:

I didn't have to meet any criteria that I know of. Prok has always known how I feel about fairness and equal opportunity for all. He invited me. I read the agenda (or whatever it was called at the time.) I agreed with it wholeheartedly, and accepted.

As for what he writes on his blog - he gets to do that. It isn't an identical representation of my own thinking, or anyone else's. Nor does it need be.

coco