An interesting bit of hypocrisy

I may be opening myself up to being a target here too, but I was at the meetings because I share the concern that changes like what is happening to GOM will occur w/o warning and without due compensation to the creators of such services/content/innovation.

My "stake" in SL is only 4 mos. old and involves only $45 a month also. I'm not a content creator or land baron or service provider. I'm a consumer, and I have made some wonderful friends here in SL, and my "stake" is not only that $45 a month, but the relationships and discussions that have been prompted by the existence of Second Life and my involvement here.

I think the primary focus of Metaverse Justice Watch is to not only find out what polices are in place, but to help in the development of policies that affect all SL users. Stakeholders are people who view SL as a place of value, valuable enough to want to see it grow and improve and be fair to all of those who live here. Of course, it helps that those who are heavily financially invested in SL are part of the group because it probably is what prompted a meeting with Philip and Robin Linden, but the group is open to anyone in SL, and the suggestion is that anyone who can devote time and attention to the discussions and work at hand be part of the "representatives" group.

The meeting today went very well, much to our group's relief and to Philip's relief as well. He said at the end that this had been a bright spot in his week. I, and certainly the whole group, felt that this positive response from Linden Labs is a move in the direction of having users assist in developing the structures and processes for growth in SL. The group is open to anyone, and really, the "representatives" of the group are those who have time and expertise in the areas of particular discussion, ie--SL users who have RL experience with corporate employee policies will work on setting up the discussion papers and open discussion of Linden Lab's policies governing employee behavior in world...and everyone in SL will be able to participate in the discussion and vote eventually.

I think that assumptions about the group have to do with who is part of the group's officers and their particular biases/arguments in the past, and I'm frankly appalled that the whole group is being judged on that criteria after having been a part of at least 2 meetings and seeing the sincerity of the group members in wanting to make SL better. This group is much larger than 2 or 3 powerful people, and everyone is given an opportunity to speak and be heard. Just as many of you responded in sympathy to Jamie/Ricky and the GOM situation, this group is part of that response as well, and wore the tags "GOM Trader" at the Townhall on Tuesday.

As far as voting for press presence or no press presence, I think it should be noted here that only 7 people voted...as to who voted for and against...that would be against TOS I believe. I will say I voted that they stay, because part of the group's mission is to protect the rights of free media/press.

(Okay *puts blindfold on, cigarette in mouth*...Fire away!!)

hmmm boycott there products land and services and they are non-stakeholders? hehe

No wonder you're a member then.

Let me try again. You deny that what Anshe said seperates SL into "stakeholders in SL" and "the user,s consumers, players of SL", then proceed to make that distinction yourself. THIS is what we keep calling the fundamental hypocrisy in this debate.

Ask yourself this, now: What happened for Anshe to put herself in a situation of dependency upon SL income ? Did somebody brought her to the computer, gun at point blank range, and forced her to become a businesswoman in virtual SL estate ? And then who is ultimately responsible if SL closes shop and Anshe loses all income sources and a lot of capital invested ?

Thank you for confirming that you classify me as a second-class citizen of SL. I wouldn't bear the stink if I were a stakeholder too.

ok I'll try answer some of these.. and though tongue in cheek as is my fashion.. but its the stinging sandgrain of truth wedged deep in the speedo of life that makes folks giggle so.

Who are these people? Folks who for rea$on$ of their own would like things in SL to go a certain way -- maybe 3 or 4 of them.. the rest are made up of people who support them, with maybe 1 or 2 others picked out of a hat.. friends of the friends.

Who elected them? Why they did of course! You don't make enough to be able to make the correct desicions for what's best in SL!

Why did Philip meet with them? Easy - look over them and you can see a handfull of names that pay a large sum in monthly land tier... Money talks, and bullshit walks..

What is with the stakeholder schtick? Simple - they are the R0xX0r and we are the SuXX0r. The virtuous act of spending money raises them above the common peon and they should be treated accordingly.. of course it is us, the common peon that gives them the money to do that...

Where did they get the 5 point plan from? Well I'd like to say it has the same tounge trippyness of a '5 year plan' , but the probable answer is 'out of their arses'

Whose opinion was asked? Why thiers of course, they're the fecking steak-holders, the people who really make things happen So you best listen to what they say

Siggy.

I like your thinking Personally I've not done biz with Anshe - and I continue not to do so - for my own reasons.

Let them make their own group of islands put a nice big fence around it, make it hidden, let them invite people and call it Eastblock 2.

And let them play dictator.

quick and simple when the rich man wants he forms a bond with what holds the keys to his riches for one i agrree they have a right to come togather as a group and talk about things they feel are important to them... but when im looked apon as a no one ... even tho im the no one that spits my money at there wallets i take notice the best way to put out this fire is to stop throwing money into a burning cause if they feel the need to power themself with my onebody money somebody elese will be geting my green from now on and i do hope that the members of this meeting in all both sides lindens and this group see the posts of us nobodys and understand we are the ones they should be meeting with last i knew the lindens didnt buy there products ...services or there land... and if push comes to shove i hope they all can come togather and think up a food stamp system for sl so they can eat everymonth becuse im done spending my money with members of this group.....


Kelvin cline

I am inclined to agree with this. I was there (you can see my av plainly in the group photo, gray robot in a top hat) and also attended part of a meeting afterward that involved some of the people who spoke with Philip.

I actually arrived at the meeting somewhat late (I don't know by how much) and uninvited. I saw a bunch of green dots on the map and saw that there was an event there, and that the event was live music by some people whose performances I like. Turns out the event was actually scheduled for much later, but by the time I found THAT out, I was already standing there, listening.

I found the following facts odd:

1. The meeting was not posted to the Events list.
2. I asked three separate people in IM what the meeting was about and none replied for a great while. Finally Robin Linden told me what the meeting was about.

It seems likely to me that this group of "stakeholders" was assembled in secret in order to preserve the interests of the founding parties, and that the meeting was not publicized for the same reason. Comments made later on about not wanting to bring content creators on board would seem to reinforce this conclusion. There were a few content creators there, alright, but the ones I knew were pretty big names, and involved in large-scale currency type operations such as online stores. I don't wish to impugn these people, who may not even have had a hand in deciding how public this would be, but most of the people there were probably either L$ millionaires or very close. As far as I know (and admittedly I don't have access to their account ledgers) the people I recognized were either into content creation only as a minor source of income or not at all.

One of the people present at the second meeting (which happened elsewhere after Philip and Robin left) said he thought that content creators had an unfair edge and basically said, in as many words, that he didn't care to have any content creators in the group. He backpedalled a little bit later, saying that perhaps the group shouldn't be reaching for them to join. He also suggested (from various angles at different times) that content creators did not belong in the group.

The self-interest in this seems obvious. They talk about wanting justice and transparency, and maybe they do. But what bothers me is the "riders*" that come along, things vaguely alluded to, such as compensating telemall landholders in the event that telehubs are no longer the only Linden-provided way of getting around (i.e., they run in parallel with paid teleportation, or maybe paid teleportation replaces them entirely.) Of course, I doubt they ever offered to compensate people whose landowning experience was ruined by all the framerate-killing eyesores that telemall owners and vendors sometimes jam telehub sims with.

* Riders: Bills such as "The City shall allocate $1.2M to refurbish Montague Park" sometimes have provisions such as "oh and by the way the City Council gets $500/month raises" included at the end of page 18 of the proposal in 3-point font. This is a common tactic to get nefarious laws passed under the radar.

Perhaps MJL should "require a commitment in time and energy as the way to filter who is to come here..." basically stating, "You guys choose who will come to these meetings." This I do not like at all. It makes it possible for the leaders to arbitrarily choose who has the biggest voice in the group - the voice that Philip hears in these meetings.

I don't care who this is aimed at. It is a burn of the highest quality and you are to be commended.

I was thinking the same thing, why didn’t we hear about this till now

I'm not going to fire away - but simply put, what your going to find is that a lot of people don't want a group helping develop the policies that affect all SL users.

Especially a group that up till this moment, the majority of people didn't even know about.

I think you'll find that a lot of people view SL just as you describe it - would be by your definition 'stakeholders' - and yet they don't even have a say in who represents them.

Some, like myself, don't wish to be represented as the tools of discourse are in the hands of everyone.

I'm sure there are a few 'tokens' in there so that lip service can be paid to 'representing all walks of life'.. but at the bottom line there are a bunch of folks there that I wouldn't trust to get me a gallon of milk, let alone help make policies in SL.

If you folks are going to be 'represented' then I think they should at least be given a choice of who represents them... I'm a lil picky that way

Siggy.

Actually, the group was announced in open chat at the Town Hall on Tuesday, and everyone present there was invited to join. Among them were content creators, FIC members (if I'm assuming rightly who the FIC are?), service providers, land owners, consumers, club owners, "nobodys" (like me), and anyone interested in wearing the tag "GOM Trader". The title was changed to "Stakeholder" after the Town Hall because it was felt that the GOM situation was not the only focus of the group, though it certainly prompted it's formation. During the Town Hall everyone who joined the group then was privy to the group IM going on during the discussion with Philip Linden, in which a follow-up meeting to discuss the event further was scheduled.

Also, I think it should be further noted in the interest of complete transparency that at the meeting following the one with the Lindens yesterday there was a heavy argument regarding one group member's self-interest in keeping content providers out and several other group members' insistence that they be included. No vote was taken, but general consensus was and remains that anyone interested in joining and working with MJW is welcome.

Hi folks, here's some more words

I am going to offer the following as one possible Big Theory to explain what is going on here. I may be way off base with this and I invite the other side to, well, present their side.

Now, this is just ONE possible explanation. I'm not saying that I am totally sure it's right, but I think it bears mentioning.

Some of the head honchos of the MJL group were very fearsome out of the gate about Linden improprieties, especially at the second meeting. It seems one Linden posed for a private resident's advert, and another DJed at a resident's private property. Obviously, these are not appropriate happenings. (At least I think it should be obvious on reflection... unless LL is going to supply a zillion Lindens to promote every last resident's products.)

I believe the primary game plan of this group - and this may be as a result of conscious decision or subconscious influence - could very well be the following:

1. Drum up support for the group on the basis of "fighting injustice" or whatever you'd like to call it.
2. Come up with a bunch of glittery stuff such as demands for transparency and impartiality and fairness.
3. Make some progress on these fronts, at least ostensibly.
4. Use the inertia built up from these activities to get riders passed, such as compensation for telemall owners and whatever policies might benefit certain individuals.

When I look back at the minutes and think about the discussion that went on at the second meeting, this is one possible system that forms in my head. Again, I'm not saying that I back this as the final answer to what went on. I may be mistaken. However, there does seem to be some evidence to support the idea. There is a definite "smell" I picked up from the experience.

I also would like to know more about this vote for removing the "media" types during the first meeting.

Theres the rub... many people (myself included) are not able to attend Town Hall meetings (in my case - thats the time I'm at work).. We rely on transcripts, which are stripped of all open chat - to get our information.

Repeaters I believe also do this.

So with no forum posts to follow up the subject, no in world event listings, for many this is the first time they are hearing about this.

As for FIC - thats easy - it's a fictional group created by a single ex forum poster as a label for anyone they didn't like or agree with. Ironically it's their imagined meta-group of high power players who allegedly have a ear to the Lindens for preferential information and help with the forming of SL policy

I'd say I'm 80% correct in assuming its probably the same one who doesn't want content creators to join

Siggy.

Us, or them? No middle ground possible?I don't think I said that there is no separation. "Seperation" in this case meaning groups with different interests. There are groups with different interests in SL, like in RL. And I aggree that with the current membership of the group wich is discussed about here, that it is probably not a "representative" assembly but a lobbying group. But I think I mentioned that before ...

Still, some of the suggestions made sounded like a lot of residents might benefit from them. Not only the "business people" of SL. So why not look at those suggestions? The are not all bad just because Anshe, or Prok or ... is lobbying for them.

Jesrad, I don't know what job you have in RL. If you are employed, self employed, have your own business ... But no matter what, if you like your job (or need it), please ask yourself: Would you not lobby for an environment where this job or business has its place?

Your question reminds me of the answer everyone critisizing the political system in east or west germany got till some 15 years ago (I am German). You usually got the answer: If you dont like it, just go to the other side (you got that suggestion on both sides of the iron fence actually). But what if I like it? And only some things I don't like. Or would like others even more? Why don't lobby for that? And I dont think Anshe "depends" on SL for her income. I just said: "assuming".Did I? When? Whats "second class"? If those terms make any sense (I don't think they do) the definition depends totally on the viewpoint. I don't know the Lindens business model. Maybe the group of residents called "tourists" or "players" in this transcript is much more important (first class) for LL. Who knows.

Huns, I'm very glad you were at that meeting

If your not at the next one, a few of my questions are already answered

This thread is the first I've heard about the new group. I joined it just to see what's going on (assuming I'm told anything).

Take care Garnet. Being in that group might carry a very "special" meaning, soon...

I'm just hoping we get a cup of tea at these meetings, and a nice sticky bun.

If the one upper echelon person's preference that content creators not be on board in the group is shared by others in the upper echelon, they will have long since formed their own group to move forward privately. Something with a benign name. Or perhaps they have removed their conversation to a private IRC channel or discussion list. MJL *has* to appear open in order for LL to even consider taking them seriously, but if my above hypothesis is correct, it will serve partially to move forward on the popular stuff (transparency, fairness, and so forth) and partially as a shill to forward the goals of the private group.

I'm really sorry to have to say all these negative things, but I hope folks understand that I do HAVE to say them.

I only talked to one attendent of the meeting until now. And from would I heard, there were was nothing served like that. Just to sad

I'm sorry you weren't there for the Town Hall Siggy. Philip wore a shirt that said "Kill Phil", which was hilarious I got a picture of it for my friend who collects Linden pictures.
As for in-world event listings, it wasn't really an event until it was announced that Philip would meet with the group at the Linden Recruitment Center, which was really too small for those who were there, much less having it listed in events and losing the focus on establishing a working relationship with Linden Labs and the citizens of SL. There were about 25-30 pple at the meeting, not including Lindens. They are not all listed in the transcript because not everybody spoke in open chat in there. Among them was Katt Kongo from the Metaverse Messenger, so I'm sure news on the meeting will be forthcoming in her newspaper.
I think that the majority of the group are sincerely interested in being part of the process of improving Second Life for all, not just a few. What works to hurt everyone in SL is speculation and paranoia about what's going on with the Metaverse Justice Watch. Really, just join the group. If anyone is thrown out of the group for unfair reasons, you can be assured most of us will follow you. Sure there are a few powerful people in the group who are self-interested, but aren't we all interested in how any change at SL is going to affect us personally first, and then fear how it affects everyone? With enough diverse voices involved the work between LL and MJW can be assured of proceeding as fairly as possible.

(What does "riders" have to do with anything? We're not deciding budgets here for LL or SL, we just want a voice in what happens to our second lives so we can stop feeling helpless and at the mercy of seemingly arbitrary decision-making).

Bah! I serve Chivas Regal and cheese at my little house in Neualtenburg.

Reading the transcript and your posts I can understand some of your feelings.

But as I said before, the only think that might be called a bit pretentious with the group would be, if they would see themselves as a representative assembly. And I don't think thats there understanding of themselves

Sounds good to me (if a rather "interesting" combination Lets found an AlternativeFIC and hold meetings at your house!

All polemics, claimed intentions, varying interpretations, and semantics aside, I think it is wrong for LL to host a meeting with one specific group, even if said group was 100% honest about their intentions.

If the situation were reversed, the top folks in this group would be screaming their heads off, and nothing anyone can say will convince me otherwise.