We Need A Central Government

Who is that? Who wants to enact grid-wide government above and beyond LL and TOS?

Virtually everyone on here wants no government. Those few that do, speak mostly of governments in single sims, not the entire grid. Entire grid government won't happen, rest assured. But, if some people want to band together and create an association to govern their own sim - have at it! You won't find me living there, but I'm certainly not going to rain on that parade.

I don't ridicule it - I only ask what will it do that will benefit me.

In the real world there is a benefit of government - we relinquish some of our freedoms and in return we have a better quality of life... how does that translate here?

I can't see how relinqishing any of my freedoms in SL will benefit me beyond what I can already do myself.... If it can't offer me anything then it solves no problem.
People bring up banning bad builds a lot too - that doesn't necessarily make it a good thing.

As for me - I do think Second Life is a game.. The rules are set down and laid out by the TOS and I'll abide by them... If someone wants to tell me what to do, they'll have to have 'Linden' for a last name.


Siggy.

I disagree completely...this forum lends no creedence whatsoever to any person or group that wants real SL government...it actually does quite the opposite because we are here to refute the claims....such as the newb that wants to redistribute wealth lol.

Keep it in the open where we can see it....as soon as it gets behind closed doors is when we wake up one day to government.

I am fascinated by this topic. I hope in this forum that we'll be able to discuss the many scales governments (from individual to everyone on the internet) in this forum. While it's questionable if large unions could or should be formed, discussing the rights and expectations of participants globally could be quite interesting.

~Ulrika~

That would belong in Off-Topic though. This is SL Polysci (sic) after all.

Im not going to post in the polysci threads anymore, I will simply wait till it dries up and blows away as it has in the past.

Given that we are a subset of the global internet user base, I would argue that it is appropriate for this forum.

Also, the abbreviation "polysci" is an acceptable albeit lesser-used variant of "polisci" and "sic" is only used within a direct quote.

~Ulrika~

Excellent. This is precisely why we needed this forum.

~Ulrika~

An experimental Government is not a bad concept, and would be interesting to observe and see how it works. Though I would not be a part of it in any Game, it would still be interesting to watch. Some things that must be considered in forming a Government are as follows.

1. What type of Government would one create? A pure Communist Government, a Socialism, a Democracy, a Dictatorship, a Republic, a Corporate Government, maybe a scientific Government, I am sure there are more versions of Government one can come up with and each will have it’s pro’s and con’s.
2. A Government can only have the authority that everyone agrees to in a game environment. Laws must be set and adhered to regardless of what one thinks is fair or not. If one member decides that they don’t want to play by your rules anymore then a Government will stop functioning for any authority in a game has no real consequences to force others into adhering to it.
3. What law’s would a Government enact and enforce? Will it be a Governing body that abhors Gambling, Adult content, or cars painted blue?
4. How will a leader be chosen, by lottery, by vote, by selection of a pallet burrow, by wealth? There are many more choices in electing a leader.
5. Length of office an elected official can hold.
6. Will the Government create social programs for its tax paying residents? Such as social security, welfare?
7. How will the taxes be set up for the residents and or visitors?

These are legitimate questions and there may be others I have not listed here. One must also have checks and balances in place or a government will be no more then a master slave type Government. If a Government was to become total opposite of what was formed in the beginning then it has failed. If you start with a given power to enforce laws then the people must have a redress ability to over throw a given Government in order to maintain its checks and balances.
If a Governing body was to be given authority by Linden Labs to force players into obeying the laws that an Government set, then they must also give authority to those that claim there land as a country or there island as its own nation governed by its own self’s. And any attempt to take that land or island would result in war. Then one must decide how one will form Army’s. Thought all volunteer or through conscription. With this kind of power in the hands of a queasy created Government then also must the players of this game be given the ability to defend there existence and there property there again creating violent acts.
I believe any governing body that forces it’s self on others would actually result in a tremendous loss in real life players there by reducing the income of the game owners and actually closing the game down in the end. I know that I pay to play this game as I choose and not by another gamers rules, and if forced to play with your bat and ball as the saying goes I would just quite playing and cancel my account and I know many others would too. Many gamers I have known for years all the way back to the beginning of EverQuest and they play this game too, so when I say many would Quite playing I am not just saying that I think they would but I know they would.
But yes give it a try, see how it goes. Just remember this. The Arc was built by armatures and it floated, the titanic was built by experts and sank.


opaww

Just carry that reasoning out a step or two further and you'll find it ventures quickly into the absurd. We're all subsets of larger groups -- yet these fora are dedicated to discussion of and about Second Life itself.



In case you haven't noticed, English is a living and growing language that cannot be contained by style books. If your desire with the above comment is my education, thank you but I neither need nor desire your assistance. That is the noblest desire I can attribute to pointing out such an irrelevant, petty detail.

You think that a player-run government would do a better job than the Lindens establishing justice? To accomplish that would mean that you (or whoever gets the job) would have access to all players' personal information. That will never happen. Never. Don't delude yourself. It won't happen.

Promote the general welfare, huh? Since everyone here could apparently afford at least the basic account, and no further investment of money is actually required beyond that... how is the general welfare in need of promotion?

Forestall pampant capitalist production... I think that ship has sailed. And its only your opinion that its a bad thing. Why should those that work harder than others not be rewarded?

Redistribute income and wealth? Why does it need to be redistributed? Anyone who wants more wealth can simply go buy as much as they want. Everything that can be bought in game is a luxury, nothing is a neccessity. There are no starving avatars, nobody is being forced to toil in the factory of some "content baron" for substandard wages... In fact, each avatar gets money already for nothing more than existing. The people with the wealth have done something to attain it, either through hard work producing things, shrewd business practices, or just from purchasing it from another source. The people who do not have wealth, do not have it because they didn't do those things. To expect those that have worked (or paid real money for) their wealth to just turn it over to other people is delusional.

You may want these things, but the fact is that just because you want them, does not mean that I need them.

The citizens of Second Life have paid taxes before and can be made to pay them again. Like any government policy, all it takes is adequate enforcement power.

The idea of redistibution of wealth through the application of progressive taxes on income derived from land sales was mentioned among other places in this thread

Please give me an example of how carrying it a step or two further becomes absurd.

Given that you chose to point out such an irrelevant, petty detail as the substitution of a "y" for an "i" with a "sic", I thought you would appreciate my attention to detail as well. I guess not!

~Ulrika~

Invect, we used to be taxed in SL waaaay back in the old days. Taxes were accrued on each prim you had rezzed on tax day with added taxes for lighted objects (based on volume, IIRC). They abolished the old tax system and replaced it with land tier fees.

The idea of progressive taxes on income derived from land sales stands little to no chance of coming to fruition. It's unfair, especially considering people are already taxed by way of land tier fees. The idea stunk then and it stinks now.

"Forestall pampant capitalist production... I think that ship has sailed".

"You may want these things, but the fact is that just because you want them, does not mean that I need them."

This is a copy of a post from another thread but thought it would be useful.

The city of Neualtenburg in the sim of Anzere currently has a representative democracy complete with a constitution. Soon we'll be implementing the second phase of our project, which is a move to a private sim and public invitations to join for those who are interested. From a business perspective it will be a nonprofit cooperative, where all members pitch in to purchase and pay for a sim and then run it together as a group of equals.

So far, the project has had varying degrees of success from smashing to dismal. Later this week I'll write up a post and describe what the strengths and weakness of the project are and why we think the next phase will succeed.

~Ulrika~

It would be considered fallacious, would it not, were the daily fluctuations of SL property values were assumed to have any relevance to any other online environment? Would it not be considered folly to discuss the implications of our application of the Diamond Sutra in SL to the Buddhist faith at large? Would it not be considered skewed if one took the dissatisfaction of some with Linden Labs' handling of recent "hate crimes" as indicative of the failure of real world government to guarantee human rights across the globe?

In each example above, there are actual, defined groups in SL that have corresponding subsets of actual, defined groups in RL. Yet the claim here that local, SL-based "government" somehow bears relevance to online "governance" in general. That stretches credulity in the extreme.

SL is a game, a recreational tool. We each bring our own imaginary "rules," our own personal ethics and code of conduct to it. None of us players have a right to impose them upon others. That right belongs solely to those who run the server and maintain this online environment, i.e. the employees of Linden Labs. It's written into the Terms of Service and the Community Standards. It's within our rights to consent to each others "rules" should we choose, but that's not what the current thread is about -- it's about the imposition of those rules onto the SL community as a whole. That would require drastic changes to the TOS; and I suspect there are many, many more than just myself who would express their disapproval thereof financially.

residents (aka users of sl) aren't citizens.

no need for a government of the type you describe.

I like you. You're very well spoken.

No it wouldn't. I've heard many folks discuss the SL land market using analogies from other online games and RL. I've even heard folks warn of the devaluation of the L$ and the problems created when a game company sells currency based on experiences with TSO.

No way! Comparing and contrasting religions, sects, and cults has value regardless if the religions are real or virtual, contemporary or ancient. Personally, I enjoy comparing and contrasting Greek, Roman, and Christian mythology.

Well that would be a leap, although to be fair, you've jumped from analogy to cause. If it remained an analogous subset, such as "does the LL handling of hate crimes provide insight into RL handling of hate crimes or vice versa", the answer would be yes.

I totally disagree! How can virtual and real governance not be relevant to one another? They are both human constructs created for the same purpose in both places. One can draw analogies and lessons from one to the other without difficulty. This is exactly what we did when building our government.

I didn't understand your final point or how it related to the above.

~Ulrika~

Selective argumentation -- nice tactic. I'll use it as well and bid you goodnight, after mentioning that there is a world of difference between analogy and assumption of fact.

Good night.

Huh?

~Ulrika~

So you're telling me that some player-run government is going to be controlling what we can build, how we build it, and where the proceeds of the sales are going? No thank you. Are you going to somehow stamp out any independent content producer? Force them to do it your way? It might make an interesting experiment for a group, or a single group-owned sim... but if you try to force this on all of SL, expect a fight.

Yes, it would be taxation, and I say again... if you think you can come along and just tell me that I have to give you money just because you say so, you are delusional.

These points, while completely true, are irrelevant.
What you are insisting on is the creation of a new government, that will tell me what to do and expect me to pay them for the priveledge. There already is a form of government, its called Linden Lab, and they collect taxes from me already to provide the service of participation in SL. What you want is not needed, wanted, or recognized by me. The fact of the matter is that you are not the government, so saying that me disagreeing with you is like a criminal disagreeing with the cop arresting him is a total fantasy on your part. You seem to already assume that you are the government, and are implying that I'm already a criminal for dissenting. I call bullshit on that. My disagreeing with you is more like my declining to join your neighborhood watch program because I don't live in your neighborhood.

I say again... just because you want this, doesn't in any way mean that I or anyone else needs it. For example... I want to have a tail on my av. That in no way means that everyone needs one.

Again, coercive government is a non-starter. The simple fact is that you can't coerce somebody who can at any time choose to take their subscription fees and go elsewhere. The society of Second Life (or most any virtual setting, for that matter) is a construct dependent entirely on the consent of its participants.

The only coercion that can be effectively excercised in such an environment are the terms of service agreed upon when joining, and the only effective punishment is banishment in the form of account banning. The sole authority is the company hosting the game.

Player governments can be fun and interesting additions to regions of the virtual world, but the only authority they can ever hold is that granted to them by those that choose to participate. In other words, if you want to run a government, you're going to have to collect enough followers that believe in you and/or your ideas to make it work... because hell will freeze over before anybody else will be forced to do as you wish.

Correct. This is why I feel that opt-in democracies, where individuals all share the cost of purchasing land and contribute to the government will be the most successful. Government in this case means a group of individuals who have chosen to live together and make decisions based upon a predetermined set of rules. Quite nice actually.

~Ulrika~

Keep your rules and policies to your OWN citizens. The moment these policies are imposed upon people that are not citizens of your group, expect fierce resistance.

As far as 'citizenship in SL' goes, I am a free and sovereign individual. Indeed, we are all free and sovereign individuals, responsible for our own actions. Any groups I participate in, I will do so by my own choice.

I accept the rule of the Lindens via the TOS and my local laws as necessary rules, and I abide by both.

I do not accept the rule of any other body of SL residents or any individual resident.

If, at some point in the future, Linden Lab decides to implement an overarching player-based government system, or components of these systems, then each of us will have to look at the situation and decide for ourselves if it’s worth staying.

Don't tread on me.

-Ghoti

(edited for typos)