Law Society: 12/1 Observations and Request for Comments

Update on the Society status: As of the end of the last stipend period 11/29, the Society had enrolled 29 members who paid L$25 each. The Moderator is holding the L$725 in trust for the purposes of the Society to be decided. On 11/29, the enrollment was raised to L$250 and as of this writing, three additional members enrolled on that basis. A request for a Group Forum is pending action by the Lindens.

Summarizing our observations so far.

Last week, I posed an observation about the places in SL to look for existing law and also some thoughts on how the Society should proceed in that search. We read some excellent feedback.

Based on that, I'm restating the draft sources of law-shaped phenomenon in SL as composed of several overlapping (not nested) sets:

This list may help us categorize and compare what we'll study and better find similarities and patterns.

As to rough methodology, Traxx and Athena seemed to agree that a good start would be to get summary reports from citizens who are actually involved in the organizations and transactions involved in actual instances of these types of in-world law, then share those in the form of short written reports posted for discussion in the forums. Desmond looked forward to the discussions but was apprehensive that little would change. Lumina seemed worried that the Society was trying to impose law instead of discover it in SL, and would thereby kill the fun in world. Hopefully, we all agree that fun is a good thing.

Some thought the Society should make the eventual results of our studies freely available, others suggested restricting availability in order to generate some revenue for Society purposes. Sounds like a hybrid might be useful. Many societies make current issues or papers available for free for a limited time, but charge a modest amount for "back issues" in order to defer necessary expenses, while making some available free in libraries for the truly poor or just cheap like me.

Traxx observed that as one example, private island owners would be natural consumers of the analysis gathered by the Society. Comments I've seen in other threads suggest many folks are unfamiliar with the routines of land management and the experiments with governance like Neualtenburger. Traxx' observation fits right in with that, and land developers are likely to be able to provide support for the Society's efforts to find protocols and methods that have proven effective.

Velmwend asked about search for law assuring human rights of citizens, and ways of tempering the "God power" of the game and sim operators. Frank pointed to a few serious legal papers that make a start at wrestling with those exact issues.

If I've grossly mis-represented anyone's view, please correct me, but I think this is a good start.

Next step ... taking it a bit farther toward picking starter study topics.

I was re-reading my notes on some works that deal with volunteer collaboration on real work. Linux is a great example of a complex yet efficient software suite that was rapidly built, largely by volunteers working in a distributed fashion without central direction (but with central coordination). Two useful works provided me some thoughts. Both had a similar message that I'm going to blend into a proposed methodology I ask you to provide comments on. One was Weber, Success of Open Source, (Harvard, 2004), which attempted to identify the elements that allowed the Linux phenomenon to succeed. The other was Eric S. Raymond, The Cathedral and the Bazaar (First Monday 1998, Issue 3), which described his use of the Linux method to develop a piece of software. I recommend both to anyone involved with complex emergent systems.

Both recognized the value of "shifting power to the edge" by decentralizing control over a project, allowing participants to experiment and enable them to frequently compare findings and develop small, useful pieces of solutions that can work with other pieces to make one or more whole solutions. So, I quickly sketched the following as a more refined protocol for how the Society can choose its topics and come up with some material of immediate use to some or all of us.



First question: what do you think of this approach?


Even if #2 through #7 are debatable, I hope we can agree that picking out practical challenges presenting short-term needs is a good place to start.

So, my second question is: What are the top one or two practical challenges you now face in-world that might be solved by some element of governance, contract enforcement or dispute resolution?

Frank

While I'm not really one to spend time on such activities, I find what you are doing quite fascinating.

I look forward to whatever results, papers or studies you might come up with.

Good luck, from a humble merchant too busy with commerce when in-world, to not be building or summoned away from such higher pursuits.

Looks like you're focussed on racing up the learning curve in your field of endeavor. Perhaps most of the potential participants in the Law Society are in a similar situation. I do custom architecture for specific clients, and I'm chronically overbooked. But here's my excuse for taking time to participate in this project:

SL is in what amounts to an extended beta. It's appropriate for residents to experiment, explore and find out what works in many aspects of this world-under-construction. LL could pull the plug on SL anytime (as far as I know it's not yet profitable), so why not extract all the fun we can while we're here? For me -- right here, right now in this thread -- that happens to be: 'hmm, interesting methodology; I've always wanted a closer look at that'.

Yes, branching out like this is a luxury given the limited spare time we have for SL. My rationalization is that an interdisciplinary approach has always worked for me. Example: computational vision and the nondestructive testing in materials research have a really interesting overlap.

But the competitive culture here in SL pressures content creators to focus on their area of specialization in order to build skills and clientele. That culture sharpens the content creator's motivation to be a market leader in his chosen SL profession, and to stay there via constant innovation. Presumably innovation is guided by in-depth knowledge of what the customer wants. Doing systematic field work for Law Society studies might be a way to uncover one or more aspects of what your customer base wants. (Reading prepared studies is great, but it's even more beneficial to have some say on what questions are asked.)

Well, that's my excuse, and I've picked a particular group to study because they're colorful and successful. Guess I'd better ask them if they want to be studied. : )


Frank, regarding your seven points, I'm happy with them all, including the suggestion to revise as often as necessary. I'm new at this so revision is inevitable.



Your second question seems to hinge on the Law Society participant's situation in SL. Mine is atypical, one of those creative chaos things I mentioned in an earlier post. My intention was to speak to one or more representatives of that colorful group, and find out if they had any problems that fell within the scope of any Law Society study area. Anyone is welcome to critique this suggestion on the basis of practicality or flaws in experimental design.

Traxx, excellent plan, to do some field research for the practical challenges that builders and promoters face. I see the "studying" as something like what a professional consultant might do ... bring fresh eyes in to unobtrusively observe, then work with the subject to identify needs. Coming up with solutions comes later.

I always worry about people who have a one-trick "solution" and are just looking for someone to implement it on .... whether or not it addresses that someone's needs or wants.

A further thought occurred to me. "Dispute resolution" is usually the *last* resort of a system of rules and laws. The first step is good *planning and documentation*. If you do the first step well, disputes often don't arise or are more easily resolved. So, I am thinking ahead of dispute resolution to planning of relationships and virtual property rights.

Frank

An excellent approach, Frank, particularly the work in progress aspect and sharing these studies as they develop.

In RL, I've seen projects that start with lofty goals, then become a closed shop and disappear. At long last, they triumphantly announce the completion of the project, but the result is not anything anyone wanted. Your approach will prevent that.

Much of my quite limited time for SL is spent in the forums. The "law" aspects there are the LL moderators, and the norms of behaviour. Of the two, I think the process of moderation would be worth study and documentation. It has seemed somewhat inconsistent in the past - perhaps even within LL the role has not been codified.

Another thought, particularly with land law, is the gradiation between the legal aspect, and what could be considered business practices. For example, we might want to investigate and document the different methods of renting property and the transactional aspects of rentals. We might run into some opposition if we were to venture into the area of how landowners manage the rentals, maintain records and ensure profitability. To some landowners, this might constitute intellectual property that they would not wish to disclose.

As the study areas are defined, it might be worth preparing a charter that sets out the objectives, the scope and the principles that will be following in conducting the study. It might be worth trialing this for two or three cases just to work out the details.

Ferren, good thoughts and insights, thank you.

I agree that many times business people think that their business structure or business method is sufficiently unique and "killer" that it should be kept a secret. But sharing and getting "peer review" of ministerial processes that are not core to the business model usually benefits all participants. The business person may find that not only has their documentation method been done by others, but that others have learned about some pitfalls the business person did not think of. "All of us are smarter than any one of us."

That would apply to routine contract forms, protocols for documenting rentals, longer term leases, mortgage loans and equity investments and other transactions where there have to be multiple parties. We'll see if the prospect of a library of forms and methods persuades folks to share what they can.

So, you see the process of forum moderation as a leading practical challenge? Good, I'll add that to the list. When we have more input we may find various folks more interested in one than another.

Didn't want to upstage others who have ideas, but here's my thoughts on top two practical challenges that might be addressed by a governance, contract or dispute resolution solution:

1. Raising capital through sale of minority ownership stakes in a business or land development without giving up control.
   
2. Assuring payment for a service contract that requires significant time and effort to accomplish (like a major design or development contract)
   

Does anyone else see these as practical challenges with short term applications if solutions can be found?

Frank

Frank wrote:

[Didn't want to upstage others who have ideas, but here's my thoughts on top two practical challenges that might be addressed by a governance, contract or dispute resolution solution:]

There was a lot of discussion during the summer about dispute resolution mechanisms. Neal Nomad raised the issue and there was a lively discussion leading to formation of an arbitration group.

I like the topics you mention, particularly the minority ownership rights. Pooling financial resources would be very much in the interest of SL, to allow more people to participate in the economic model and learn how to do business in this world. As of now, it seems to be very limited.

You described a process of documenting what is being done - I think it is important to remain true to that approach. Descriptive first, possibly proscriptive later. There may be some solutions out there for minority ownership that would make additional development unnecessary, or we may find that this is a key area that LL should look at for improving the economic tools.

I saw that. Has that solved the challenge of enforcing contracts? Or is the ability to make contracts for future performance (with the assurance that they will be performed on both sides) still a practical need? If it is still unsolved, I'll add it to the list.



I suspect that we'd see some interesting new things if penniless creative types with an idea that requires capital (like owning and managing an entire sim for something not possible elsewhere) could combine with risk capitalists in a way that both could get their stakes protected. It sounds like you agree that those methods would be useful to research and describe. I'll add that to the list.



We think alike. I suspect that if possible solutions can be clearly described, those with an interest in implementing them can proceed. I also suspect that those solutions can be found that do not require LL to alter the "physics" of SL.

So far, subject to the results of Traxx' research with his friend with the private sim, for near-term practical needs, we've got ( in no particular order):
# Clarifying how threads in the forums are moderated (correct me if I mis-stated)
# Raising capital through sale of minority ownership stakes in a business or land development without giving up control.
# Assuring payment for a service contract that requires significant time and effort to accomplish (like a major design or development contract)

Are there no other in-world practical needs that might be addressed with local governance, contract enforcement or dispute resolution? Anyone?

Frank

Well from my perspective, in SL we have no real need to reinvent the wheel on a lot of issues I see addressed. Rl provides a basis for the law in just about every area. I see the problem in SL as being one not so much of what the law should be, but of how do we enforce the rule of law.

I noted someone said dispute resolution is a last resrot, and to some exten that is true. But really the mechanics of dispute resolution guide all the preventive efforts. In RL we know what dispoyte resolution ultimately involves: a trian and a judgement that is enforceable by the state.

In SL we don't have anyway to make an agreement enforceable. Nor do we have any institution the represents the rule of law. To some extent, trying to solve the more "practical" problems is to put the cart before the horse.

I mean yes, figuring out a way to "sign" a virtual contract is a necessary practical step, but it does us no good if the agreement is not enforceable to begin with. Many people in SL now seem comfortable only with LL as the police agency, and LL certainly does not want to put anymore effort than it must into playing police man. So the question becomes how to do it? Many players say they will leave if player governemnt becomes a reality, and yet self regulation seems to be the answer everyone wants to hear. If neither of these happens, then we are back at square one, unless people wish to regulate the right to contract back to the real world. In which case an SL contract is not a virtual contract, but a real one, enforceable via litigation.

If SL is a platform, then allthis discussion about in world policts reall should not matter becuase SlL is just the moethod of communitcation for RL transactions. If SL is a game, or even a simulation, then all these issues do raise thier heads. Thus we are back to the basic question of what direction is SL really going to go.

Jake, excellent points. I suspect that issues of documentation and signature are actually trivial, in part because the procedures are easily imported from First Life experience and easily implemented with SL's existing tools, such as the Notecard and object permissions systems.

Perhaps we're stumbling over semantics as to what is practical. If I understand your post, you see two practical challenges:

1. "inability to enforce contracts" and
   
2. "having no accepted authority with power to adjudicate"
   

Would that be a fair statement?

I agree that those are two deeply fundamental practical obstacles, far more so than issues of documentation.

I'm suggesting that we not accept those as given "impossibles," but rather as challenges, and find ways:
that contracts can be enforced in world and
that authorities can be agreed upon that are able to adjudicate.

That such have not yet been recognized does not mean they don't exist.

I'm ready to believe that both can be found lurking already in-world, or can be assembled out of existing component processes. Would looking for and working out solutions to those two challenges be worthwhile, or do you think that an impossible dream?

Frank

I just wanted to let you all know that I have proposed to LL to conduct a research project with some college students starting in late January that will cover the following parts of Frank's original post:

Municipal Law. Self-government protocols, like Neualtenburg's, that allow forfeiture of citizenship privileges.
Tribal/family/clan norms. Mutual expectations among self-selected groups that allow peer pressure or exclusion
Social norms: Societal expectations of behavior from everyone that allow peer pressure or social ostracization.

I will have a small group of students study these attributes for a limited number of communities in SL that they select. This will be done with full disclosure to everyone and permission from the communities studied. The student reports will be made public in May. I hope to expand the project in the fall of 2006.

Spengler Roo

If you want to study a group, choose one with a group forum; that will give background on the group. As past member of Darkwood, i would volunteer it.

Strife, I'll be dipping into Darkwood soon to learn its culture as a community.

Meanwhile, it may be one of those that Spengler's crew of virtual anthropologists looks at.

Thanks to both of you for your support and encouragement of Law Society's efforts to learn and share.