So you want a Government in SL

Oh there have been some screams for it

I personally dont want it but there is indeed a small minority who want to impose it on SL.
I also dont think there is much chance of it happening, but I did want to plant a seed in people's mind as to what exactly they will get if they go along with the idea of player government.

Thats all.

No, it's my incredulity that you would call someone else to the carpet for a behavior that you, yourself, have repeatedly demonstrated within this venue.

Tell me why not? What is your problem with some people wanting to run a Governmental Simulation here in SL?? What you are just a normal Lazy person that can’t take and get involved? Some people in SL like going clubbing. I for one don’t like if. Maybe I should fight against there being clubs in here. If you are offended you can get over it to.







Talk about some one needing to getting over something. You are really uppity. Chill out!







Well nothing really as a Libertarian I think government is the evil in the world. I am also a political junky and would love to play in a political sim. With out a SL government I can’t do that. So that is the one thing that it can do that you can’t really do with out it.







Well maybe it could be your game play? Some people like that kind of game. Maybe it can ADD to it. I would suggest having a “Government Run Area” and a “Free Forum Area”. If you don’t want to play around with government you can stay out of the areas were there is.







Maybe SL is not all about YOU. Maybe it is about all of us. What will it do for me? Give me more to do in SL.







Why? If we want to play in a game that way why not? I for one would love to do some government type things.







You know you sound like the POWER MONGER. You want to prevent people from playing a game they want to play.









No shame on you to tell us and LL what SL should and should not be.







As a LP member I can say I don’t want power. You dislike Politics fine. Some of us like it!

First, I just want to say that I am not an advocate of a grid-wide government. However, I am an advocate of rational discussion and ideas, things I felt that were the real victims of Shadow's original post. He also made some very simplistic characterizations about government to bolster his vitriolic attack, things which I felt should not go unchallenged. So...


I would replace "extremely well" with "adequately." But good enough, anyway.


Something that this thread makes abundantly clear.


But, you must admit that not everyone is happy with the ways in which the Lindens get things done. Is the current system really the best possible?


This was a direct response to Shadow, who claimed that a player government would grant a single individual unchecked power.


It's a small world right now. What will things look like in ten years if SL is still around?

Hey, BTW Juro, I wanna talk to you in-world sometime. I'm thinking custom builds....

OK.. I'll agree with that one. While it may have served me extremely well, I can see where it may have been less so for others.

Agreed. I feel that a 'government' is not the best solution to this. We, as a group, need to bend the ear of Robin or Philip and figure out a way for the community to have some say in prioritizing issues.

It could be very different, it has certainly changed in the time I've been here. However, I still think living in a sim that is controlled by a government should be an option. Similar to how we have PG and M sims, possibly we have Governed and Non-Governed sims.

Sounds good.

Good post Shadow.

I've said it a dozen times. We live in a dictatorship. Even if someone came up with a reason for government we still have a dictator to contend with. I'm cool with the dictatorship as I feel with the collection of nutjobs this place has,we need one person to lay down the law.

Most of the people who want government in SL are the frustrated under-achiever types. The kids who represented the Congo in model UN during high school(no offense to those from the Congo). All the in-kids (some call them FIC here) were the US, China, UK and a few other cool countries. I was against the Polisci forum but am now for it so we can keep an eye on these people just in-case LL has a brain fart and actually decides to give them some limited powers (read: zoning).

You just committed the same fallacy again.

The fallacy "tu quoque" is where one turns the critique back against the accuser. An attempt to justify a wrong or revoke the right to point out a wrong on the grounds that someone else is guilty of that same wrong is a "red herring", because, if this form of argument were cogent, one could justify anything.

~Ulrika~

Logic is a scalpel, not a sledgehammer. Treat it accordingly.

Pot...kettle...black.

~Ulrika~

No, I simply pointed out your hypocrisy.

"Hypocrisy" is one of those forum words that everyone tosses about but no one really understands. Hypocrisy is where one feigns to be what one is not or to believe what one does not. In regards to the post that started this, I said to Shadow:

Nowhere in that post do a feign to be what I am not.

~Ulrika~

When taken in context and within the common vernacular, there is/was no obfuscation. It was ironic to see you reprimand Shadow for behavior that often typifies your own forum persona. In addition, I thought your characterization of Shadow's comments was overstated.

So, there.

As I understand the definition of irony, I don't think it exists here. What are you trying to say?

~Ulrika~

let me repeat myself for you. not that i expect you actually pay attention, since i already wrote this once in the thread.


it could improve enforcement of the tos/cs by having move people authorized to do something about. there are only so many lindens to go around, and only so much us$ to hire new ones.

it could improve the flow of information between ll and residents.

it could help ll run projects like the mentors, live helpers, and instructors without having to use paid employee hours to run those kinds of programs.

it could provide an organized means of directing all the people who would love to do things on a voluntary basis for ll.

all of those things could make sl better.

however, as people have knee-jerked over and over, there is a down side to all this.

but that also means a government could mitigate these problems.

in an ideal work no goverment would be necessary, but it's not an ideal world.

but at a pragmatic level, some of this stuff has already happened in haphazard ways. so creating a structure that mitigates the downside and optimizes the upside would be a fruitful thing to do. not addressing these things, and letting the functions of government proceed without government-like structure in sl is a recipe for disaster over the long term.

Me no speakin da tongues. Ulrika mean nasty lots time to peoples. She call names and say yucky thing. No like that and think she no right say Shadow bad man. Think Ulrika use meaning of word strict legal so she no face accusation. No think Ulrika care other person but self.

LOL! Paolo is Big John's alt!

Good Thread!

Summarize for my sake:

a) World wide government is out.

b) Local areas with various forms of goverment is ok, sort of... Some think there is no point.

c) Ulrike is rude and legalistic (heheheh). Maybe she is German? Doesn't bother me at all, she is also clear thinking when she wants to be An incisive intellect can also be cutting... and irrelevant... the humour of the pot .. kettle tennis match does not escape me

And my comments to LL as a form of government - they aren't. They are a Pantheon, in world. Out of world, maybe an Oligarchy. In world, they are collectively God. The great objection to apparent favoritism between some players and LL is a primitive form of government (Ulrika knows the exact word, I bet) where the High Priests intervene with the Gods to assist the ones the High Priests favour. The High Priests obtain their power through having a Close Connection to the gods, not because anyone particularly likes them (not elected at all). I am not sure that this is directly describable as a theocracy, though it loosely fits.

Of course, any new form of world government is desirable to those people a) who are atheistic, and do not believe thatt LL is God here, but that LL should be able to be put under Elected Pressure from the players or b) are materialistic, and believe the world runs on automatic, without the Creators, and we should leave the running of the world alone and just run each other, or c) those people who want New High Priests.

I reckon it will NEVER happen that the High Priests disappear, nor is it particularly desirable. When the gods are in the world, high priests will exist, because de facto some people get their ideas accross to LL more effecively than others, and LL does need direct feedback.

In my mind, it would be great if a sort of Pope existed here, through which we could mediate with LL... but he/she/they have to then have a responsibilty for two way commincation, bug issues, status... and then, we have Power Over SL in the hands of a few... And at the moment, we have Direct access to the in world lindens, a sort of demigod class here

I reckon we have to live with the idea that local government OK, and Global Government will remain a High Priest / TOS LL matter.

Maybe we should just make it more open, and build a Central Temple where the High Priests get statues that accept IMs... it seems to be a problem that the High Priests are a bit out of touch with their power and responsibilities!

Lol.. where have we seen this in history?

Well noted Prokofy, I will keep that in mind next time you post.

Shadow

Self-fulfilling prophecy: Considering the kind of behavior displayed in this thread and others like it, any sort of player-involved goverment in SL would be a threat to intelligence, balance, wisdom, restraint, tolerance, and truth.

Sether, you are wise beyond your years.

Thank you I couldn't have said it better myself.

Interesting that you consider it censorship when I see it as nothing more than an open invitation to flame.

Here are the points as to why.

#1 A Poli-Sci Forum is basically a call that was heeded by the so-called feted few that beg for government within Second Life. Irony isn’t it that the supposed claims by Prokofy/Unsung is coming to fruition through the very people he/she/it supported as not being members of the supposed feted.

#2 A Poli-Sci Forum cannot establish any clearer the non-need for government than that which has already been stated in the past.
Reference material located through many posts by Ulrika and her subordinates of the past.
Which ironically enough conceded not only in those postings but even here that a worldwide form of government is not a benefit to Second Life.

#3 Opening debates on a forum with a designated label of government opens an invitation to flame and rebuke with vehemence.

#4 those who fail to read history are doomed to repeat it.
However with the plea and cry for a government forum by such a minority few being heeded that prompted me to stronger reaction and action.

If you feel this is a call for censorship I simply call it a retort to stop the stupidity.

It's funny that we as human beings have to have some things hammered repeatedly in our brains till we can accept things such as defeat.

Noted in some of your follow on posts past this stating “Cop Out?” I am very familiar with it indeed and it’s ironic that you merely pull out what you perceived as such to retort too. But you totally overlooked the other factual information offered.
So again were my questions answered?
No!
Neither of them was thus far.

Additionally, as for my statements to others that replied to date.

Stone, repeating your original reply does not answer the questions.
Could is like saying could have, would have, or should have, as a response to something that may have happened.
Unfortunately it is not a clear definitive as an answer to my questioning.
Please note my previous responses on each of the “Could” statements.
Again many things have come to pass such as Live Help and the Mentors but none of which is a government.
Mostly they are done on a voluntary base.
So, please review what has been said and rethink your answers, as they still do not answer the questions I have put forth.
I’m not dismissing you I am merely asking for a clearer definitive from you as your answers are weak tactics at best and do not fully address the questions asked and the manor in which they were asked.

Ulrika, I am now calling you on the carpet as you have failed to answer my questions. Thus I ask again where did I call individuals names and paint derogative images that you so ardently tried to point out.
I respect you as a decent debater.
But the last few post I have read between you and several others points out a “Down the Nose” attitude that many of you think your smarter than the rest of Second Life.
Never assume that in the future, please it cheapens the image I have of you as being intelligent when you stoop to that level.
You don’t have to agree with me and you can point out fallacies.
However I do expect an intelligent response to the questions and not a total overlooking them and dismissing them as though I were not worthy of your time.
If that was the case then why reply in the manor in which you did in the first place?

For those that want to debate semantics of spelling and the English vernacular let me assure you I am fully versed in the language.
Unfortunately, when I have a short time to reply arthritis is not a friend to the spelling typist.

I will leave it at this for now but looking forward to some honest answers to my questions I have put forth.
Could have and Would have are not options as responses in that category.
That type of paraphrased answers only lead to what may happen or might possibly happen.
The debate here is the true definition of government and what some offer, as solutions are only mere components of an Organization.
An Organization is not a government.
There are several things needed for a true government and one of which being players having any form of control over others is not an option Period.

Sincerely, Shadow Weaver

The problem, dear Mr. Weaver, is that I wasn't speaking of Ulrika, Pol, Stoneself, or some others. Demagogues, nihilists, do-gooders, and Jacobin-wannabes are easily dealt with. Less so the kulaks, whose militant apathy and rock-headedness frustrated Lenin no end, and whom Stalin later shot.

I know and that’s why I said it the way I did since I was referencing in essence what a player run government would inevitably put limitations on.
All of the things you mentioned in your list alone would be attacked at one point or another.
A player run government would one by one defile each of those points and inevitably put limitations on each one with simplistic politically correct mindedness.
Whether it is of intent or as simplistic solutions to problems that everyone agrees up on eventually it would lead to stifling many of the traits you mentioned.
It's unfortunate that not many see it as such and with what you noted alone is the simple reasoning behind why I echoed your sentiment in your post.

Solutions inevitably have consequences and many times those are restricted by refined limitations on inherent freedoms we all assume to be the “Norm”

So yes I do understand your response, and I agree with it.

Many people fail to realize that in some instances certain “Governments” are the greatest thing since sliced bread when written on paper.
The problem is they fall way short when implementing them, as you have to have a method to control the Greedy/Wealthy/Articulate and the Inane.
Hence without control and ethics to guide a mass of people then a free for all of greed and self-impotence will inevitably rule.

Shadow

Many people fail to realize that in some instances anarchy is the greatest thing since sliced bread when written on paper.
The problem is they fall way short when implementing them, as you have to have a method to control the Greedy/Wealthy/Articulate and the Inane.
Hence without control and ethics to guide a mass of people then a free for all of greed and self-impotence will inevitably rule.