Should Ostracism Be Used In SL?

Ostracism was a practice in Ancient Athens, where the community would get together and vote on whether a citizen of Athens should be "ostracized", or banned for the city for ten years. This was an early predecessor to the court system of the USA including the Jury, but in a much more democratic form, where all members of the community have the right to participate.

There are many people in Second Life who have not broken any rules but have contributed greatly to the degradation of he society of Second Life, such as annoying advertisers, griefers, freebie-resellers, etc. There is much outcry against these people, yet as they are within the Terms of Service, and Community Standards, they are not suspended/banned.

I propose a system like ostracism, where a polling booth is set up, and names are anonymously submitted. If a particular name is submitted enough times, a second booth is setup to vote for or against the person's ostracism. To make it fair, there would be a special area for placement of signs/notecards in defense or prosecution for the person in question.

If you agree with this proposal, go to the URL posted below.

http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=1353

You can also join the newly formed Ostracistic Party (go to find, groups)

I believe what you're proposing is the political formalization of a social system more commonly known as "high school".

In spite of its Athenian, "cradle-of-not-so-democracy" roots, it's just a glorified social skills contest and ought not to be the basis of "governance" or consensus-building in Second Life.

If it comes to it, the first person I'll nominate for ostracization is you.

THis proposal would solve a lot of problems with people who are disliked by EVERYBODY!
why should the entire community suffer for one person,and while it may seem like equal rghts, that puts the person in question on a higher level, saying that their experience is more valuable than that of so many others.

And as to the "high school" thing, the difference is maturity. with this system, you dont just eliminate those who are unpopular, you eliminate those who are a problem, such as griefers, who act like 13-year-olds.

No, you have to define things like "maturity", "griefer", and "13 year old" first, and what ostracization itself means when applied in practical situations to various degrees - and those kinds of issues was where the Athenians gave themselves a lot of trouble. To say nothing of notions such as the idea that behavior outside the mainstream often lends to (a) unpopularity and (b) creative innovation at the same time....

I'm afraid the issue is a lot more complex than you or the original poster believe. You need to think it through a little more.

as far as I know, what Camthaelion was trying to say, is that the high school social systm wsa run by children. We are adults here(most of us)!And as adults it is our responsiblilty to conduct ourselves as such, or else the entire real world would be Anarchic!

It is not that hard to use maturity (webster definition---ma·tu·ri·ty\ m&-'tur-&-tE, -'tyur- also -'chur-\noun\1 : the quality or state of being mature; especially : full development)to eliminate greifers (people in Second Life who go arround in damage/regular sims killing without warning {even if people are trying to carry out conversation or build weapons}, annoying residents, spamming, causing global attacks, creating lag, and generally degrading the enioyment of the region) and other such people who act like 13-year-olds (one who is or acts like a child of the age of 13 , on who acts with liitle maturisty (see above)).

Good enough definitions? (and yes, ive thought this through pretty well, consiering ive got the entire structure of the system worked out).

"Anarchy", not anarchic - which refers to "anarchism", which is a credible form of government that many mature adults adhere to.

You see what I mean about definitions and careful thinking about the consequences?

sticking your head in the sand and hoping the problem goes away seems to be common place in SL already!

oh wait. thats ostrichism

one vote for j00

Before anyone jumps on an ostracizing bandwagon, a fair warning.

While the system will help in getting rid of people who really are troublemakers, ask yourself this important question that must be asked of any law that is made.

"Under the proposed system, is it possible for an innocent to be penalized?"

To test this you have to think like a criminal and actually find ways to get someone in trouble. ONLY when you find it *impossible* to frame or falsely convict someone is a policy safe. Success of a policy is not measured just in getting troublemakers out but it must also PROTECT innocents from prosecution.

Sufficient controls must be put in place.

To execute such an ostracizing policy you will need.

1. Clearly stated conditions that will merit ostracizing.
2. Rules of evidence that will guarantee that *only* truly guilty parties can cause such evidence to exist.
3. A judicial system that can objectively review such evidence and certify the accuracy of same.

The absence of ANY one of the above will doom a policy to abuse and catastrophic failure.

Popular vote is not a good way of determining guilt. Reason: word of mouth, advertising, grapevines, and propaganda will affect people who otherwise are too lazy or not in a position to verify the data themselves.

To cite a poignant example of a conviction gone wrong. Someone spent FORTY YEARS in a US prison for a crime he did not commit. The conviction was traced to a judge that was in a hurry to get a conviction. How does one compensate for lost living/time/freedom? In SL's case how would one compensate for damaged repuation and unfairly lost participation in the community?

Aodhan, you point is quite valid, very hard to disagree with. But perhaps the same team of Lindens that enforces the TOS/Communty Standards currently could be in charge of the Ostracism process. Also, just like the original Ostracism process, a quorum would have to be met, in this case, 5% of the population to have an Ostracism vote. This way, a large enough amount of people would have to have complaints about the person in question. Random joe shmoe is not even known or cared about by 5%(as of now, about 10,000 people). But i bet you could find 5% against, for example, the "bush guy". This guy is now among the most infamous in all of SL.

Also, i greatly agree with you idea of a "valid arguement" and i would like to add that certain Lindens, i.e. Philip Linden, should hav veto power over any ostracism, to prevent abuse.

Maybe, even a veto of the veto, like in the U.S. Congress, where it takes a 75% majoriy to overturn a veto.

Now im just rambling.....ahh politics....

Since SL started, up until about six months or a year ago, you could rate people positively or negatively in "Behavior", "Appearance", and "Building". It cost L$1 for each vote you cast. If you were highly ranked relatively to the rest of the population, you'd get some extra L$ with your stipend.

It was a dismal failure and has since been removed. In general, people who were good at soliciting ratings were highly rated, with social butterflies who never rezzed a prim (for example) leading the the Building category.

Worse still were the paroxisms of unhappiness that some players would experience upon receiving an unwarranted "negative rating" and the apoplexy should they be "triple negged".

Yes, very much like high school, with the added fun of putting a "popularity score" beside each yearbook picture.

Good riddance.

However, this relies on the "Wisdom of the crowd" a principal that the lindens have heavily relied on with the feature proposal tool. Sure, there may be a few hundred greifers trying to ostracize people, but I KNOW that you could find a quorum of 10,000 dissented SL residents to ostracize the griefers, especially the people who had been negatively rated in the past by griefers.

Actually in MMOGs in general it's the game host that handles the process. There are legal implications if the user body handles matters such as this because it will reflect on the comany (in this case Linden Labs).

The way they handle it is in the design of the TOS and the enforcement methods. Late last year I co-wrote an ROC for an MMOG host and to this day there has been no overturning of any conviction. All those who attempted a contest were shot down by the quality of the evidence.

That was because the rules of evidence forces airtight evidence and the ROC tells people exactly how to collect airtight evidence.

The key is always Rules of Evidence. It's all about how to obtain it, and what must be present in order to make a proper accusation.

Aodhan, The point of Ostracism is not getting rid of people who have broken the TOS/Community Standards, that is solely up to the abuse team, and they do a fairly good job at it. THe point is to remove troublesome members of society, who do not break rules, but generally depreciate the experience of other members and degrade society.

I dont in anyway intend to challenge the abuse report system...merely to add a corrollary.

Ostracized from where? Isn't that what suspensions & bannings for?

Briana Dawson

Hmm... maybe Trevor was coining a new term:

"anarchic" (pronounced an-ar-SHEEK); the act or state of being a stylish anarchist. "You look so anarchic in that Sex Pistols tee shirt!"



P2

Ostracism worked so well for Socrates. Why not? ;-P

I agree that sometimes people do not technically meet the terms of abuse, but are nonetheless being obnoxious and unlikeable. Isn't that why we use Ban, though?

I do wish there was the option to Ban (person's account name) and all alts. THAT would be useful. Example: Person X comes to play on my property during an event and finds an object that he can make talk throughout the event. Person X does this and flies away when I come to investigate. The second time this happens (during the same event) I am quick enough to see the person's name and I ban him. He finds one little square he can hollar from and immediately starts threatening to tell the land owner, etc.

My reply? G'head. I AM the landowner. Eventually he quits whining and goes away. If he had been more determined, however, he could have just grabbed an alt and continued as before. "Ban ____ and all alts" would be a real boon to property owners hoping to minimize menacing or annoying behaviour.

Not to mention things like connotative value and faulty reasoning. Someone might, for example, see your first name and get it confused with the fellow just banned for bringing down the grid, ignoring the one letter's difference.

I love it! I can see it now... "Tonight... on 'SecondLife Survior'... Will Jopsy Pendragon get voted off the grid!?"

--
Nice parcel... owned by ... a witch! Burn her! She's a witch!

Oh look... nice public land. Sweet.

No i was not trying to coin a new term, that day my conservatie english would not let me use a noun in place of a adjctive, so i placed in a little known adjctive
webster definition:
an·ar·chic
Pronunciation: a-'när-kik
Function: adjective
1 a : of, relating to, or advocating anarchy b : likely to bring about anarchy <anarchic violence>
2 : lacking order, regularity, or definiteness <anarchic art forms>

And no, Briana, this is a corolary to suspension/banning, where citizens who have caused general annoyance without breaking rules are disliked by a large enough number of people.

And Persephone, the usage of Ban only works on private parcels, what about combat sand box griefers? or ppl like the "bush guy" tha caused so much public outcry? they can be banned from your land, but that wont solve anything...they will keep going with what they do...

Also Persephone, yes spelling mistakes can happen, but that comes back to the Quorum, this way, it would take an unprecedented and virtually impossible number of mistaks to try an innocent member.(yes, i also realize that in Shakespeare's "Julius Caesar" Cinna the Poet was mistaken for Cinna the conspirator, but that was over a small group of people, and that many people could not even fit in a single region to submit a notecard for Ostracism.

and NO! WE MUST NOT AKE THIS ANOTHER REALITY SHOW! THEY ARE POINTLESS! THIS ACTUALLY(yes i know its hard to believe) HAS A POINT!!!!!!!

ive seen 9 "Yes"'s on the poll, but only 5 on the Proposal!
Dont forget to vote for it people!
The link is below


http://secondlife.com/vote/index.php?get_id=1353

vote and let your voice be heard!
Also, Join the Ostracistic Party, it is free and does not require an invite, IM me if you need one though.

For 46 years I have been ostracised at one time or another simply because I am Lakhota and you think I am going to put my seal of approval on something like this?

To answer your question in a word, no.

Considering that the last attack was by a certain Adohan Zephyr while I was online ... yes it can be a problem.

Getting off the subject...
If youve read all the posts, you would realize that I said a quorum of 5%(10000).
10000 people are not even online to be kicked off by an attack, and very few will actually catch the name...

PLUS! I have said REPEATEDLY that this is not to replace the abuse report system. If someone breaks the TOS, they are to be suspended/banned (no votes involved)!

THis is merely to eliminate citizenswho are loathed by the masses.
People who set off nuclear bombs in the damge sims are not breaking rules, but are greatly disliked, cause problems, decrease the enjoyment, and are generally called "greifers". THey are just one example.