Ulrika, some help please in finding the good parts in this forum.

Ulrika, you have mentioned that the signal to noise ratio in this forum is better than previous attempts in the general forums to discuss matters related to the topics this forum is supposed to be describing.

I can't really find anything much that seems worthwhile in here, and I am tired of reading "Government is bad" posts.

Can you point out some good posts, or summarize a few statements that struck you as having merit?

So far the best thing I can recall reading is a paragraph of yours suggesting that some people might find benefit in giving up some of their freedom to do certain things in order to gain the ability to not experience the consequences of other people doing certain things.

Sue, now that we have eliminated the "Noise" with Phillips quotes about no world wide imposed governments. We can actually discuss independant systems for rulling "Group" establishments.

Shadow

Lord I hope so, I had read all the real world anti-government propaganda I need for the rest of my life decades ago. I still have a bunch of it sitting in boxes in my closet.

To find the good stuff in the forum, just search on "~Ulrika~". It'll pull up all the best.

~Ulrika~

"Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither." - Benjamin Franklin

As true today as ever, even in virtual worlds. Self-governance being the ideal, vigilance of and acceptance of personal responsibility being the method, and 'no thank you' to those who think they know better than you what you need and are more than happy to shove it down your throat (figuratively as well as literally, as some in this forum have readily demonstrated).

The problem with the idea of an LL supported player government is that it will initiate an endless storm of disputes, almost all of which would land on LL to mitigate. I'm sure they do not want the extra work and I'm equally sure no one but them would do the job with any semblence of justice.... especially not those who slaver and plead with people to support them in building 'the perfect virutal society', they're inevitably the least suited to the job and the most likely to abuse the hell out of it.

BLINK scuse me???

After reading that as much as I adore you Ulrika, I have to say hun roses dont smell like shit and with comments like that.
I think I need to take you to a Real flower shop so you know what a rose smells like.
Just so you know when your shit is starting to stink.

((hugs))

Shadow

Well stated and summarly the basis of why I have posted in the past against a world wide government.
I am glad Phillip suppressed this idea with his commentary at the town hall.
However, I think that maybe that needs to be added to either the TOS or CS as a foot note to debunk future quarrels over World Wide governments. (Please note world wide meaning overruling any sub government cultures that crop up throughout SL. )

Shadow

It is impossible for someone to literally shove something down someone's throat in a forum. For that I'd have to be with you in a room and literally (and painfully) shove something down your throat.

I disagree with you completely. I feel that you do not understand and fear player run government and nontechnical forms of governance and that you've created an unsupported, exaggerated, and illogical negative argument to attack it.

I can tell you personally that we (and many others) have had a fledgling government operating in SL and they do not lead to an endless storm of disputes. In fact it's been very stable.

~Ulrika~

Well, if you really want to be pedantic about it, allow me to clarify for you... you are not and will not make headway continuing in your 'I'm right, you're wrong, so there' method. But if you enjoy the sound of your head connecting with the brick wall... knock yourself out.



That's your problem, Ulrika -- you 'feel' instead of 'think' and expect everyone to grant your 'feelings' legitimacy. You have no idea the extent of my thoughts on the subject because I have never posted them fully... but once more, you demonstrate handily that the last thing you're concerned with is what someone else thinks. Case in point --the preceding paragraph. Thank you.



Kindly read for comprehension, dear. I did not say it would result in endless disputes for players, but for Linden Labs, should they introduce it. You see, small efforts undertaken by like-minded people often work nicely. However, that is not what you're lobbying for, and it is irrelevent to the reality that a large-scale effort such as you dream of would be a miserable failure. On the other hand, it is telling that you 'feel' your small success is proof of concept.

Now let me not distract you further from your enjoyment of your brick wall.

I've never had someone accuse me of feeling instead of thinking before! Usually, it's the opposite.

Every journey begins with a single step.

~Ulrika~

Depending on who you ask, Ulrika is either a large source of 'signal' or a large source of 'noise'.

All kidding aside, I think she is right in that respect - the dedicated forum is showing a slightly better signal-to-noise ratio overall than when it was part of the other forums. The general number of knee-jerk reaction type folks are much lower. We're not gone with them completely, but at least with a separate forum only those that explicitly seek us out are reading these threads, rather than any joe-on-the-street just browsing through the forums.


(And yes, I just *did* agree on something with Ulrika - see, even I can have an open mind)


- Newfie

I don't post much (if at all) in this particular forum - likely because I just don't have strong feelings about the subject one way or another. I've been pretty confident that we wouldn't see any global-player-governement (at least in the forseeable future), so to concern myself with it seemed like a red herring.

Some folks were concerned about the creation of this forum - because it may give validity to the concept of player government. In reality - I think what it has done, is given some validity to the *discussion* of player government. In the general forum - mere discussion of this topic fanned flames from both sides of the debate.

So, I think the creation of this forum was a productive one as well. Not because I believe (or not believe) in player governement - but because discussion itself is a good thing.

It would be nice if there were pithy aphorisms which were always true.

You, signing up for the ToS is "giving up liberty for security". You, stopping at a red light is "giving up liberty for security".

I think that we're just going to have to take the issues one at a time.

Well, two out of three isn't bad...

Actually, it would be nice if snippy people who obviously either had a bad night's sleep, not enough coffee, or not enough sex in their life could somehow manage to stop pushing their frustration off on others.

You're right -- you've certainly got an issue there. No, no, pardon me... that's not an issue, honey, that's a SUBSCRIPTION.

Good luck with it.

p.s.: If you need help understanding the difference between literal and figurative application of things, just say the word.

I'd like to understand what you're saying, but it doesn't seem to relate to what I posted.

People give up liberty for security all the time, and we all agree that it's a respectable thing to do.

Now, what was your point? In particular, what was figurative in this discussion?

No, we do not all give up liberty for security all the time, and no, we do not all agree it is a respectable thing to do. Your assumptions are not my problem, but they are very pointedly the reason why it is generally futile to attempt discussion with one who enters with them.

Wow! We really have a gap in communication here.

Let's just take the ToS issue.

When you signed on, you agreed to be bound by the ToS. That is, you agreed not to do the things that the ToS says you mustn't do. You gave up the freedom to violate the ToS.

Now, maybe you did this only to get access to Second Life and don't consider that you got any additional security from the fact that the ToS exists (which is true for me).

Or, maybe you clicked past the screen without really reading it, and don't consider that you are bound by it.

Most people, though (and I admit am just guessing), are willing to live under the strictures of the ToS; and believe that it provides enough value (and note: by limiting the behavior of other members of the community) to justify it's existence.

You have to take it a case at a time: does a given restriction provide enough value in terms of the security it provides to justify the loss in personal freedom.

I could provide dozens of examples from RL, but I think we can weigh the equation strongly in favor of freedom here in SL, because there are no real dangers (well, people have been able to destroy hundreds of hours of work but that will not be possible when personal backup mechanisms are implemented).

In fact, looking at the liberty/security equation, I am tempted to suggest eliminating the ToS completely (I think it is more valuable to the griefers than to those of us who behave civilly).

There is, however, no blanket principle which will keep us from having to think about each such decision individually.