First and fastest connections get heard.. all others are out of luck

I could not believe this annoucnement today....
/3/01/19856/1.html

So there is going to be a set of small group discussions on current land issues (presumably including auctions, prices, land releases, etc.) BUT

1. The actual location won't be posted until just before it occurs

2. Only the first 12 people to any one of the locations can
participate

Like I said in the title.. first and fastest get heard ... all others may as well not exist...

What a way to build/run a "community"!

You would prefer the old way, where only the first 30 get to be heard? This way, a total of 60 people can be heard, and the groups are small enough for back-and-forth conversation.

I think a meeting with an elected advisory council would be vastly more useful than a meeting with 60 random individuals. I think the format of this town meeting clearly demonstrates the need for a representative government.

~Ulrika~

First, I have no clue about "the old way".

Second, you totally missed my points - while "apparently democratic", this method of "creating discussion groups" rewards those with superfast connections and/or in locations which are not electronically distant from LL itself.

I am in the real world business of comm study, have formed and run focus and discussion groups on various subjects, products and in numerous geographic and virtual environments. This method of discussion group formation is probably one of the worst methods that could have been chosen.

It smacks of "secretiveness" as well as favoring certain individuals/groups. That this can be so easily dismissed with your comment (a thinly veiled insult) smacks of a lack of critical thought... on both the Lindens' part and your own (that comment is not intended as an insult - rather, it is a professional opinion, this being my field).

Nope.

Attempting to hijack the thread to make a claim for "Self government"/"elected advisory councils" is no more of a reasonable solution to the problem here than is randomly IMing newbies with under a week in SL for their opinions about land and land prices.

Address the point(s) raised or don't.....stay on topic pls.

You are wrong. Having the populace elect 60 people to talk about land prices is a more reasonable solution to speaking with 60 newbies about land prices.

My logical argument is that you, Korg, would only elect someone who would represent your views on land, whereas a newbie will probably know nothing of land. Thus given that that you personally elected that representative to speak intelligently on subjects including land, they must know more than the newbie. Thus it is better.

I also reread the first post and it seems like a general gripe. Thus this would be a solution to that gripe and not actually off topic.

You better be nice or I'll sic Darwin on you.

~Ulrika~

First... your "logical argument" is illogical based on the fact that you are making assumptions about me - "you, Korg, would only elect ..." I'll thank you to let my words speak for themselves and you keep your words out of my mouth.

Second, and this is my real world field - as I said before - you don't know wtf you are talking about here. "Any elected representative" may or may not represent my views whether or not I actually voted for him or her. What is said during campaigns is notoriously inaccurate as a predictor of personal agendas for politicians' performances once sworn into office. Way too much historical research backs that up for me to give your "argument" any credence.

Lastly, whether you interpret my comment as a general gripe or not... I can't care less. Take your campaigning to some other thread.

Jesus Christ. These forums are so harsh. I can't imagine why Eggy said these were a good-enough form of government. I'm just beside myself with the vicious treatment people give an attempt at a logical argument.

I just want to give up. There's got to be a better way than having to subject myself to this kind of nonstop abuse. I mean, when everyone is playing flame war, it's fun but when you're really trying to be honest it's just agony.

Can it you twit!
We don't need a government and we don't need your nonsense posted in every thread!

I wasn't vicious I don't think. Insistent.. and pointed maybe.

I just don't like people hijacking my threads. Or putting words in my mouth. I nearly have a PhD in communications so I am pretty good at choosing my own words.

As for evaluating your arguments "harshly".. it's what I do. What you said was not a logical argument at all. And if you can't take it... well, I'm not really sorry. Don't post.

The trouble with 'representatives' is that what they usually end up representing is their own interests.

MAYBE Ulrika we'd thought you would have GOTTEN THE HINT BY NOW.

The people have spoke -- the majority has spoken -- we do not want elections and we do not want you shoving it down our throats every damn thread. Shut up about it already. You are just making more and more people see how one-tracked minded you are, unwilling to listen to "the people" whom you so desperately want to represent. You've proven your inability to lead because you won't go with the wishes of "the people."

Girl, don't go away mad... just go away.

I dont think we even need any meetings. That's what the forums are for. Lindens post feature proposals in the Feature Feedback section and we post our suggestions in the Feature Suggestions forum.
It has been working wonderfully for the past year or two.

Ah. I disagree with you too. Do I have to stop posting as well?

No, just don't hijack threads like Ulrika has been lately.

This was ONCE a thread about a **REAL** in-game issue that the Lindens are implementing. Not a fantasy or something we "hope to see."

Because of Ulrika's hijack it has deterioriated from a "real" issue to a hypothetical one that has been argued to death.

Have you noticed that people don't argue their points much with Ulrika anymore... they just tell her to shutup and go away.

Please do. This will ruin SL. People do not come in here I feel to replicate the BS that exists in RL.

Play nice, people. Your collective animosity towards someone you're solely judging based on a conflict of opinons is just as unamusing and stifling. You have the right to disagree, but you have no right to stop them from voicing their opinion. If someone's posts bother you so much, put them on ignore.

Excellent!

I didn't tell Ulrike not to ever post. I said that I resented the hijacking and the pointless "non-argument argument". She got miffed at the directness... As my friends in the old days used to say.. toughski, sh**ski.

I respect everyone's right to an opinion as well as their right to express them. However, all things have limits, in this case the limit that I, as thread starter, desired to be recognized was appropriateness and objectivity.

Failing to recognize those limits, I feel no one should post in this thread... it becomes a "3 word time waste" thread otherwise. Notice that I don't play in those "feel good threads"? There IS a reason. And it's not that I have no sense of humor.

I don't like this way either. Obviously, they did it this way to have some organized debate. It would be overwhelming to have 100 people there all rushing to talk over the other. 25 to 75 percent saying the same thing.

It does bother me that someone might attend that meeting suggesting things I'm totally against. There are several things to do. Attend the meeting myself. Have a friend attend it who will give me the minutes in detail. Or hope that nothing productive comes out of this meeting, so no one wins.

i've been biding my time trying to think of one good thing about this format wrt getting input.

i can't.

it's not a random sampling method to get a statistical cross-section.
- it's time selecting for against most people who have jobs
- it shuts out the euro-timers
- it's rewards people who have the fastests connections. which is SES biased.
- it's too small a sample to have meaning.

is it possible that what LL is doing is to have these small meetings first? where Lindens and SLers can discuss things in real time.. to brainstorm together about new and current ideas/issues.

it may not be an exact representation of SL as a whole, but between the 60 different SLers that will be there, a general feel for our collective pulse can be taken.

then the results of these discussions can be brought to the forums, where everyone would have a chance to voice an opinion.



it may not be a revolutionary move, but it could turn out to be a more logical way to collect and process information from the community.

to take a general pulse, i would expect it to be statistically meaningful. this method is not.

this will get a biased pulse.

My guess HIS this is designed to deal with the freezing summer SF weather by giving the LL management team a nice warm fuzzy place to hang on a thrus. afternoon.

Hey, they gotta have fun too!

I was hoping that we'd have a Town Hall meeting like we used to do.

Philip and various Lindens would be located in some out of the way location, like a newly released but unsold simulator. People would place "repeaters" at that location before the start of the event, and up to 30 people could attend.

The other end of each repeater would be at various locations around SL, such as clubs, people's homes, universities, etc. People held events providing prizes, dance parties afterwords, discussions before and after, etc.

During the meeting people would send questions to a moderator, Haney Linden, who would then ask them live to Philip or any other Linden as they came in. Philip or the Linden would speak and his message would be repeated ot the various repeater locations.

Seemed to work find before. Why can't we do that now?

It allowed *everyone* to participate, using the technology and best of SL to make it all work. Fixing the group to 60 people, and freezing everyone else out seems to be the wrong direction to go.