Philip has posted his intended remarks on his blog

As do I from mine in agreement.

Lewis

I don't believe they are shying away though, which is where we'll disagree I'm afraid. And I don't believe that the previous registration rules were so much more stringent as to have been a panacea to stop teens entering the main grid.

There are obviously things in Second Life that I wouldn't want my children to see but then I wouldn't allow them carte-blanche but, when they are old enough, even if there aren't adequate tools to stop them accessing such content, I also wouldn't stop them from coming in-world if they showed an interest. I would ensure that I was there with them when they accessed it, to provide the content filter directly. And plus I could teach them building and scripting and animation, which would be fun

To be honest, the influx in new people has meant that I'm dealing with many more IMs for support, questions and stuff and I'm meeting more new players in-world. I'm not finding any of those scary and I'm not double-thinking whether they're below 18 or not - it doesn't bother me because I wouldn't be in areas, or discussing subject matter, that was questionable for that age group. That's why it doesn't bother me, but I understand that it would be worrying for others for the exact opposite reasons. It's those differences in the way that Second Life is used that makes policy so very difficult as you aren't going to suit everybody with them straight away.

I've also never actually assumed that people I met in-world were over 18 because, I know full well, there's never been any guarantee in practice that they are. I think many people have seen the previous registration requirements as a guarantee on face value.

It's a vastly different Second Life you're seeing than I am. I don't see commercialism as a problem though, which I guess is always at the root of the issue for those who think the world's gone to pot, which explains why my views will always be different from those of people like yourself.

Commercialism does not equal a world with a derth of imagination and creativity. The two are not mutually exclusive. Of course, there will be people arriving who just want to make money at any cost, but then there are also those who don't and create for the hell of it or those who want to make some money by using their imagination and creativity, rather than just chucking out rubbish.

You've always been a big exponent of personal liberties in Second Life, and by Second Life allowing those personal liberties you're now not actually happy with how it's turned out - you're basically saying that those who choose to use Second Life for commercial reasons are ruining it. You cannot be all for personal liberties and yet moan when people exercise them. That's a paradox. You may not like it but that's not actually the point if you believe that everybody should use Second Life in whatever way they want to.

As for griefing, well I've already worn my fingers out on that particular topic on other threads. I experienced griefing at Philip Lindens speech last night but, then, big events always attracts jerks, new registration system or not. That's the first time I've been griefed since the registration change and yet I've visited countless places in Second Life in that time. I can't explain why you're being orbited constantly, it's certainly not been my experience.

Selador, very well said.

More to Moopf's points, though, as a parent I can assure you that I stick my nose into my kids' business whenever I feel it's warranted. I know where they go on the internet and I know who their friends are, it's my job. But of course I'm not like 100% of all the other parents out there. Some let their kids use computer gaming as a virtual babysitter while they work or relax, and have no idea what the kid is into. That's the way things are.

What concerns me as a citizen of SL isn't how that other Mom is raising her kids. What concerns me is that she's going to be on CNN one day, her attorney at her side as they announce a major lawsuit against Linden Labs for exposing her poor defenseless Johnny to SLex. It concerns me that the moral crusaders like Jack Thompson will sieze upon it as a political football and try to pass laws that hogtie the open, creative world the Lindens have created.

THAT will be the real damage to our world, even more so than the griefing you mentioned.

Filing a law suit, especially in the US, seems to be amazingly easy and I see no reason why this wouldn't have been a possibility before the registration change. The basics are exactly the same - to get into a grid you shouldn't be on, you're having to lie about your age. There may be more danger due to higher numbers of people using incorrect birth dates, but the basic idea that only now are they open to such lawsuits would seem to me to be pretty false.

I couldn't comment on whether such things would hold water in court (pre-requisite "I am not a lawyer" statement) but I don't see the situation now as being much different to before and so I can't see that this is suddenly a new danger that's lurking.

I've always had the impression that people like Jack Thompson don't really need much of an excuse to crusade against anything and invariably don't actually succeed. And anyway, the press would be dynamite for Linden Lab!

Actually, there's a big difference now. Before, with the credit card based check, there was at least a token attempt to produce an age check, the exact same check that almost all adult oriented sites use. LL was legally safe, as they could claim to be making a reasonable, albeit not foolproof, attempt to avoid letting in kids. Now, with no only no meaningful check, but a conscious decision to have no meaningful check, they have left themselves defenceless against that kind of lawsuit.

But I am not a lawyer.

Robin's answer to dealing with kids on the main grid is to allow them in, wait for them to cause trouble, then wait for an abuse report(s?) before attempting to do anything about it.

Wtf?

More disturbingly, I wonder if the policy for adults on the teen grid is as lax. Do you allow adults on the teen grid, wait for them to molest a child, wait for an abuse report(s) and only then take any action? Do you then allow them to log back on with another, unverified account?

EDIT: Ok. Maybe I was being a bit... strident. I'm just concerned.

If Linden Labs hopes to capitalise on the press from any impending lawsuit they'll need steel nerves and a team of lawyers of the calibre that took on OJ Simpson's case. Let's face it, their current registration policy is an open invitation to any ambulance-chaser.

I think you may have a point. Maybe Linden Lab is *looking* to get sued? Think about it. A lawsuit would bring HUGE publicity and a HUGE increase in signups! There is no bad publicity. A lawsuit like this would "put SL on the map."

From what I understand about venture capital financing (often called "vulture" capital financing) most vc agreements contain performance benchmarks that a company must meet in order to avoid a management takeover by the vc financiers. Do you think LL is struggling to get subscriber numbers up by any means to avoid a takeover?

Exactly Paulie. There's an old showbix saying: Any news is good news.
Even when the critics are panning your show, it still gets people talking about it, etc., etc. If it is LL's 'secret plan' to capitalise on an impending lawsuit, we're into Malcolm McLaren publicity stunt territory now.

It's pretty obvious LL is taking desperate moves to keep the wolves/vultures from the door. And not nice furry wolves either.

I keep wondering if this place is actually being run by Michael Jackson.

Eeeeewwwww, creeeeepy.

I think also that as our children grow old enough to access the net on their own and to visit Second Life (teen years), they've been indoctrinated in our own morals and attitudes about things enough to make their own judgements.

When my daughter cruises the internet I don't police her activities or sit next to her, but she wants to show me things that are interesting that she finds. If it's sexual in nature we discuss it, and I let her make her own judgements about what's acceptable and what is not. She's 13, mostly her attitude is "eww gross!" I trust her to make good decisions, fully knowing the problems and consequences and seriously effed-up people who are out there because I've taught her about those things. She's very safety conscious about the information she shares.

The reality is, teens are seeing and experiencing sexual situations and pictures, etc. all the time because we are a society obsessed with sexuality. A television commercial could be considered semi-pornographic looked at in a certain way. (Victoria's Secret?)

I don't want the Thought Police in Second Life any more than I want the kids, and I don't think it's our job to police kids on the grid because they have parents to do that for them (hopefully). We can't be assured, however, that every parent takes the time to teach their kids about safety in online activities, and that scares me to death considering some of the people I've known in SL. But to balance that, we can't cut kids off completely from the sexuality of life because they get older and if they know nothing they may not be able to handle what the real world is like.

To address griefing and the kids participating in that--i don't have the energy, lol. They think it's fun. Sometimes I think it's fun to have a shootout, but I understand if someone is in the middle of cutting a prim down to 1/1000 of it's original size and someone orbits them, that it could be a serious problem.

With regard to the underage issue, one thing seems to me to have been forgotten. It's the possible damage to the adults who become unknowingly involved. Certainly, the damage to the children has the highest priority, but it doesn't mean that it the only damage.

Can you imagine having sex, then discovering that your partner was 10 years old? I know it would completely devastate me.

The one thing I really loved about Second Life was it was a relatively safe place for me as an adult to play. Certainly, it wasn't perfect, but it was fairly safe.

The safety has evaporated.

Must I now move on to somewhere else to find a safe place I can play as an adult?

1. Pham, your child is six. You have a ways to go there. Raising a child is actually a gradual, and ever continual, letting go. Like teaching them to ride a bicycle. During the teen years, this becomes paramount.

Yes, you have rules in place; yes, you are either relatively strict or you're not. Yes, you have either spent the early formative years with your child and teaching them all you can about what to avoid in life, or you haven't. Yes, the child has inculcated all that perfectly, or he hasn't. (Actually, he hasn't, because he can't - because he lacks your judgment and experience.)

If you knew that there was no law to protect them aside from your presence and the assumption that not only was your teaching perfect, but their judgment was also perfect, you might never let them go. But you have to gradually let them go. You simply can't be at their elbow until the day they turn 18, or you will have been a bad parent.

Laws about minors in adult places aren't perfect, either. They can't make everyone safe anymore than perfect parenting can. But they are an extra safety net, one our society recognizes the need for and creates law for.

The purpose of the sorts of laws in place to protect minors is not to take over the responsibility of the parents. It is not to force other entities to serve as in loco parentis. It's not because parents are crappy and not doing their job.

It is a recognition of the fact that all humans need and deserve protection up until a certain (arbitrary, by necessity) age, and adult institutions must reasonably provide it.

Young people have a right to reasonable societal protection even when their parents are not there.

2. For you, SL may be like the world wide web. For LL, SL may be like the world wide web. Most people, though, aren't going to agree with you. Most people, including judges, juries, and law enforcement, are going to think it is much more like an MMOG than it is like the world wide web. Primarily because it is.

LL needs to realize that what they dream about, what they hope for, and what they may give themselves airs about - is simply not the case.

Restricting access to SL based on credit card verification is not only a sensible solution, it is a reasonable expectation that they do so, and a solution which many other websites and games do, because it is easier than demanding to see a driver's license (though many will ask for a copy of that, too, if necessary).

3. There is a dreadful error going on in the reasoning of those who want to throw out any age verification: That if something isn't foolproof, it is then useless.

By that reasoning, no one would ever institute safeguards for anything whatsoever, or have any laws or rules at all, for minors, or for anyone.

coco

Thank you for your thoughtful comments, Coco.

I admit that I have "ways to go" But please believe that I am not totally naive, either. A long time ago, I was a horrile juvenile, too. And - being a late parent - there are a lot of teenagers and kids from 9 to 19 (and their parents) which are near to my heart.

The lessons I learned is (interpretation is personal), that the best protection against drugs, smoking, sex on the net .. whatever you may call it, actually are family values.

But I am not a laissez fair type of guy. It is just my belief that "credit card age verification" (which would not work in my home country anyway) is not the best solution to the problem. Maybe such a drastic measurement (showing your credit card for a free service) would be appropriate for a porn site. But I don't perceive SL as such a site.

Maybe it depends on the locations I visit but currently I can not remember anything that was on my screen in the last 20 days which I would not want my son to see (as I have mentioned, german children are rarely protected from bare nipples).

I think, there are better solutions which would be much more appropriate from a cross-cultural point of view - which is important. Lets talk about those!

Well, just a couple of additional things, Pham.

This isn't TV. This isn't about what kids happen to see. This is about people interacting with other people.

This isn't high school, and it isn't about kids having sex with other kids. This is about a very sexually oriented place filled with adults having cyber sex with each other in every imaginable way.

And it's about this particular place having just thrown its doors open not just to adults, but to teens and even children, who are allowed easy access to participate in the activities with people of all ages, with no identifying information; and who can return again and again even if they are thrown out, as can those who would prey upon them.

LL has abdicated its moral, ethical, and legal responsibility, in my opinion, to protect minors. And in addition, they have put us all at risk.

coco

yea.ok..........

Xcite!

Sensations.

BDSM.

Detailed Skins.

Active floggings.

Nope, nothing adult or pornographic on SL.

Please come to a dungeon some time. Hang out a few hours. Then repeat what you say about there being nothing you don't want your children to see on SL.

Love & Friendship & Blessed Be!
Lynn Kukulcan

Ooooh, thanks for your ever insightful thoughts and comments on my post! Thank you for contributing!

Yes.. there was a 'tone' of nostalgia, to the point of melancholy in Phil's remarks. That is, if you can infere such emotions to text. That is very difficult - which only talented writers and successful authors can achieve.

Anyway, put into the context of corporate organizational behavior, I see SL entering a new phase of development. While change is often good, this phase of development may be a meaner, leaner, and more densely populated world than many of us older residents, including, it seems, Phil, fondly recall. Ah, the good old days. Like in that old TV series Cheers.... "where everyone knows your name..."

SL is unique to the corporate world. But, it is still basically a corporation and will behave in most ways as an American corporation - a 3 year business plan, and short term quarterly financial goals. Oh, and finally, an "Exit Strategy".

So, here we are, ummm... 3 years into the Business Plan. Get my drift?

Yes, infusions of outside venture capital can be heady stuff. The fuel, and too often a drug, to manifest and fulfill the dream that Phil spoke about in such a reminiscent way. But, there is always a price to pay. Part of that price is having certain corporation performance goals and objectives that are not always your 'own' - which many a CEO of a start-up has learned. Subscriber numbers, revenue and profit goals, "Return on Cash" invested, threats of competition... sometimes even by competitors your investors have also invested in. They hedge their bets quite often.

Successful companies with fearless, talented and persistant leaders at the top usually make it through the start-up phase and proceed to grow, diversify and generally flourish. Unfortunately for many of the individuals in the top management positions, the talent, skills, management style and experience in running a large, now more mature, organization are not always those same skill sets that it took to create an entrepreneurial start-up such as Second Life. Granted, Phil & Co. are entreprenuerial leaders in this industry sector. The industy literature and media converage all agree SL is unique in a mostly ubiquitous world of mindless first person shooter games and less interactive virtual worlds.

Bottom line, it's all reduced to numbers now. The goals have been set with alot of input by the investors, and agreed to by management. So, here we go. Get the numbers up as fast and quicky as possible. The new 3-year Business Plan and growth strategies are going into effect soon. Do whatever you can, even if it hurts and goes against your altruistic entreprenueral nature. Notice how few Linden posts and responses lately? Every one is screaming about this and now that. Silence. Even our favorite watermelon Linden is quiet - and apparently stressed as noted in the recent post about being able to keep up.

IF Second Life is going to succeed and continue this path of developing an evergrowing virtual world and economy, there must be change. Now is the time for certain people to stand back, self-evaluate and reflect - ""Is what I offer SL in terms of my background, skills, and management style what the company needs as it enters this next phase of organizational growth and development? Or does the company now need the strong and steady hand of an experienced "Operations" executive team? Can I assume that role? Or, should I stay in my element of entrepreneurial visionary and start-up executive?""

We cannot answer these questions for the LL executive team. Only they can ultimately decide what course to take and on which strategies to focus company resources. We can only advise, and, yes, often bitterly complain. I am not a big fan of Advisory Boards. They can be manipulated by management as simply as deciding who sits on the Board. But, it might be a good exercise for this organization at this point and time.

In the meantime, we see a bit of floundering, false starts, lack of meaningful communications, a degree of operational chaos, and the resultant customer dissatisfaction.

Yes, numbers are up - but at a certain 'cost'. The grid is swarming with undocumented residents, dozens of new sims and islands are packing the existing (already congested) grid to what may soon become a critical mass in terms of load lag and just plain old overpopulation of a limited virtual geography and limited technical resources. I see islands approaching ever closer to mine. Which is normal human behavior when living in an every increasing population on the same land mass. "Stack 'em and Pack 'em".... seems to be one strategy in evidence. BTW, that also permits a great deal of cost avoidance in terms of expanding the grid. Again, it's all about the numbers going forward. Don't ever forget that....

Yes, A certain sadness and sense of finality pervades, and reminds me of Galadriel's lament in Lord of the Rings...at the end of the Third Age of Middle Earth. *assumes Elror's elvish personna.....

I amar prestar aen
********** 'The world is changing'
Han mathon ne nen
********** 'I feel it in the water'
Han mathon ne chae
********** 'I feel it in the earth'
A han nostron ned wilith
********** 'I smell it in the air'


Fare Thee Well, friends....

E.

That was a well thought out post, Elror. But if it was just about 'getting up the numbers' why hasn't LL splashed out some of that mythical 11 million dollars on a promotion and advertising campaign. There's more ways to get a crowd in than simply dropping your drawers and shouting out 'Come and get it big boy'.

I'm with Marla here in that I feel that adults need to be protected too. Up to now SL has been that safe walled garden where we could play. That has now ended. I should imagine that people who are more instested in sex play will prolly migrate to Sociolotron. How that affects SL remains to be seen.

Sorry Sansarya, I overlooked your post earlier and I apologise for doing so, because what you've said really strikes a chord with me and I agree with most of it completely. You've explained part of what I'vre been trying to get across much better than I've been able to do. Thank you.

I just can't help but think this all points to Philip getting ready to sell Second Life to some mega-company like Microsoft or another.

1. Beefing up accounts figures, no matter what the effect to exsisting users.

2. Amazing lack of customer service or discussion on hot-topics.

3. Lack of concern over potential lawsuits and consequences of children getting into the very mature grid (sell it all before some parents start suing over virtual molestations, etc).

4. Absense of anyone answering any forms of communication sent to LL, via phone or email.

5. Philips comments yesterday also hint at that direction, in a few different areas.


I could be blowing smoke here, but I think it's a piece that definitely could fit in the puzzle.

I did not even go into that common organizational behavior commonly termed the 'Bunker Mentaility' in my post.

Your observations are succinct (as opposed my style) and to the point as always.