SL: Globalism or Nationalism?

My intention here is not to continue the locked thread from yesterday but to start a tangential discussion, so please try and refrain from flaming (and my sincere apologies for baiting and derailing that thread. It was rather uncalled for and I should know better).

I've been pondering what it is about different views of community that bothers me so much...

In the real world we are divided by nations, flags, religions, races, and all the other myriad ways that humanity chooses to wall itself off into cloistered groups. With that comes excessive nationalism, xenophobia, prejudice, war, and all the other nasty side effects that result as we arrogantly try and assign those groups into some kind of hierarchical pecking order through some ape-brained human nature need of people to see whatever group they belong to as being "superior." It's something I very much dislike about the real world

I see SL as a new world, and I see all of SL's inhabitants as equal participants, citizens, and peers. We are already comprised of diverse communities defined by interests, and yet SL (to me at least) has so far seemed to avoid dividing into warring factions. There's a huge amount of cross-pollination between all of these different interests and the shared experience of our new world seems to unite us in a way that wards off those things that cause so much trouble in the real world.

That's why it bothers me greatly when I hear people lament or deride different groups with interests or commonalities they don't happen to share... oldbies, newbies, content creators, beta people, techi-wiki, scripterati, basic, premium, estate owners, and so on... because in those labels I see claims, accusations, and seeds of division and I see squandered opportunity... the opportunity to live in a world where we see each other as equals with far more to bind us than split us apart into warring factions. Where else can you be at a party standing next to a supermodel, a space alien, a robot, and a purple dragon?

I think it was a combination of Katykiwi's excellent post from yesterday about people deriding other's fantasyor roleplay combined with the poll about community that made me realize that they're the same issue, just expressed differently.

I ask for your thoughts about this subject. Is that chance already squandered? When people come in to SL's world and for their own subjective reasons see it as already striated into classes, how do we combat that? Is it even possible? How do we hold onto a world view for SL that we are just one community and that the myriad interests and goals are more akin to a buffet at which we're all equal guests free to sample from a thousand different dishes, and not already a world divided? Am I merely a utopian?

I see everyone here as my equal... even those whose interests I do not share or whose philosophies I do not agree with. Where I draw the line and my tolerance ends is when people try and paint SL as a world divided. Will we become that despite ourselves? Are we already there?

Discuss

I think that many of the divisions exist only in the minds of those who complain about them. Many of the threads that I have seen along those lines seem to boil down to "someone is keeping me from something I deserve" ... or that there are not enough goodies to go around. SL, IMO is as endless a source of goodies as you are willing to dream and achieve. However you define goodies: social, building, exploring...

That said, it is human nature to divide ourselves into groups of shared commonalities, or "tribes". Whether that is good or bad depends on the people involved, their perceptions, and actions.

I still see SL as a hotbed of potential and actual accomplishment and fun.

People always find ways to segregate and divide.

In SL its no different...

Land Baron v. Landless
Content Creator v. Event Hosts
Welfare State Activist v. Rugged Capitalist
Clubbers v. Non Clubbers
FIC v. Non-FIC
Old Hat v. W-Hat

The New World, ain't so new...

I agree Surreal. It's definitely human nature, and perhaps as the world grows larger and larger it will inevitably divide. I also agree that those divisions are far mroe imagined than real... for example if someone disagrees with me my personal reaction is to see it as simply an individual who disagrees with me and not link that disagreement to other attributes that person might have, like "you disagree with me because you're a [insert label here]"

I'm going to try to answer without going all academic. Human cultures have always - and probably will always - be typified by groupings and sub-groupings, xenophobia and cliques. That's just the way it is. In our evolutionary past, that's how we survived as the slowest, weakest, softest species on the planet. It was brains, but more so than brains it was our tendency to communalize.

For the most part in SL, those groupings tend to cross-pollinate. Tringo addicts can also be shop owners. Wargamers can also be creative scripters who give their brainchildren away for free to the 'community'. Escorts (possibly one of the more widely disliked professional groups) could also belong to a number of other groups, but have chosen their line of work for convenience and fun. Reasons for any grouping aren't important -- the fact that they exist, however, is something that is unavoidable.

Your concern seems to be friction between the larger groups, or at the least a sense of exclusion between groups. I submit that the best way to counteract that is not through legislation or rule-making, but through a more holistic approach that seeks to find common ground between opposite groups. Open discussion on this board is one. Perhaps friendly competitive tournaments (Who wouldn't like to see a trivia contest between clothing merchants?). Whatever opens dialog and brings parties into closer contact is eventually going to bridge gaps, and I think any initial friction could be surmounted in order to reach the desired outcome.

Cindy

But those are simply different sides of issues, not demographic categories.

in the gay pride thread hiro asked this question
and olmy answered:* * *

we fall into sub-groups because of commonalities.
we are placed into sub-groups because of perceived (and mispercieved) commonalities.

we are different form each other and are like each other to varying degrees. many problems arise when we try to create bright lines of division between those we are like and those are unlike.

grouping together provides security and comfort - especially in the cause of excluded, oppressed or discriminated against groups. but at the same time that opens those groups up to accusations of exclusionary, oppressive, or discriminatory practices.

there is a middle ground between utility and idealism, between security and exclusion.

i don't think the question should be globalism or nationalism. i think the discourse should be about getting them both to work.

I think the main current divisions In world are those of Interests.

Many people have different Interests, therefore they log in and do what they perfer to do.

This ofcourse creates some "cliques" , but theres many people who also have varied interests, so they span various groups.

I think as long as the World of Second life evolves like this, things will be fine.

Maybe the real problem is if people to take labels and biased divisions from outside of Second Life and import it into the game.

Another problem is people who live for drama, to create strife and basically end up Forcing people to Circle the wagons and internalize their groups.

Thanks for quoting those StoneSelf. I hadn't read that thread and I really liked Olmy's response. My thread title kinda sucked, hehe. I wasn't finding the words I wanted to sum up my thoughts.

Colette, that's an excellent point about people circling the wagons. That's my fear is that these things become self-fulfilling prophecies. I love that there's such a richness of differences here. That makes the world interesting. I see differences as something more like different spices than as things that actually divide us in any way. What is it about certain differences that make people divide when others don't. Maybe that's a naive question but it's always baffled me. You don't see people looking at something like enjoying or hating lima beans as something worth splitting into tribes over.

Are people who rail against different styles, tastes, or goals in SL also that way in RL? Is there something about SL that maginifies for certain people things that would be viewed as trivial differences in RL? "What? You design clothes? Get away from me you elitist bastard!"

SL isn't going to be an idealistic fresh start for the human race... we bring all our baggage on this journey as well.

I agree that our social/group/herd mentality is built into our very DNA -- we have evolved this way for survival and success.

I agree that we are all equal citizens here within SL. It's not just in attitudes like yours, chip, but embedded in the way LL is trying to design the system. (note that this doesn't mean a flat playing field at the lowest common denomenator, just that everyone starts out equal and with what they themselves can bring to the table).

It is what it is. Some people like to surround themselves with like, some with diversity. Some have friends in 50 different cliques, some with one, some prefer to be a hermit and build in the sky.

There will always be a certain amount of conflict whether it be simple interpersonal strife or individuals with an agenda pushing for what they want.

At least in SL we seem to be able to, for the most part, leave nationalist and religious divisions behind -- but all it might take to shatter this is a very upsetting event -- then human nature rears its head and shifts into defensive/aggressive group-for-protection mode. I also find SLers (with exceptions of course) to be very open minded about sexuality/lifestyle choices, race, and other bigotry related issues we see in RL. Maybe it's the demographics of those who are able to discover the game, be interested in the game, have computing power to play the game.

anonymity brings wonderful freedom from RL constraints... which can lead to good and bad behavior.

just think about people who are very nice in RL and the minute you put them behind the wheel of a car, feeling protected by steel and size (the illusion of safety), surrounded by strangers and relative anonymity -- well, some people become monsters, cursing, honking, driving aggressively, etc...

Agree.... But we can all work on it ....to a better world... in SL... (maybe it can spill over IR to)

But already when we have PG and Mature areas its going on as usual...

There are more.. a lot more to discuss.. interesting thing this..

That's very true and I attribute it to the same things you do. I guess my real question was the one after what you quoted. Divisions caused by religions, sexuality, and such are pretty much drilled in to people from birth and I don't have any expectation that SL has any magical ability to nullify those things (even though to some degree that seems to be the case). It's more that people take different play styles or interests and hold them us as differences as large as those. Like creator vs consumer becomes a kind of vitriolic equivelant to Muslim vs. Jew... like people look for trivial differences as an excuse to claim division or class. That just seems completely nutty to me and I don't understand it. Fortunately it seems uncommon for the most part, but will it stay that way?

Torley, you are the poster child for tolerance and open mindedness! Thank you, and I couldn't agree more. I wish everyone could think the way you do.

Well I must congratulate you on a thought provoking and well crafted post. I never think its too late for a community to reshape or redefine itself. I think SL is dynamic and in constsant motion.

Some times I think some of the devisiveness and categorization stems from people resisting change, because they are comfortable or set in thier ways. To these people, the new changes diminish the game they love, and to the new players, these people come off as elitist curmudgeons. In truth, neither label is accruate, though both contain some truth.
It becomes easy to hide behind name calling and harder to address the issues underlying it. People also tend to find solace and comfort in groups of like minded people. Labels are empowering as often as they are demeaning, and the significance of a group label can itself be changed.

For example one of the key dynamics I am watching in SL is the conflict between whether this is a game that is meant to reward the creators, or whther it is a game that is meant to please the more common and less skilled user. I think by the way it grew, SL was set early on to reward the builders and the scripters. The very marketing of the game seemded a bit back channel. I stumbled inot SL from a NWN website. SL was not distributed at the local Best Buy. So the early population seems to me to be composed mainly of those "in the know".

There is nothing wrong with this, but it created an strong community with a sense that you could, with only some effort learn to produce and script and make stuff. This stuff could be sold in turn and thus an economy would be born.

However now I see a large number of people attracted to SL for the social aspects of the game. They come to hang out and chat and live out a bit of fantasy, spiced with a bit of drama. I think of these people as the more casual users. Not all of them want to invest the time and effort to get a job, and learn to script and make stuff. They see these activities asa mostly secondary to their enjoyment of sl. To be sure they like the stuff that is made, but they also come on and look for things to do in the world beyond hanging out in the sand box.

This creats some problems because some of the attitude of the people who make things is "its not SL's job to entertain you" or "Sl is a tool not a game" or "I paid my dues, now knuckle up and pay yours." Of course on the other side many of the casual players come on and complain about how boring SL is. Or they rip the products and builds other people work hard to make.

So there is a conflict, which spills over into the forums. And many other issues, such as land sales and rentals, stipend amounts and impact of free stuff on the market are impacted by the tension between these two ideas. Each side of the argument has some merit and it is an tension that is part of our community.

thjis is only one example and the strata are endless. Even within groups there are divisions, for example in my own tekki-wikki group there seems to be a definite "guild system" i.e., "I had to pay my dues as an apprentice, and so will you. If you help me do what ai want however, I might share some information with you." Or the disticinction between those who create things to sell, and those of us who give things away for free.

This distcintion spills over into other areas too. Some people feel free stuff enhances thier enjoyment, others feel free stufff only reduces market share. Some pople thing the stipends should be increased to foster enjoyment of thecasual user, and others think that the value of the linden against the dollar should be protected.

Even the FIC, which has become in many ways an ongoing joke, has its kernel of truth. The lindens, are, in my exeperience, much more accessible in the game, and in the forums, than are the developers of other games. They have accordingly known some players since beta, and are familiar with a number of very talented players who contribute to the sl expereince. The lindens, I think, listen to all of us, but human nature says they will listen closer to those they know and like. Also, a hand full of players are very influential because of the popularity or universailty of their contributions. The fact that linden labs rewards those people, and features those peoplemakes it appear to the new user, like the mountain is unclimbable.

There are other details to be sure. I have in other posts, seen the lindens criticized for selective enforcement of the TOS. It may not be true, but I think the question of what gives rise to this impression is significant. The FIC as such may or may not be nonexistent, but I think many have a sense that there are some "special players" who may even be linden Alts.

All this being said, I don't think the FIC is a bad thing, it is just a thing, and perhaps the discussion should be held as to how we can go about increasing other's sense that they are all vibrant and contributing aspects of the community.


I guess ultimately Chip I think you hit the nail on the head when you point out that we are all part of this community and we must all learn to interrelate with respect and tolerance for the fact the someone elses SL may be different than our own. Thus far discussions of these and other aspects of SL have turned into battlegrounds, but they don't have to.
We must I think as a community learn how to disagree and discuss, and compromise. In that regard thus far, it seems we have failed, but I don't think any door was locked or any bridge burned.

"Like creator vs consumer becomes a kind of vitriolic equivelant to Muslim vs. Jew... like people look for trivial differences as an excuse to claim division or class."

-------

The idea that any division as simplistic as "creator vs consumer" exists in this game or anywhere else, for that matter, betrays a built-in bias.

Rather than being a natural division analogous to "Muslim/Jew," I would consider this game view more analogous to divisions such as "believer/heathen," or "valued contributor/useless parasite."

How many of you would classify yourselves as a consumer rather than a creator?

Does not everyone who subscribes to this game create? I have yet to find anyone - and I do mean ANYONE - in this game who doesn't consider him/herself a creator, as well as a consumer. And how many of you who think of yourselves as creators actually believe you don't consume as well? Every act of collaboration between you is an act of consumption, of the other person's skills, talents, and work.

Everyone makes avatars, fiddles around with their avatars, builds things either on their own land or in the sandbox. Etc. Those who host are creating, too; i.e., they create entertainment content. Like an actor. Nobody would suggest an actor is just a consumer because he doesn't make something useful, like shoelaces.

If there even exist any people who actually never do create a thing - which I hugely doubt - I could even argue that they are creating, too, in this fantasy virtual role-play world of ours, in that they are creating the audience. Without them, there would be no show.

Anyone who actually views the game in terms of creator vs consumer - including every Linden who has done so - needs to realize that it is this very classification which is insulting and causes people like me to become apoplectic.

coco

You're right Coco, your example is better than mine... and that brings up an interesting point (and this goes towards Jake's post too)... there will always be disagreements about certain issues, and even tensions caused by them. To me, rhetoric like "contributor/parasite" is nothing more than that... simply rhetoric surrounding different views. The problem is when different sides of issues become like flags of nations instead of simply differences of opinions. Some people seem to take those kinds of rhetorical devices and project them into a kind of actual social striation that I don't really see. No difference of opinion is that important that I feel it makes anyone a member of a different community than mine. I still see it as simply one community full of a diversity of opinion.

True, to a point.

I see community by finding ties that bind rather than driving wedges.

Yup, what Torley said .

One point I would make, though, is that the idea of "celebrating diversity" is to do just that; to embrace differences! I hope the intent, here, is not to lump everyone together into some non-descript, cream-colored, melting-pot soup. What a bland, colorless and boring world that would be.

a friend of mine has a litmus test for "faced community" versus "faceless community".

can you (w/o resorting to stereotypes) say something about a person beyond what they look like, where you've seen, them, possibly their name, or some other socially unimportant fact?

if you can't, they are part of the faceless community, and as far as you're concerned they are interchangable with someone like them.

if you can, then they are part of the faced community, and they are individuals in your social circle.

* * *

"who do you know that i know?" was proposed as a question for who is a member of your network of community.

Hehehe, well said Paolo. I certainly don't want to all join hands and sing khumbaya. I'm a huge fan of diversity and I would never want to see a drive towards making SL more homogenous. There were some responses to the other thread like "I don't belong to the community" and it makes me wonder... is it because we (the collective we, or SL as a structural system) fail in some way to project inclusiveness or because people don't actually want to feel equal to everyone else in terms of belonging? Is there a way to foster it, or is it even desirable to do so if we could? Would that stifle diversity?

I think much of this phenomena can be attributed to personal and/or sociological defense mechanisms. In and of themselves, defense mechanisms are neither good nor bad; they are simply survival implements. When they become fixations, that's where the problems begin.

I also think it is worth taking into consideration the vast array of personality profiles/styles. Some people are much more wired for social interaction than are others. I, for one, tend to prefer smaller, more intimate group settings. That may come across as exclusivity, but I simply don't operate well in large, anonymous groups. I would be quickly drained if forced to play the part of social butterfly. However, I am very open to meeting people from different walks of life.

In the end, it's all a matter of perceptions. Taking a deep, introspective look at our expectations is a good place to start; uncommunicated expectations are nearly always at the core of any dispute.

That'll be five cents, please. D:

One of teh things we always need to keep in mind is that while descriptors like Tekii-wikki-ati are usefull to adress an general mindset, and particular descriptor will likely fail when applied to a particualr individual. the point of any discriptor is to proved a gerneal fram of reference as a baseline for discussion. While I see see that every individual is both a creator and consumer (Coco's point is well made) I think there is some value to developming a definition of what we refere to wehnwe talk of a "creator" mindset versus a "consumer" mindset. We all know these are generalizations, but they do not have to be pajorative. We can usefully describe one tension in SL as being between the creators and consumers and proceed to debate the value of that. But lets not get hung up in name calling. To me, in every relationship between people, one fo the things that must be done is you have to learn how to disagree, or even fight, in such away that the disagreement does not devastate the relationship.

we as a community have as much in common as we do in differnece, the key is how to express the latter without losing sight of the former.

Yes, that's a neat trick, getting a thread closed, then making a patently fake apology about getting it closed, then positioning *yourself* firmly across the issue so as to define it LOL. Nice work, Chip!



You say that, yet you claim you're not for everybody holding hands and singing Kumbayah (didn't I invent this phrase? I know I've said it forever.) When you make this Star Wars bar kind of image, even with all that fake "diversity" (it's only external, it's not about very different notions of commerce or very different notions of society) -- there's an undertow of conformity -- everybody has to appreciate a bar, everybody has to identify with the shared trope of "Star Wars". What if they didn't?

You're happy to have diversity be a purple dragon or a model or a space alien. WOOT Diversity! You're *not* happy when diversity is about someone who has a different idea than you about advertising, the land business, what constitutes a fair policy on freebies and who gets to greet the newbies, hmmm? Then it's all "my way, or the highway," eh?

See, by pinning the blame for "lamenting" and "deriding" on someone -- like me -- who identifies different groups, their interests, their behaviors -- and then making it seem like "everyone is united in their diversity...except that one nasty person who didn't unite bleh" -- well, you're just circling the wagons. That's all it is. It's eminently transparent.

Yes, there are divisions, groups, interests, movements, clans, classes, all manner of separations in SL. And that's fine. That's life. In fact, SL is more about those types of differences, niches, and even clashes than RL where people are forced more to get along by governments, public school systems, elections, etc.

Reporting on this, discussing this, is not inciting it. It's just reporting. Don't kill the messenger. Don't claim that if someone *describes attitudes and even satirizes them* that they are -- like the Bolsheviks used to say -- "wreckers and splitters".

Everything would be just this wonderful gorgeous mosaic if it weren't for just that one person...and his few supporters who refuse to dress him down on the forums! Then we'd all be one happy but diverse happy go-lucky rolicking Brady Bunch!

All this "we are the world" stuff is a mirage and just a feel-good exercise. You can have cooperation and a shared purpose without pretending everyone is in some giant collective farm or hippie love fest even celebrating multi-culti icons like "diversity" (as long as they involve purple dragons, but never my notion of business and land). Indeed, it's good to acknowledge and respect differences and build a sense of tolerance -- authentic, not ersatz tolerance.

Indeed, what tolerance would mean to me is never reaching for the net-nanny, hysterical tattle-tale Abuse-Report button to blow in someone's post. Reaching for that button is a profound, profound de-facto recognition that either you don't believe there is a community that includes that person you are tattling on OR you believe there is a community which you run and can decide who "violates its rules" (rather than the more impersonal and less tempermental moderators). Each time you reach for the AR button, you perform an act that illustrates you don't believe you are in a community with someone OR you believe that "community is coercion". That's why it saddens me to join this pernicious practice in self-defense. I think it's a form of defeat.

What's funny is that some of the utopianists want to be able to create sophisticated niches for the "highly creative" and "highly contributing" and have private sims with complex layers of air space and myst wafting everywhere to block out ugly views and hence the lesser mortals they despise. So for them to actively seek niches, and then bitch then SL is "divided" is the heighth of hypocrisy. They'd like SL to be whole -- in the holistic, fascistic sense where everything is subordinate to their notion of "high contribution" or "righteousness".