Did your discussion thread get FICed?

If you are influential enough that a discussion of a policy winds up being a discussion of a person, that discussion is closed.

Yes.

Well said.

Are you saying a thread with "well known land baron" in the title, with a link in the opening message identifying the person, followed by a discussion about what that person allegedly did, isn't a thread about a person?

If you are alleging favoritism, maybe you can point out other attack threads that didn't get closed to back up your claim.

Buster

First, I think it's a ridiculous policy that threads cannot be about individuals.

Give a specific reference to some thing or place, and there is almost always a corresponding individual. Look at any sales or service thread. Those threads are all about individuals. I recall a battle for ownership of the name "Hiro" recently, which was all about two individuals. Threads about "SL Hacked" seem to directly target a handful of individuals, in addition to a group of others who are, apparently, guilty by association, and all individuals.

In any discussion of a policy, real, specific examples tie that discussion to reality. Those examples almost are always tied to an individual.

Then there is the fact that, like many realtors in RL, Anshe uses her name not just to identify herself, but also to identify her product and her business, in which case talking about Anshe is like talking about GOM or Sexy Jesse's Pose and Animation Shop.

There are threads all over this board that are about individuals. There is nothing wrong with that in most cases. The thread in this case seemed more about the actions of a group (Land Barons), a business (Anshe), and how they handle land auctions. What was cited was a business transaction, and the discussion went from there. I didn't see it as a discussion about Anshe as a person, but about Anshe as a business, in which case the rule appears to have been misapplied.

This leads back to the fact that a rule about not posting about an individual seems ridiculous, as it is arbitrary, vague, and easily misapplied.

My other point for creating this thread - the main point - is this: I liked the title.

/grins

The rule is in reference to attacking individuals, making accusations towards individuals (true or otherwise) and other activities that could be deemed offensive, bullying, or just stupid.
In the recent auction related thread that you are refering to, accusations were made by several people that the individual concirned had deliberately borked the auction. Even when she replied explaining that is was a genuine mistake on her part, the first mistake she'd made in 14 months and that she was quite happy to accept the fine imposed, STILL people carried on throwing accusations.
This is the specific behaviour the Lindens do not want on the forums.

Actually the thread got closed, as this one probably will be, after the person in question stated pretty bluntly that they should be exempt from the rules because they were rich, powerful and above regulation.
Something that could only lead to considerable comment of a sort that would embarrass LL...

In fact, looking at the thread carefully it seems that the person concerned deliberately dragged in comments made elsewhere, on another forum entirely, for reasons I can only speculate about. Possibly to create a smoke screen over the original point of the thread by introducing material from another forum? Who can say?
Certainly it stopped any further discussion of the original subject - mind you, both issues are of considerable public interest in my opinion.

I'm afraid gagging public debate about issues that are in the public interest is not a terribly good public relations exercise - however, what can LL do when an individual who's spending well over US$6000 a month with them gets themselves into trouble?

How much of the thread is about the person, ie: "smells bad" or "gave me crabs" and how much is about a business or product, ie: "manipulates land prices" or "bid then balked?"

I don't think anything like the former was said. I didn't read the whole thread, but the parts I skimmed over seemed more of a debate about a business and a policy.

Gagging public debate is not the issue, LL are trying to stop the "he said, she said", "I think XXX is a fuckwit because..." and "XXX is such a dick..." types of thread which the referenced auction thread degraded into.

Hmmm, you seem to be confusing the content of the SLU forum with the thread in this forum - I certainly didn't see anything along those lines in the SL thread.

Indeed the whole matter was treated in a highly civilised and concilatory fashion, right up to the point where someone developed a sort of schizophrenia in which their persona changed moment by moment from 'I'm just a poor little girl trying to make a crust' to 'I'm a big business person who has thousands of customers and spends lots of money with LL and never makes a mistake'.

Even at that point only a few very polite and gentle comments were made.

Still, you are entitled to your view, as are we all... However, expressing those views has become problematic, hasn't it?

Whether it's problematic or not all depends on what your particular view is that you're trying to express and the way in which you choose to express it.

So.... Leaving the method of expression out of it for a moment, some views are unacceptable?

I'd agree that views can and should be expressed in a reasonably civilised fashion, but surely the actual view should be freely expressable? After all, there is a quaint idea called 'free speech' that some people are quite attached to...

Wasn't that the original idea behind having a 'forum' - I mean in the original classical form, not specifically as an internet institution?

To summarize:






I have read here that the percentage of people who are willing to pay for server space, buy land if you prefer, was indicated to be around 15%. That was before reading a lot of people posts saying that they are tiering down or selling out. Although only a small number of players bother to post to the forums, looking at the the map with "Land for Sale" turned on can leave you blinded by the white light. Anshe has put a ton of cash into this game. I pay close attention to the opinion of serious members regardless of the area of their contribution (land, scripting, artistic content,...).

IMO, the innuendo in that thread alone, which may not have been noticed by someone who didn't actually read it, warranted the closure.

Ah, so if I put US$120,000 PA or so LL's way I'll presumably enjoy the same level of protection from adverse comment? Regardless of what I get up to in world or what postures I strike in the forums?

Fair enough.

Anyone got any idea what the lowest level of investment is that offers this sort of 'service'?

I'd truly be interested to know, after all, it could be a whole new cash-cow for LL...

Really?

She made some sort of an out of pocket donation of her own funds?

It isn't money she made off of others through typical capitalist means of buying and reselling to others what they could have purchased cheaper without the tax of having to deal with an intermediate party?

ROFL!

Nope Smiley, Margaret was, I think, talking about Anshe's tier and sim charges paid to LL in terms of an 'investment' in SL

By her own public admission (sounded more like a boast actually...) she's cleverly sitting on 30 sims worth of unused land (US$6000 a month tier...) then there are her sim purchase charges...

But I don't think, any more than you do, that she's made a gift of any money to LL. If she had I'm sure we'd have heard ALL about it by now...

I'm sure that it's not specified anywhere but one of our senior players has suggested that it makes good business sense to know who your top customers are as they put the bread on the table. Another threw out a half or 3/4 sim but he may have only been saying that was what was needed for a forum opinion to have some sort of validity.

From the business point, I'm just thinking it'd be more advantageous to release some purina that isn't likely to sell and pick up land in a fast new sim in the short run. But that would stick LL with no tier on land when people don't seem inclined to want to pick any more up.

Should they hire more employees to manage land and moderate forums or to work on the technical aspects of the game? I can only ponder what I'd do. It's their business and they should pay more attention to business advisors and financial analysis than to me.

Hmmm, well it's something well over 1/2 - 3/4 of a sim, I can assure you of that anyway... well over one sim too. Time to buy a couple of islands maybe? Certainly cheaper than the mainland sims now.

As far as employment is concerned - more people working on technical aspects without a doubt!

Nobody said EITHER that they should be "exempt from the rules" OR that they were "powerful". You are putting your own words in her mouth.

The person in question pointed out that she contributes to the community by carrying the cost of unsold land. She meant that this helps the community by making lots of choices available so that people can find whatever kind of land they want. She was saying "I am a good person". Not "I am an important person".

Buster

Great suggestion! But an even better suggestion would be to purge the trolls from these forums.

I was thinking...

What if Anshe Chung really isnt just a single player at all? What if she is a RL company acting like a single player? That would explain the unlimited funds dumped into SL from the Anshe account. It is a viable possibility.

These employees of Anshes could very well be RL employees at that company. There has been talk of chinese nationals working in video game sweatshops working the games for money. What if this is it? Anshe Chung does live in China, so this may very well be viable.

Could this be the new age of CN Sweatshop architecture?

She does? You know this as fact? LOL

Might go some way to explaining the wild varaitions in grammer and switches from English to Chenglish one sees...

Interesting concept!

That any person, or group of people, profits from their activity does not negate the value of their contribution. If they didn't reap any personal benefit, I might dub them Mother Theresa Chung (or Midnight for that matter).

Yes actually, she does live in china as stated by Hamlet Linden in the new world posts news articles where anshe and Hamlet helped out a girl who claimed she was working in said sweatshops. as soon as I locate the article again, I will link you to it.