Resident Action Committee -- MJW followers and such, please read.

Lord Digeroo,

I like this format a lot better than an agenda set down by specific people with their groupies to support them.

We are all individuals and we all have different concerns, there's no cookie cutter agenda that will fit everyone and trying to make one up just so you can seem a formidable force to be reckoned with is not the way to go.

Plus things change so quickly and different people will show up at different meetings. Having the ability to address the issues that are on our mind at that time instead of making a list that may or may not be applicable and then being forced to stick to that list is just not wise in an atmosphere as changeable as SL.

****


__________
A proud member of PIC = Pudding Inner Core
__________________

Am I elitist? I am neither old school SLer, a capitalistic SLer, nor a profitable SLer. I am in-world quite often, and do my best to enjoy and contribute for contributings sake. Visit my land and see there is NO money making happening on site.

The "if you don't like it, form your own group and leave" criticism doesn't make much sense, because the agenda was drawn up and presented for the reason for the group to exist since I first heard of it.

Since I was in the loop prior to the forum crowd, I know the agenda was set before detractors came in and tried to hijack the agenda to prove some kind of point about Anshe and/or Prok.

The political battle was actually the direct result of the external pressure of these forums to "represent the whole" of SL despite the clear intentions of being a special interest group with an agenda already stated. The infighting for power was just that, fighting for power within its own group and in no way effected the population as a whole (nor the opinions or objectives of most of the membership).

Stated another way, everyone became so intent on insuring MJW's failure, Anshe and Prok went off on an internal tangent trying to steer the group in the direction they felt it should be steered, to the detriment on their ability to steer at all, and to the exclusion of the topics. I entered with a neutral stance on Anshe and no love lost from my battles with Prok, but I honestly am more comfortable with how Prok handled the infighting. He tried NOT TO play politics. He tried NOT TO get taken off course many times in the transcript asking to get to issues.

It's easy to find fault with Prok, but as exasperated as I have been at Proks antics and manner of speaking, he in no way exhibited the "corruption" that others both internal and external have exhibited.

I mean hating someone is fine, but if you read the transcript give the devil his due, he even gave Aimee officer status.

I see the "if you don't like it, don't join" response to be quite appropriate. Quite appropriate. You are free to and have formed a group. I just think that without clarification as to the goals of your group, you put yourself out on a shaky limb.

My advice is keep your eye on the prize, whatever the prize is. That is one thing that until pressure caused it's collapse, this group and its members did VERY well.

Our prize was the notecard. Our 1st result was successful in the the LL handbook is to be made public. You will have no measurement of success without an agenda, even if the agenda just benefits handicapped lesbian tiny furry robot alien BDSMers only to the exclusion of all others.

We never claimed to be indicative of everyone despite the allegations, we were merely trying to accommodate Philips stated goal of being all inclusive and representative, a concept he clearly retracted upon realizing what his request opened us up to or other unknown factors.




My question is what tree are you picking fruits from?

Without an agenda and a common ground from the membership, how can you present a unified voice.

Much to the dismay of most on the forums, we asked Anshe to be the spokesperson for our 1st meeting. Despite all the negative reaction, we stand by that vote as Anshe was able to consolidate our agenda in rational, comprehensive front that was was taken seriously and acted on BECAUSE of that organization of differing voices.

If you can't be the Spokesperson for the Linden meeting, I urge you to elect one and make that your SECOND priority (after FIRST deciding on a common ground and agenda).

Learn from our experience, our success and failure.


I am not a power broker but the detailed notecard gave me justification for my energy.

I think you underestimate the struggle you are going to have in setting an agenda, I could be wrong, but I don't think I am, and this is based on experience.

Everyone has different experiences to draw from and needs and desires to consider, so finding that plurality will be your most difficult struggle.

Mark my words.





http://www.lordfly.com

Forgive me if I have my doubts.



I hope you set aside a large block of time, because #1 will take far longer than you anticipate. With 7 of us, and an agenda set up, we spent well over an hour just gathering input. If you have more then 10 people show up, keep your Excedrin handy.

#4 is a very promising plan working towards your goals, when they are decided.

Good luck!



I agree, underhanded tactics and infighting hurt MJW bad, but the microscope of pressure and external sabotage, and fearing every word you said publicly being over analyzed to find an ulterior motive will do that.

I hope you are able to see that those of you who spent energy better invested into doing something productive, but found it more fun to be destructive, did more to harm MJW and the ideals then any member inside did.

While some of you may be proud of this accomplishment, even though I perceived you as antagonizing MJW because of who it was, I am here offering you some advice based simply on experience and a perspective you may not be aware of. Healthy debate is good, but the downright nastiness displayed this week for the sole sake of self gratification and destruction is disheartening.

I am reaching out my hand to share my experience so that your agenda can be heard, even if I don't agree with your agenda

To paraphrase, I may not agree with your opinions but I will defend your right to have them.

And, we were blazing a trail, there was no model for what we did. You are using the path we cleared, so I would urge you to see your group in that context and show respect to those who it is due, the ones who opened a door none of us knew existed.

I have been critical of Anshe and Prok, but I took time out recently to make a special note to thank them for starting something that others will find useful, despite how everything has turned out. I hope you can put aside your personal bias and thank them to for your directly reaping what they have sown.



While I don't doubt for a second what you say here, please understand Philip and Robin are taking time off their bust day to meet with you. They are setting aside business to gather feedback from you. Please go to the linden labs corporate website and view their biographies and accomplishments. They are setting aside time to accommodate the end user, not to play settlers of second life. That is why I am so strongly advising you to have a clear concise agenda to keep them willing to set aside time in their schedule to hear end user concerns.

I hope you realize that.






Maybe not, but it is the best model that is currently know to work with.



I have many disagreements with this statement but I will only confront it with one example.

You are reaping the rewards of what MJW did by taking advantage of the precedent MJW set with Philip agreeing in world formalized group conferences were sanctioned and encouraging others to do the same. This is a direct result of MJWs efforts, and is in no way detrimental to the majority of residents, nor is it in conflict with the stated goals on the notecard.

I also feel it is important to note the hypocrisy of those asserting that "no one can refuse us a voice" are refusing MJW a voice. Whether it be goals, personalities or our individual motivations that concern you, questioning our right to express ourselves is in DIRECT opposition on the claim that no-ones voice shouldn't be silenced.

Something to think about I hope.



I hope so, but let others experience this week show you that "pride comes before the fall"



You now have a better way to communicate to the Lindens, thanks primarily to efforts and the fallout of MJW.

And how is your square block different then us, aside from having no common ground to initialize the meeting of a CEO. You seem to be using the very venue MJW pioneered. Even if you disagree with the steps we took, you apparently agree with the outcome

I believe in a transcript posted somewhere that I stated that Prok and I have very different paths to the same conclusion. It is the sharing of that conclusion that allows us to put aside our personal disagreements to work for a common cause.

I cannot abandon a cause simply because I don't like someone who shares my views on the cause. And I notice that you are using the very venue, albeit with VASTLY different circumstances, that MJW used for thier agenda.



I hope not, but I am still unclear what message you are trying to communicate with the highest chain of command. This is what concerns me, and I really feel it should concern you too, if you value the venue you have been offered and are not trying to destroy it.

I may be there or not. Honestly I have had my fill of drama for the week, but honestly without any stated goals or agenda, I would only be involved out of curiosity for your process and outcomes.


Beware, as I told Prok, I can debate either side effectively if I so choose most of the time.

I wouldn't do so to destroy what you are working on, but I may do so, as I am doing here, to point out cracks in your foundation that may end up causing you more problems than you anticipated.

And honestly, my true concern right now is that this group was made as a reaction instead of for filling a perceived need, and I don't want the venue Philip has offered to go away if my suspicions of your lack of foresight convince Philip he was wrong to offer the venue.

I truly hope you understand my concerns and take steps to ensure you don't realize them.

I disagree. I think focus and the identification of mutual concern is pretty much a definition of "special interest group"

To suggest representing the "will of the poeple" is far more politicaly oriented then MJW ever inteded to be. Our interest was what was outlined of the notecard. If you agree, please join, if not, do nothing or make your own group.

Trying to assert you are the voice of the people is at odds with your statement that I quoted ablove, invididuals, different concerns etc.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_interest_group

Our Lord who art in Heaven... you're the next incarnation of that Prokofy spirit. The torch hath been passed.

I can't respond to many of your points (primarily because I stopped reading your post) but I think one of your points is incorrect. The in-fighting which destroyed MJW was almost completely unrelated to outside pressures. The real impetus was Anshe's recruiting her residents to join the group. Prokofy's response to this was to begin brainstorming ways to counter that influence and retain posession of the group, up to and including graft. You also assert that he didn't exhibit corrupt behavior. I don't think this is particularly true, as his brilliant idea to buy votes suggests.

If I finish reading the other two or three volumes of this post, I may come back and discuss the rest of your post.

I take proks assertion on the other forum that he was illustrating insanity of bussing in residents was why he stated he could lower their rent, I honestly don't think he intended that given his insistence on holding that meeting in public. Prok may be many things, but a complete idiot is not 1.

as far as me being like prok, maybe in terms of logic, but certainly not in terms of venom

and I maintain that anshes attempts to bus in residents to swing the vote was a direct response to forum griefers joining, trying to vote a founder of a group they didnt agree with, and generally attempting to destroy someone elses creation.

for the record I think that was wrong, and Prok informing the general public that Anshe wanted a super secret ninja power group behind the scenes was why i left in the first place.

I also respect Prok making things public, as this is precicly what the forum jackels asked for. if you can put down your hate, Prok did many of the things that the forum jackels clamored for.

Take off the bias glasses and review things. It is most likely a waste of time, but I think my assessment is pretty damn fair.

You assume that her residents were both ideologically sympathetic to the purported cause of the group and naive/obtuse enough not to see where things were really going.

I was particularly amused to get an invite from Anshe, despite having vehemently denounced the farce. I was most certainly not the kind of person whom you would want in the group to balance out the "griefers" as I am, I'm sure, just another one of those "griefers" who needed to be marginalized. After all, only griefers would disagree with the leadership of the group.

Review the chat log from last night. notice how many members were confused about why they were there in the group, what the group was about, and what were they voting for.

I find it odd that she didn't even bother to explain why they were there to them.

the forums are very limited despite thier popularity with some people. most people simply log into the world and leave the forums alone. that would further explain their confusion why they were there

niave/otuse may seem harsh, but if you need to be a member of a group to rent somewhere, and your landlord informed you that you need to be in a new group, and advised you how to vote, yeah, i would say that meets the qualifications of a bussed in party totally not informed of the agenda

I do beleive this was a direct response to the forums, but I assert it was certainly the wrong and a corrupt response, as it hid the intentions behind a veil of democracy

and as far as your last statement, do you disagree that there was a huge contingent who wanted the group to implode and actively manuevered to ensure it imploded?

at the 1st meeting prior to the Philip meeting, I advised them to have a way to deal with people trying to come in and screw everything up, in terms of a commitee, a floor to be yielded, and a logical officer group modeled after real world comittees. This was to keep the dialog on the notecard and agenda.

They ignored my suggestion, and they got about what I guessed they would (and this was prior to the forum fury).

I actually live in Dreamland (for now) and I received the spam invite from Anshe. Anshe didn't claim the new group was necessary, nor did she advise how to vote. In fact, she simply invited and that was it. No explanation was given, no requests were made.

Perhaps I'm just an optimistic misanthrope, but I have a hard time believing that people would automatically favor Anshe simply because she's their landlord. If my landlord in real life were running for office, I certainly wouldn't blindly vote for him.

On the subject of order/disorder, unity/dissent: Though your proposed structure would certainly keep dissent in check, I don't think that's a good thing especially in a group with objectives like those which were stated for MJW. Committees are rarely a good idea for a group which is supposed to be representative of large numbers of people, as you get a very narrow subset of people who may or may not accurately represent the whole, and you miss out on some truly innovative and worthwhile opinions which may come from the non-committee masses. For special interest groups with more specific goals and more select membership, committees would probably work fine. In groups which are supposed to be defending everyone, it would be more appropriate to institute some basic rules of order, and censure or eject group members who fail to heed them. The effect on participation and equal representation is not quite as chilling as a committee based alternative.

I certainly hope you are right. But the allegations and dialog in last nights chat logs set off red flags for me.



Well, at the final unpublished meeting we had post the Philip meeting, we had agreed we were a special interest or Lobbying group.

Philip challenged us to represent the whole group (which he later rightfully reversed course on), so we made an effort to comply with his request. But in doing so, it was fairly obvious what was eventually going to happen, given certain particpants.

My suggestions were two fold. 2 of the personalities are much hated (or at least distrusted) and it came as no suprise when the first griefing recall was initiated. I fully anticipated that.

Another was my concern that 1 or possibly 2 personalities would dominate the dialog to the point of monologue, and there was certainly a need for people to yield (give it a rest)

A comittee may be imperfect, but as a special interest group or lobbying group who voted and agreed government was an issue the group didn't want to get involved with, it was the most efficient model to keeping on task.

You're marginalizing the dissenters again. There are very valid and realistic reasons why someone might not want those two paragons of venality at the helm of the group. If someone believes in the focus of the group but does not believe that those people are interested or capable of accomplishing that goal, then don't they have a right to make that known? Do they not have a right to demand leadership which they can trust? And if the majority of people agree, don't you think that those demands should be met?

In a democratic model sure, but this wasnt a democracy nor a broad leadership, despite allegations to the contrary (and possible hidden motives).

But the recall was initiated by a brand spanking new member about 1-2 hours after the transcripts went public, sometimes "you don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows"

the recall function was used to cause grief because it froze memership for 7 days, and people could accuse us of using the recall to keep members out. It was a very clever catch 22, but I suspected that would happen, hence I wanted structure before all hell broke loose.

I agree, and have stated knowing full well I was doing so publically that those 2 in leadership roles could be a liability to the goals, and it certainly seems to be the case, no?

While I agree what you are saying, please don't forget that for many years Anshee has lived in a "guild" environment, she has not lived or participated in a truly 3D community. Within that guild is a leader and officers, from the guild you receive discounts on items you need to purchase, in some instances a "home" within the game, and assurances of various types of winnings to allow your game money to grow.

Largeness of the guild also helps accomplish many things in a game, and while I'm not saying that a guild does not have a community-type of feeling, it's not quite the same as Second Life has been. Yes, there can be social structure, there are officers who everyone looks to for leadership to "get the prize" for everone. Seeing that in the transcripts of the meeting wherein Anshee pointed that out, it doesn't surprise me about unannounced invitations to join a group. Many guilds are formed that way with individuals standing around the major cities "advertising" their guild for additional membership.

If any of the SL players have been in guilds, then they would realize the value of having Anshee as the "leader" and/or probably vote blindly for her since leadership was what she was trying to accomplish.

All you really have to do to include us euros.. change it to 2pm PST. That would be 10pm GMT which is a LOT better then 1am. You do it earlier not later. Therefore you dont have to be up at 5am and we dont have to be up at 1am.

I have been in a guild for many years that play other games. Yet I do not and will not ever see the value of having Anshe as any sort of leader. People are supposed to vote based on the previous actions and stances of the person who is to represent them.

That was my response as to why she would pass out invitations to join the group without any previous notification. Many people are followers, and would just join without asking. Many would also vote to elect her, not wanting to bite the hand that feeds them their rent at low prices. Yes, even by owning sims and renting out land in a "business" here in SL, it's a lot like being in a guild on another game wherein items you want/need are given/purchased at lower prices than buying them outright, i.e., the land rentals.

I guess I don't really think SL needs a special interest group. I was under the impression that the MJW was organized to get fair treatment for all. I also don't think SL needs a voice of the people because the people are right here.

You chose your way, Lord Digeridoo has chosen this way. I don't understand what the problem is. We saw how well your way worked with the ensuing power struggles.

BTW, I think it's wonderful how well you've grasped the concepts of Second Life in the short time you've been here. It's really refreshing to know that new people can come into Second Life and contribute so much. One of the things the anti-FIC party members used to tout was that the atmosphere currently prevalent in SL made it difficult for new members to contribute. You've proven them wrong. Welcome

From: Seth Kanahoe

Thank you for spewing sense into this thread.

Except I'm working at 2 PM PST.

You know, this could just work.

And the dwell going to a charity, that's wonderful!

coco

P.S. Mulch, I think they are going to figure out what they are for once they are all there, see what people want to be for, and see who has the loudest leadership voices to make it happen. At that point, everyone can decide whether they are for that or not. Could just work! I'm not sure exactly what it will work for yet, but it will be interesting to see everyone's concerns.

P.S. Lordfly and others - don't underestimate the strength of a group of people who have very specific ideas of what they agree is wrong and can suggest concrete ways to fix it. Those groups are not going away; there is nothing inherently wrong with them; and they WILL be effective.

This and all that follows . . . brilliant analysis! And so articulately explained. Everyone would do well to pay attention to the remarks of this very astute individual who was there from the beginning (and didn't miss the meetings I did). Bravo, Mulch! You're one terrific asset for SL.

coco

TY Coco. I think it is worth mentioning that you and I never attended the same meetings (except one group IM) and have never met in world.

I hope things return to a position where I feel comfortable being a part of them again, and apparently, staking my reputation on 1 group. Not that I need reputation to be happy or make money, mind you, but because defending something that deserves no defense frustrates me and makes me waste my time.

If the debate was squarely on the notecard, I wouldn't stop. But the debate has been and still is on Anshe/Prok, and there is so much that they both have done which makes them eternally guilty to every accusation in public opinion, no matter how spot on or dead silly it may be.

Damnit LF, why'd you go and get on this bandwagon?

Ah well.