this way out

Okay I'm comitting the venial sin of reposting maybe because I think I had an accidental insight or maybe just because I want to be thought of as concerned and clever. At the bottom of a non-controversial thread I posted the following (and thank Jsecure for asking the thought provoking question as to how to remedy the recent schism):

I'll beat my old drum again, but briefly. Until such a time as the existing ToS and CS are enforced swiftly and openly it really doesn't matter what the policies are or how they are arrived at.

You can stop there if you'd like because now I'm just going to add some navel contemplation.

I believe Linden Lab is operating under mutually incompatible principles of governance and is chronically caught on the horns of their own dilemma. On one horn, I do believe that they hold many of the democratic ideals that were laid down by Tom Jefferson and friends. Thus we have things like feature voting, open forums that tolerate posts critical of Linden Lab and so on.

On the other horn, they are stewards of the world and must be the de facto police. SL is far too complex to allow the mechanisms of the grid to enforce the rules and I think they know that. However, unlike the real world, there is an asymmetry of power that utterly prevents the establishment of player governments. They own the SL world in the manner that a despot does and cannot avoid doing so not because they wish to be despotic, but because it is inherent in the fabric of SL.

For example if I am your neighbor in real life and my actions cause you harm, you can appeal to the judiciary and we enter our pleas for adjudication as equal persons under the law. If, however, if I toss a sim-bomb over the line into your sim, there are at least two parties that have been "harmed" you and LL. That is a natural effect of their ownership of the land and our leasehold. From some recent Linden statements, they'd prefer to not have to be the police but cannot avoid doing so without yielding enforcement power which I think is widely regarded as a horrible idea. Finally, call it what you will, but SL is some sort of recreation; they could indeed yield total governance to the players but as has always been the case anywhere governance is simply hard work. For a community of transients (which we all really are, regardless of tenure) it is rare to get a collaborative build going let alone the tedium of governance. Put more simply, you can't press Ctrl-Q to pop out of the real world so we are forced to provide for our own real world government; problems don't cease with a keystroke.

So, how could they better do it? If my thesis of "dilemma of their own creation" is correct, here are things that would make it easier. Acknowledge that they are a mostly benevolent dictatorship and not any form of democracy. A benevolent dictator always has the privilege of listening to the subjects but doesn't necessarily have to. Furthermore, the dictator can say "this is my decision, no appeals" there is far less work to be done managing conflicting interests.

Another thing that would ease the burden would be to dispense their justice in the light of day; this is what separates a benevolent dictatorship from a despot. For too long LL has held "privacy rights" over open justice. This has a number of ill effects: it does not allow people to see justice being done and thus they can easily feel that it is not. In the end who cares if the privacy rights of "Joe Avatar" are violated, Joe isn't a person and therefore has no privacy to be protected. A large part of the car-crash of yesterday's "star chamber" meeting was because of the perception of hidden machinations not because there necessarily were any. Also, whose privacy is being protected? "Joe Avatar" might live next door to me in RL, if he doesn't tell me I'll never know. This is the other facet of open justice, if I see in the police blotter "someone was suspended for violating CS" I learn absolutely nothing about how I should comport myself and neither does anyone else. If I see "Joe Avatar mowed down a simful of concert-goers" I learn that such is not tolerated and if I was one of the concert attendees, it would increase my feeling that the world was just. If on the other hand, if I see that Joe was suspended for misspelling "fark" in a PG sim, that would also tell me something about the dispensing of justice.

These forums are an excellent way to let the sunshine into a global community which is far preferable to seeking real-time audience with the king. In someways we are doing it already by beseeching the king in Hotline to Linden. Many of the posts in that forum are seeking clarification of whether I can or can't do so-and-so. More open justice would make a clearer line for everyone to follow.

In conclusion, I am asking the Lindens to be less tolerant, more dictatorial, and more open. Because of the inherent structure of the world, I see no alternative. To do this means having to abandon some of their well intended but flawed ideals - but not many - for the benefit of all.

Insightful.

Your nailing close to where I feel virtual worlds are in the realm of "participatory culture."

Players politiking for policy changes, regulations, and arbitrations won't work because that's not what every citizen of SL agreed to participate in when they signed on to SL.

Politics DO work in places like "A Tale in the Desert," where it is aforementioned and understood that politics are central to their world.

I signed on SL for the freedom and possibilities. Not to harangue and bicker for my rights.

Good post.

Damn, this box of cigars may be emptied one day after all! Give this man a cigar for 'getting it'.

Bravo.

Great post Malachi. Sadly, it will fall on deaf ears.

Hasn't Philip acknowledged it already ? I agree with your general point, but I feel there should be more "police" powers transfered to residents (comprehensive land tools ?). Also, I think there ARE checks and balances in place against LL abuse, because it's not 1st Life. We can bail out.



*smoochies*

Mal, per usual, you hit the nail on the head. Insightful, logical, and reasonable. You're champion.

mal, very good post.

i do think that anyone who doesn't realize LL is a benevolent dictator needs to pull the blinders off. LL is a business. They need the control to make decisions that help grow and protect their business. Maybe one day, if SL becomes the defacto standard and critical mass becomes a huge barrier to competition, they can turn over the reins, but we are quite far from that point.

There are some people who get caught up within the bubble that is Second Life, and do not have the perspective to look outside. Linden Lab does not have that luxury.

There are also some people that are overly enamored with democracy. But you cannot run a business that way, and popularity contests mixed in with the occasional fad/mob mentality do not make for good design decisions. That doesn't mean ignore your customers, but don't let them dictate your business either.

As always, you have presented important ideas eloquently.

Mal is re-writing the Federalist Papers (you Hamiltoninan, you).

Thanks for the kind words, folks. Forseti, were my ramblings distilled into one point, you made it:Where "some people", I fear, includes the king. Now that's a paradox to put in your pipe.

Hmmm, I think too many people confuse "democracy" with the principles that lay the foundations for the humanist movement.

Searching for my metaphorical match!

Excellent! post Malachi - please be sure to E-mail it to Robin Linden. Keep us updated if any of this finds traction.

Yes very insightful. If you read Philip's recent excellent post about the MJK fiasco, and their actions to override GOM, which clearly would benefit all, you can see they are moving into right direction suggested in your post.

SL is very unique environment and amazing experiment. The success (or failure) of which could have profound impact on the new direction of virtual societies, which will be inevitable as Internet is. I find these discussions very interesting and very important. The key word you used and Philip clearly outlined is "openness" or transparency, hope we move towards that ideal.