Ulrika Declared a Terrorist in N'burg

You have a unique point of view.

A fascinating twist of events would be this:

The city government, sensing potential liability over content rights, could hire a team of builders to rennovate the city.

Total cost: perhaps $L 200k or so? But averting potential infrastructure disaster.



By the time all this dragged through the courts...

*insert large pile of contested, unlinked prims here next to bulldozer*


Just out of curiosity, where is said trial to be held when the person in question is banned?

Outside of Neualtenburg? Trial in absentia?



Oddly, the businessman in me senses a great opportunity for Neualtenburg. With drama comes press, and with press comes business, desired or not.

Isn't successful arbitration when neither party gets what they want? True mutual satisfaction is an illusion.

If you guys ever need an impartial arbitrator, give me a call. I'll make sure nobody is happy.

The best part of all of this? The realization that getting Ulrika to come back works just like invoking Beetlejuice.

ULRIKA ULRIKA ULRIKA



Just keep chanting it and hilarity will ensue.

* hums the Carmina Burana *

Exactly. Beyond the simple argument of who owns what, there is also the discussion on what actions are just. Deleting all the structures would be quite unkind, just like hiring individuals to replace them would be unkind. In the first case it would leave the city in bad shape. In the last case that money would be diverted away from the original investor just in spite to recreate the same thing that is contested.

I should note that we're both guilty of the former and latter. I have removed access to critically important online tools. I took the original website, domain, and voting tool offline. They have hired out artisans to rebuild my infrastructure. They have hired a person to rebuild the voting tool and now have a budget for web support. As an artisan, it is not fun to ask for compensation, hear them say no, and then have them turn around and pay someone else for exactly what you asked to be paid for (at a lower quality).

As I see it there are several options:

1. A one-time settlement for the contested infrastructure and time in US$ or L$.
   
2. Mutual agreement to the removal of all contested infrastructure.
   
3. A contract that pays monthly for previous investment.
   
4. A contract that pays monthly for previous investment plus access to online voting tools.
   
5. A contract that pays monthly for access to online voting tools.

It is up to the government to understand that they have a moral obligation to settle an outstanding issue with a principal member of the start up. Villifying someone to whom you're beholden to avoid personal responsibility is immoral. This must be resolved so we can all rest in peace.

~Ulrika~

Well, there's one BIG bad news, Ulrika.

Governments don't negotiate with terrorists nowdays. Sorry.

That's not a counter argument. Can you really see LL going 'She deleted her own stuff? ZOMG HOW DARE SHE?' I can't.

Not being an N'burer or an N'burg supporter... not being a fan of a certain person... I say, delete, or better yet, return, all the builds! Of course, I take that perspective from Marie Antoinette's infamous quote, "Let them eat cake" married with the sentinment of "Ye reap what ye sow" - in this case , demogogic posturing, fawning and a collective sense of Utopianism seems to have created or at least aggravated an inherently unstable situation. Notice the impications therein - it's not about a single person.

tands back to watch the "tower" wobble, lean and finally fall...... The impact could create some interesting detritus.

I don't see it falling, myself. In fact, controversy does wonders for breathing life into almost anything.

But let's say the unspeakable did somehow happen someday, and it 'fell' as a sim either culturally or financially.

I doubt Neualtenburg would simply vanish from the grid, unless a suicide pact is built into its constitution.



Perhaps the system of government would not survive. But would someone step up to save the territory itself? I think there would be a good chance of that happening


Desmond Shang

Imperialist Independent State of Caledon

Karsten, after reading your words twice, I still can't understand your message. Are you making a statement based upon your personal opinion, a lawyer's know-how and experience, or expressing the fear that actually people are able to create their own rules and enforce them?

The Microsoft ToS is void in all European countries, since it deprives users of some of their fundamental rights. Do you think that has ever stopped Microsoft to enforce it — and, I might add, mostly to full effect? I haven't heard of a single case where Microsoft failed to execute their ToS (at the very least, the offending party would need to compromise). In my country, the "fines" for unauthorized duplication of their products, for instance, are at twice the value you'd pay for murdering someone while driving drunk, and these "fines" are not applied by any authority with judicial powers. Do you think that has stopped them to try to apply them — and many have even voluntarily paid the fines?

Enforceability of a contract and its ability to bind people is tied to the level of sanctions/fines you are able to extract when you fail to comply with a contract. Thus, a good lawyer would probably find that you can freely violate the Microsoft ToS; but it would mean for a company that they wouldn't ever be able to buy a Microsoft product or get support from it. Ever. If your whole business setup depended on being able to use Microsoft products, you'll comply peacefully with their ToS, pay all "fines", and solve any pending issues in good faith.

Enforcing a contract or any set of rules in Second Life, or, verily, on the whole of the multinational Internet, is exactly the same. The Second Life ToS is also void in several points according to European law; even the whole interpretation of "fair use" of IP on content developed in Second Life by the residents, which forfeit any royalty payments to Linden Lab in case Linden Lab uses that content, is not possible outside the US. Still, by agreeing with the LL ToS, a user is relinquishing some of their (possibly) constitutional rights in their coutries, just to be able to access Second Life and enjoy it, and use the tools Linden Lab provides us — in the manner LL proscribes. You might enjoy a nice legal fight with Linden Lab, and even win your case, which will give you a warm and cozy feeling, a document to hang on your wall, and, naturally enough, a permaban from Second Life. After all, we all have agreed to the LL ToS just to be here; it's up to us, residents of SL, to carefully review what we've signed, what rights we have forfeited, and what jurisdiction we have adopted for discussing those rights, before we enjoy the pleasures of Second Life. Once doing that, there is no turning back; LL is absolutely able to enforce the right of access to their virtual world, if you fail to comply with their ToS — no matter how your current perception of your legal rights are. Unless LL violates some Californian law, their ToS is absolute inside SL.

Why do you think that any other ToS, applying to parts of Second Life, is "less valid"? When "signing up" to Neualtenburg, citizens also have a clear notion of what rules are apply to them — and when you fail to comply with those rules, you're out of it. "Enforcement" in this case means "access"; when you can enforce "access", you can enforce "rules".

But surely that's precisely the same what happens with SL and the LL ToS — or Windows and the Microsoft ToS?

Actually, there is just a slight difference. The LL ToS is changeable by LL only (as the Microsoft ToS is only changeable by Microsoft). The Neualtenburg ToS is changeable by any citizen. That is the only difference, but certainly is a major one.

Oh, and while you're enjoying the drama (I'm glad that there is always fun to be gotten from that), groups in Neualtenburg are actually continuing their work on their projects for their second sim (deadline on May, 1st).

Also, drama comes regularly up, every three months or so. Sure, it's bad PR, but as the old saying goes, it's always better to have people talk about something than to ignore it completely. There are always a few new people who come to join shortly after the drama explodes Quite often, this is the first time they ever hear about the project anyway...

Of the choices given, call it personal opinion. I'll try to explain better what I mean.

So, your TOS says Ulrika can't delete her builds in the city. The only way you have to 'enforce' that is to ban her from the sim, as you said already. Access is control, to a degree. But suppose she does as Jonas suggested (note, purely hypothetical, not intended as a characterization of anyone) and flies in with an alt, mops up and leaves. What then? She just broke your TOS, and there's nothing you can do about it. You can't call LL and say 'ZOMG, ULRIKA DELETED HER OWN STUFF THAT'S AGAINST OUR TOS.' Do you really think they'll care? It's an agreement between players which they take a totally hands off approach to. As long as it doesn't violate THEIR TOS, it's not their concern, nor should it be.

And as far as the 'government' of Neualtenburg is concerned, what I meant simply is that the sim owner wields supreme power, period. If the sim owner tomorrow decided that Neualtenburg was a waste of time and erased the sim, there's not a damn thing the 'government' or citizens can do about it. Likewise, as long as the sim owner sides with the 'government' there's nothing the citizens can do except leave if they don't like it. You can say it's a government with processes and rules and all that all you want, but in the heart of it, there's one person wielding the big stick, as is the case for every other community sim that exists.

has sole responsibility for paying tier, .. oh wait. This is LL. It's the corporation that has the stick and they have shown that as far as N'berg goes, favoritism can and will be shown, special deals can and will be made, and "blind eyes" can and will be turned whenever it is in the corporate interest or even mere whim to do so.

Let the drahma continue!

From the N-Burg TOS.... penned by Ulrika:



And now from a post in this thread



Confusing to be sure...

Don't think I need to say anything else

I believe Ulrika claims that her work preceeds the Neualtenburg TOS and therefore isn't subject to it.

Has sole responsibility for the tier, and therefore final say in what happens to it. Like I said, the big stick. You think if the sim owner deleted the sim tomorrow that LL would step in and say 'ZOMG, YOU MUST KEEP PAYING US TIER AND LETTING THOSE PEOPLE USE YOUR SIM'? No. And if they did, do you think the sim owner would? No. Would Linden Lab go back to sponsoring NBurg then? Not likely.

Deleting her stuff from NBurg might be looked upon as unethical, but I don't think you'll find Linden Lab smacking her for it, as long as she doesn't delete anyone elses stuff, and it seems unlikely she has the power to do that anymore. That would be LL setting the precedent that they can give your stuff to another player without your permission, and I don't want to think about the uproar that would cause. (and yes, I'm aware the ToS gives them permission to use whatever they want for 'marketing purposes,' but I don't think any content creators would stand for LL giving their stuff to another player just because it was allegedly one of their pet projects, or probably for any other reason.)

What you describe is the old issue of the notion of the perfect crime: it's still a crime, if you can't be caught?

It's an interesting philosophical concept (since the perfect crime is committed every day — you just don't know about it), but it has no relevance to the issue. Just consider the following example: iRL, you can enter the Louvre or the Guggenheim, plant a bomb, and destroy all works of art inside. Even if you get caught, arrested, and fined, what does that matter? The works of art will still be destroyed, no matter what you do about it. They cannot be replaced. They will simply cease to exist. You can rot in jail or pay fines of billions of dollars, but what's the point? You can't undo what was done.

Nevertheless, even of it's impossible to replace the works of art, it's illegal in any country in the world to plant bombs in museums! The mere fact that catching the bomber won't restore the works of art does not prevent Governments to legislate on it.

Using your example above, of course we can do something about it — ban the alt from Neualtenburg as well. Would that replace the destroyed buildings? No. But like iRL, the fact that you can't replace the buildings/works of art is irrelevant to the discussion. The rules are still enforceable a posteriori, although it would be nice to be able to enforce them a priori. Still, we live in an imperfect world; it would also be nice, iRL, if you could 'un-murder' people after arresting the murderer, but that's sadly impossible.

You're addressing the philosophical point of defining crime when catching the culprit will not restore things to how they originally were. Some things are irreplaceable: a human life, a work of art, someone's reputation, etc. Still, perhaps half the crimes of the world are commited upon irreplaceable things. No modern society, to my knowledge, has refused to legislate on those crimes, even if they know that you can't restore things that were irreplaceably destroyed.


Oh, please — it should be pretty obvious by now, after a year and a half, that the sim of Neualtenburg only exists at all because all the citizens pay for it; that's the whole point. And citizens pay for it because they trust that the Government — embodied in the PayPal account that pays Linden Lab the monthly fees — keeps paying and does not do crazy stunts like the ones you describe.

What you describe is an "illusion of power"; what I'm describing is something based on the only thing that defeats paranoia: trust. My own RL government may also believe and act as if they have absolute power — but as a matter of fact, two or three nuclear bombs would wipe the country out in a second (and since my country doesn't have a proper army to speak of, warfare is a ridiculous concept for them — we're totally defenseless and in the hands of any military power). Of course the RL government trusts their EU and US friends and allies not to drop atomic bombs just because they dislike the PM's choice of ties or something petty like that; and so they act and behave as if they're safe from all-out nuclear warfare. My RL government has established an "illusion of power" based on trust that countries will not drop nuclear bombs on top of it.

Similarly, in SL, we all act and behave as if Linden Lab is eternal and won't unplug the grid just because they feel like it. We pay every month our due fees to LL in the trust that they'll be working tomorrow as usual. Why is that so? Well, because you trust LL to act as responsible, mature adults, and not as children that might, at a whim, break their toys or throw them out of the window, because it suits their mood. Also, notice that LL is allowed to do that under their ToS — you have certainly forfeited the right to demand any sort of compensation in case LL got crazy and unplugged the grid, while evilly laughing behind your back.

Please spare me from any answer like "but LL is a real company and subject to Californian law so I trust them more because of that". That's your choice and I'll respect that. But for me, LL is even less material or "real" than Neualtenburg; actually, although most Linden employees act and behave rationally, there are a few that don't and I often worry to think what would happen if LL were in the hands of them! I trust Philip to keep things in check, like I trust most people in Neualtenburg to behave like sensible, rational adults. Some, of course, sadly act like spoiled brats in severe need of spanking, but then again, who am I to judge that — it's their choice of acting, and I'll respect that as well.

The concept of trust is something very alien to the minds of 170,000 users of Second Life, and, again, I'm understanding (and often condescending) to the several degrees of paranoia exhibited by residents. Many have several good reasons for that paranoia. Others are just so used to it that they can't believe in anything else. Paranoia, alas, feeds upon paranoia, and tends to spread to others. It's not easy to build an "island of trust" that stands against the waves of paranoia Just look at the handful of people that are able to do that in SL, when compared to the uncountable masses that aren't. The whole point here is that trusting others and delegating powers to the ones you trust is something so rare and precious, that it is an exception to the overall level of mistrust and fear that rules paramount in SL.

There is no "the sim owner wields supreme power, period". That's true if and only the sim owner pays the sim from their own pocket. Rest assured that any rational, adult, mature fellow human being understanding that simple statement will behave very reasonably, according to expected trust


Not only the 'sim owner' has quite often 'not sided with the Government' and openly said so — and even been vetoed — but there's a lot that citizens can do if they don't like the Government, the simplest thing being, of course, electing a new one — which has happened four times so far. Don't take my word for it; read it in the forums!

If by your comment you mean that Linden Lab should create better tools to allow a different model of paying for a sim, well then, in that case, I'm definitely all on your side. The good news is that this is exactly what Linden Lab is doing: a way to have groups, for instance, to make tier payments collectively — ie. 'shared bank accounts' and similar devices that allow people to pay their 'share' of a private island, not unlike tiered land in the mainland; and, on the other hand, implementing similar "Estate Tools" on mainland-held land. What we all know is that these things take time to be implemented — and while we eagerly await all these fantastic tools to be developed, we have to survive on what we have. At the moment, the easiest choice seems to be to funnel all the money into a PayPal account, and pay tier through that account; the more complex choice (which some groups also do in SL) is to incorporate a company and do it through a company. This might be the route for Neualtenburg when it has perhaps 20 sims or so, but right now, the overhead costs are simply too high to set something like that up. We'd go for the new amazing 'group bank account' tools that are under development instead — they'll be very likely available much sooner than Neualtenburg growing to 20 sims... (one per year seems to be the rate that we can reasonably plan to expand).

So, let's bump up LL's priorities on developing better land management facilities!

But in either case, the need for trust, for yielding power and delegate it to others, is what makes things like Neualtenburg work. Like I use to say, it's not a project that is for everybody; you have to get rid of layers and layers of fear and paranoia until you're able to join a project like Neualtenburg, and wake up every morning in the confidence that things will be as you left them before logging off the night before.

Like, in a sense, I wake up every morning in the confidence that the grid will be there or that my ISP is still providing me Internet access to the grid...

Care to make a list of what you see as "favouritism"?

I love allegations that have no basis.

You're entirely mistaking what I'm saying again. I'm not in any fashion insinuating that Ulrika, the sim owner, the sim government, it's citizens, or anyone else involved in this project or dispute would do any of what I'm saying. From what I've seen, most of the people in this dispute and/or project are very decent people with a common goal and interest, but as always when people are involved in anything there's bound to be controversy. I'm simply saying have fun with it, take it where you will, but when you cut to the heart of the matter, the sim owner could yank the plug anytime they want to. You're right that after so long, it's very unlikely and even very silly as long as other people are paying for it, but that doesn't make it any less possible. It's a trust system, and if the worse were to happen, the Neualtenburg government and/or citizens couldn't do anything about it except move on and rebuild a new home.

Additionally, the bomb analogy doesn't even remotely fit. The 'crime' of 'deleting the city' is only a 'crime' under your TOS as long as it is her property, and the worst you can do is ban her from the sim forever. It's not a crime under the Linden TOS. That's was my point, you can't punish her for it, whether it would change the fact it had been done or not.

All that being said, I do hope this gets worked out peacefully. Neualtenburg is an interesting project to watch, but I just can't personally take it seriously as a government with the current model that SecondLife operates on. That's not a fault of Neualtenburg, and it's not really the fault of SecondLife. I just don't believe they're compatible.

Amen.

I think some people look at Neualtenburg as a pet project of SL because it was at one point sponsored by them in some fashion, or so I've been told. To what extent and capacity I really don't know. As I understand it, though, that sponsorship ended a long time ago and I wouldn't expect them to deal any differently with Neualtenburg than they do with any other group in SecondLife. If that's not the case, I would also like to see this list.

A stunning example of ignoring the spirit of something while hiding behind the letter of the thing, if you ask me. *shrug*

This link was the first post the Lindens made, soliciting for groups to build in the Snow Regions, that led to the creation of Neualtenburg on the Main Continent:



It is my understanding that the Neualtenburg group was the only group to apply.

yes

I think the other people that were going to apply are still buried somewhere in Anzere

Indeed.



I see. So Neualtenburg wasn't even sponsored, really. Good to know.