Wallace solicits conversation on RL identities in SL

Surely, as a business, LL should be looking at making their platform THE universal virtual reality platform, with immersive fantasy at one end of the scale and RL social/business networking at the other. SL caters for both these aspects already, although they don't always sit comfortably together. Maybe there's a case for LL starting another grid specifically for RL social networkers.

To a great degree, I agree with what Nika says, above. I do think, however, that there should be a way of implementing strengthened linkages between RL and SL without creating havoc. To me, the issue is not technological, it's about policy and culture: HOW is this going to be implemented, how strongly is it going to be "pushed," particularly on newcomers, and what sorts of "incentives" will LL apply (if any) to make this not only happen, but become widespread?

Your scenario is a plausible one, but still concerns me because a "ghetto of the mind" can be almost as powerful an inhibitor as a geographical one. And I don't like anything that has the potential to segregate; communities are stronger and more productive when they integrate diversity, not exclude it. We HAVE seen this happen, to a much more limited extent admittedly, with voice.

One thought occurs as a sidenote: if they are really planning to make something like Facebook accessible in-world, they are sure as hell going to need to beef up the platform browser. And THAT is not a bad thing at all.

So, I guess the sky if falling, then? Looks like it's a bad time to become a premium subscriber then, and even buying lindens might not be such a great idea.

If this site is just going to become twitter 2.0 by this time next year --is there any point in sticking around?

Wallace is clearly testing the waters, so I take as a given that changes of some sort are planned. My suspicion is that we will end up with something much more robust than the current 1st Life and Web tabs, but I also don't believe that it will be the kind of full or compulsory integration that some people seem to be predicting.

I find it, personally, a bit odd that people are criticizing Wallace for being "vague." Some seem to want to know, RIGHT NOW!, what it is that LL is planning. In other words, they are demanding more or less a policy statement. The problem with policy statements is, of course, that they represent a fait accomplis: if LL is at the stage where they can clearly articulate what they are "planning," then they are also beyond the stage where consultation is either possible or necessary.

I think Wallace is doing pretty much exactly what we should WANT him to do: he is throwing out some ideas, and listening (one hopes, anyway) to our responses.

I might also add that Wallace is refreshingly articulate and his ideas reasonably sophisticated: he's not spoonfeeding us pablum. He seems like someone with whom one can actually discuss ideas, and not merely technical or policy details.

There is hope that he can find a more user-friendly way of 'testing the waters' than the equivelent of yelling 'fire' in a crowded movie house.

Well, there you are. That is LL's stanard operational propcedure. Most just want to 'get it over wth' so they can plan accordingly.


Wallace said he would do this"Maybe some read too much into it and assumed he would be our oracle to the future of Second Life. It was wishful thinking.

But he turned out to be the company Grim Reaper. When he starts making vague inquiries to us about how we feel about 'proposed' changes - we know we are doomed to have something forced upon us we will not like.



If I want to discuss ideas I will go to the Thinkers meetings in-world. When a representative of my service provider starts hinting at sweeping policy changes - I do not see that as a frindly discussion - I have to be smart enough to find out the negatve and positive impacts of these changes and how I will be effected - and I need to know when and how it will be implemented. And then go about adjusting my SL to be ready for such changes.

Wallace is not delivering any information that will allow me to conclusively develop my long-term plan in light of Real Life Identity Linking in Second Life.

He just gave vague inflammatory warnings that caused mass hysteria. And that is where we will be until Linden Lab lowers the boom and puts such a policy in place.

One would have hoped that LL would finally respect their customer base enough to give us enough lead time so we can salvage our communities - instead of 'feeling us out' to see how much they can get away with before the negative blowback from their customers impact Linden Lab.

*sigh*

Well, glass half full? Or half empty? Dunno.

Anyway, I just blew off some steam about this on the blog . . .

Actually, I think that Wallace came in for a minimum of rant responses. It seemed to me to be a pretty high-level discussion, for a VW forum.

I don't see Wallace himself engaging in discussion. He seems to be mostly responding knee-jerk or flippantly to the most outrageous comments. For my part, I really don't know how to be any more substantive, respectful, and thought-provoking than I was in responding to him. But, no acknowledgment of any of the ideas I advanced, and I brought up quite a few different ones. I may respond to his posts in the future in order to engage with other residents; but I do feel that *he* is not interested in anything I have to say.

It may be that he feels that directly engaging in the discussion will steer it too much, thereby making it less of a barometer of resident opinion. If so, he should make that clear. As it is, he appears to me to be simply disinterested in the opinions of many of the more thoughtful voices in that discussion.
.

Yep, I agree that he could be much more engaged than he has proven to be. There may be a couple of reasons why he isn't, in addition to the one you suggest. He may simply not have the time to respond to thread in the way that he wants. Or, he may feel that his hands are somewhat tied by restrictions on the sorts of information or ideas that he's allowed to impart.

Or, you may of course be right: he may NOT be interested. His brief response to Dusan was certainly disappointing.

Also disheartening, to my mind, is that, despite a very direct appeal to him to post here, on the forums, he remains conspicuous here by his absence.

Oh well . . .

Water glass half full . . . or . . . ?

So much for a "Conversations Manager". Conversations go two ways, Wallace.

Well, the other possibility is that you approaching this logically, rather than rhetorically. Now, I'm taking the approach that if I REALLY REALLY suck up to him, he'll listen to ME at least . . .

Baaaaa!

You are pretty safe baaaaing for now, Pep hasn't been around for a few weeks.

He'll just use you and cast you aside, like any other Linden.

ROFL!!!

(Whew. Thank god . . . )

Story of my life, Lindal. The story of my life . . .

Just call me "Poor Tragedy."

Don't be disappointed. That is his job as Corprote Shill/Mouthpiece. There's nothing but a bunch of greaseball marketers out there now, the likes that would make Professor Harold Hill blush.

We could dress up like Amish people!

I don't even mind them screaming Fire....if they would just point toward the direction the Fire is coming from. Straight Up. Need to know which direction to run, or which direction to toss the buckets of water.

So everyone had to interpret the statement their own way.

What was the deal? What was the need for the original observation? Are they threatened by the fact that Second Life is losing a presence in Facebook....since FB was coming down on Avatar personas being used?

Was the plan to convince us to adapt to the new FB policy and embrace it? So that SL would maintain a strong presence in FB? Why can't LL put their energy into convincing FB to adapt to the concept of Avatars? So what that FB has a larger market share.....maybe some day the Avatars will be the larger market to capture....certainly headed that way.

Why can't LL have confidence in the market share they already have, and it's strengths and values.....and convince FB that there is a need for an Avatar Facebook? Why can't LL dangle their own established market under someone's nose....and change concepts....rather than it continually being vice versa....and trying to change the personality of your own market to fit someone else's mold? That's just about impossible. Seems like the harder road to go down.

Because the people who run SL now have no idea what SL's strengths are. They are salesmen and marketers. They just latch onto the craze of the month and milk it for every penny they can. They don't care about what SL is or the peole who use it.

One thing I would really miss if real names became widely used would be some of the great SL names that have shown up here over the years. Hello, Landing Normandy, wherever you are.

Well now...hey...hold on...not every salesperson and marketer tosses their bread and butter under the bus, while they experiment with the t-bone steak!

I would not mind one bit...if they required each employee to create a non-Linden av....and immerse themselves into 3 or 4 hours of "living" in SL every day.....to the max, during a 30-day intensive training period. Some here, would not like to be deceived....I don't care...bring it on, for educational purposes....to find out what the draw for people is.....to find out the strengths (and weaknesses). Maybe they already do that....but if they do, they sent them to the wrong islands.

Trying to explain the concepts to someone on a message board, with ranting and raving going on all about...is impossible. Send me the trainees.....and I'll make sure they get the grand tour.

A few of them have gone in world to try to understand. M Linden, for example, was seen in various places in his first days at LL. The problem was, they probably had other Lindens looking over their shoulders, saying "now do this. Now go here. Now go there." What they SHOULD do is just what you suggest, Mickey. Come in world anonymously, and find a non-Linden mentor to show them around.

I would say that's probably a given, and they've demonstrated that bit of shortsightedness many times so far.


I agree and that's basically the picture that spawned what I had said. They may not see it as relevant or necessary to themselves, but they DO seem to be hopelessly caught up in the FaceTwit hype, so much so that they're now convinced SL can't prosper or grow/expand without offering at least some of the exact same kind of thing. Brenda wisely used the word "redundant", because that's what adding that sort of thing to SL would be. SL can't compete with other services/devices for easy use of social networking stuff. Especially not when SL is this bloated behemoth you have load up and wait to rez, and the other guys are a fast 2 clicks in a browser, or flip of the cellphone away. 2 or 3 years ago the idea might have made sense, but now they're so far behind the curve that I really think it's nothing more than a token nod that could potentially cause some very real inworld issues for people who choose not to embrace it. No war drums and the sky is not falling, just concerned.