Comments on: What Second Life users like least

By: Rika Watanabe

Rika Watanabe — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:25:53 +0000

It’s not about democracy or government. SL is touted as a “platform” for user interaction and communication, and creating user “applications”, and in it’s essence it is, or rather, should be. It, however, does not actually behave like one, because any platform, like any system actually designed to be used, should follow the principle of least surprise. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment)

Well, it doesn’t, in everything, from user interface design to LSL language design to policy — every system behaviour is ambiguous and the users are left to puzzle it out on their own, every policy is open up to too much interpretation, and in general, even a corporate-run platform should not be allowed to be run like this, like the phone network is not.

By: Tateru Nino

Tateru Nino — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:50:17 +0000

I’m not sure if ‘government’ would be the right word for that. I think it would be more like a condo body-corporate or neighborhood association — since it would have to operate within all applicable laws at all times.

All I think it could really do is add additional restrictions on top of whatever legal limits are already placed on us.

By: Danton Sideways

Danton Sideways — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 20:50:21 +0000

Peter has a good point: Second Life is a company that runs its world in an autocratic fashion. That may seem inevitable. I’ve always argued the contrary. Linden Lab as a company COULD provide its users with a world that functions with some sort of democracy. Robin Linden even suggested the idea at one point – and the residents overwhelmingly rejected it, because it sounded like a restrictive “government” which would hamper the anarchist ideal of “I’ll do WTF I WANT on my land” (as Prokofy aptly puts it). If the residents really pushed for it, I think Linden Lab would have to give them some sort of Magna Carta. Remember: “No taxation without representation”.

By: kanomi

kanomi — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 07:26:19 +0000

Well, what I hate is stuff that doesn’t work. Teleports that don’t succeed. New downloads that fail to install. Group chats the explode. Purchases that timeout.

By: Peter Stindberg

Peter Stindberg — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 07:13:56 +0000

One thing every person planning on doing business in SL should always remember is that SL is not a NATION, it is SERVICE offered by a company.

In any Nation worth the name, legislation is discussed well in advance, it’s pro and cons weighed, usually interest groups (lobbyists) heard as well (whether that is a good thing is debatable) and then, after a long opinion making process, legislation gets passed and – ideally – is a compromise. People whose business relies on that legislation have enough time to add to the discussion and adapt to the legislation.

While it would be nice if the service provider Linden Lab gives advance notice of any changes to the service model, by the very nature of the corporate model they do not have the legislation process. They have all right to change the rules overnight. Of course they COULD apply some more openness, and better schedules, but they are not bound to it by their constituion. Even if it sucks, that’s how it is.

By: Tateru Nino

Tateru Nino — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 05:10:23 +0000

Well, it’s something of a generalization, that’s true. Subsystems that don’t bloody work are a major nuisance, of course.

By: Erbo Evans

Erbo Evans — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:55:16 +0000

Actually, what I like less than LL surprises is existing features of SL that don’t frakkin’ work and don’t get fixed. But “LL surprises” are right up there.