I wrote a piece for The Metaverse Journal about this topic. Since it is mine, I cannot but recommend it really, now can I?
As usual, it’s not from the same angle that you might read just anywhere.
|
|
Having had a look at the new Second Life community dashboard I find myself groping for a word to describe it, and find that the same word applies to the Second Life viewer: Unresponsive. I’m not just meaning slow (though that may be a factor also). What I mean is that neither of them actually meet my requirements, nor is there any sign that either of them will attempt to accommodate me better in future. Short version: New user documents, particularly FAQs, need to be reviewed (and updated if necessary) at least monthly. At least if you’re serious about keeping your new users. Here’s why … JIRA is a proprietary enterprise software product, developed by Atlassian, commonly used for bug tracking, issue tracking, and project management. In Second Life terms, "a JIRA" refers to a tracked issue, tracked bug or feature request. JIRA VWR-8049 is a feature request. This JIRA, when implemented, will allow the user to choose their preferred next-owner-permissions as defaults for newly-created assets. Ari Blackthorne carries a post by a commentator called Charles, titled Second Life: Land of the WEAK home of the BROKEN. Now, Ari doesn’t necessarily agree with all of it, and I must admit that there’s very little in it that resembles anything that I experience in Second Life myself. For those of you who also spend substantial lengths of time in SL, does any of it ring true for you? Nowhere do you see the Observer-Expectancy effect, the Subject-Expectancy effect or apophenia than on the internet, and when you bring diverse people into a formative culture, the signs of it become too obvious to miss.
Second Life is like a giant placebo in many respects, or a nocebo – depending entirely on your perspective.
What is Second Life? A game? Yes it is, because if you only judge it based on it’s game elements (noting that most game elements in any game are imposed by the player, not the game) then it’s certainly a game.
Is it a platform? Well, yes. You could primarily focus on those elements.
A sandbox? Yes.
A social experiment? Yes.
A country? Yes.
A dark conspiracy? Yes.
Deus ex machina? Yes.
Each point of view requires the exclusion or diminution of certain aspects of Second Life. That’s up to you, of course, since that happens inside your head.
Reflexivity is an undeniable fact of Second Life. Well – unless you do deny it. Your own perceptions can make it cease to exist within your personal weltenshauung.
What you get out of Second Life is a bit like the double-slit experiment coupled with a heaping helping of Observer-Expectency effect. It really depends on what you put in as to what you get out, and how you view and interpret the results.
In an environment rich with subjective interpretation, apophenia abounds. In a sense, Second Life really is Your World as they say, in much the same way that a Rorshach inkblot is entirely dependent on the viewer.
A new resident comes into Second Life and they’re faced with what is probably the most difficult thing they’ve ever done. There’s a complex interface in front of them; A formative, distributed society of – well disparate and distributed societies; Complicated concepts wrapped in obscure slang; A world that is too large to see all of, and that is constantly changing; An open ended system that delivers satisfaction based solely on the resident’s ability to select her own path and goals, and stick to them.
Second Life may well be the first piece of non-business software that a resident has been exposed to after minesweeper and freecell.
At best, our residents are not going to see more than a portion of what’s going on in Second Life, from day to day, and they’re going to see patterns. People see patterns in everything, because that’s what our brains do.
More so, we see the patterns we expect to see, and our brains are adept at discarding or distorting data that does not fit.
One thing you can be sure of is that none of us see Second Life as it is. None of us can. What it is, however, is amorphous enough that our position, circumstances and point-of-view greatly affects what we see it as. There are so many diverse elements and aspects that you can focus on. Second Life might be a dull place to you – or a place full of greed and selfishness.
It doesn’t have to be.
Just because these things exist, it doesn’t mean you have to dwell on them in your second life any more than they deserve, any more than you might feel compelled to make prions the central fact of your first life. At last it chaunced this proud Sarazin It’s not hard to have fun in SL, day after day. Get to know some people, maybe connect with a peer group. Get comfy with the basics. Find out what’s where. And keep a relatively moderate attitude. I’ve yet to be hit on the head with a piece of sky, after all. Getting to that point – aye, there’s the rub. Assume you don’t have a lot of time to spend inworld. You want to bounce in, have a bit of fun, and see a couple really cool things. What do you do, Philip? That’s right. You ask someone Until we form our own monkeyspheres, our time in SL is a series of encounters – a bit like Spenser’s The Faerie Queene. (Even after, but our monkeyspheres help cushion us from the effects of the poorer ones) Retention in SL is like Secret Santa (we call it Kris Kringle, where I come from) – you know the office thing where people draw names out of a hat and get them gifts? Well, it’s like that. In the short-term, retention predicates on a series of random encounters, and their cost, benefit and the perceived risk of the next encounter. An encounter may be good (benefit) or bad (cost) or both. The human mind will look for patterns to predict the next encounter to determine risk. When the predicted risk/reward ratio falls off, the resident leaves SL – perhaps for a time. Perhaps forever. There’s the person-to-person interaction. There’s also person-to-environment. The environment is all that stuff that you don’t know or have a chance of getting wrong or have a chance of misunderstanding. Costs involve getting a box stuck on your head. Making a fool of yourself. Feeling like you made a fool of yourself, even if that isn’t so. Smacking into the side of a building. Jumping instead of talking. Benefits are…well, benefits are results that please you We can reasonably assume that a resident’s early person-to-environment interaction will be poor. There’s a lot to learn, and every block of unit-time that they spend trying to learn, or relearn without corresponding benefits is a downside. This works to magnify the bad-experiences risk when we go to person-to-person. If you’re frustrated with an unfamiliar interface, perhaps artificially high expectations and suffering poor machine performance due – perhaps – to overoptimistic default settings, it’s only going to take one or two poor experiences to make you think that Second Life is not for you. One bad experience with a volunteer. Another with an SL resident, and risk vs reward would be pretty low. Add any technical difficulties, and you’ve jumped the shark for your new resident. In my last community gig, someone at the table would now be saying something like “So, how can we maximise the subjectively-assessed customer-valued monkeysphere opportunities?” A bit of unnecessarily dense piece of corporate newspeak, but the point is there. Philip? You go the Secret Santa route when you’re looking to kick back in your limited time on the grid. You ask someone. And you’ve got enough experience to assess whether you’ve been steered well, or been handed a dud. At the outset our new residents are likely too proud or too shy or both to necessarily do that asking, and too lacking in any basis for comparison to tell what is a fine example of what SL has to offer, and what isn’t. Secret Santa works better for the experienced – and we can always fall back on our monkeyspheres. How does the new resident find what is (necessarily) subjectively enjoyable and cool? How does the new resident expand their monkeysphere before the risk/reward ratio bottoms out? How to increase the odds of a positive experience?
How do we use the strengths of SL to help us with the answers? Some of the solutions are technical, others are social – and none of it gets improved overnight. Whether you’re looking at a society, a community or a company, culture-shock is a two-way thing. People don’t much care for cultures that are incompatible with their own, and – frankly – they’re rarely at their best when confronted with confusion or doubt. Of course there are many compatible cultures, and compromises and cooperation are the social lubricant that forms functioning communities – either in purely social contexts, or in business structures. Businesses with strong products, good profits, and excellent business models often go under for issues more than the immediately obvious. Citing cash flow as the cause is like giving the cause of death as her heart stopped. Well, of course that was when things crossed the line. How did it go wrong? Some of these businesses succumb to unmanaged growth. Victims of their own success. A dozen people may be able to turn over just so much work and business. Business is good, and either profits are too, or you get an injection of venture capital into the works, to take you through from one stable business plateau to the next. There are a number of things that can make the growth curve between these two plateaus unstable, and one of the most underappreciated items is culture clash. Consider, Alice, Bob and Carl have been through the company trials at the startup level. They’ve settled down into a routine that appears to maximise efficiency in Product Development. The expanding company, flushed with the fresh blood of venture capital moves along the new business plan towards a new operational plateau, and hires Diana and Ed to join the Product Development team. Our first problem is that Diana and Ed don’t know how things are done. That takes some time away from the performance of Alice, Bob and Carl right there. Training must be done, and supported. Our second problem is that Diana and Ed don’t know why things are done. How many times have you looked at a situation and said “Oh, that’s just stupid!” only to find out after hours or days of querying that due to various circumstances and conditions, there doesn’t actually seem to be any better or more efficient way to go about it? If nothing else, unnecessary friction occurs while questions are asked, and Alice, Bob and Carl hear exactly the same ‘new’ ideas that they themselves thought of and tried out in times past. But Diana and Ed don’t know that – and based on incomplete information, they see better ways – that aren’t. Our third problem is that the new Business Plan, and the introduction of Diana and Ed (and also Fran and Ginny, in Support) change the circumstances and conditions under which Product Development operates, making things possible that weren’t before, or making things that were bad ideas into better ones (or causing a tried and true method to become counter productive). How many times have you looked at a situation and said “Oh, that’s just stupid!” only to find out after hours or days of querying that due to various circumstances and conditions, there doesn’t actually seem to be any barrier, and that the new ideas are better? Honestly, that doesn’t make Alice, Bob or Carl feel great. They’ve hung on to procedures because until Diana, Ed, Fran and Ginny showed up, they didn’t have time to review. And perhaps one of the reasons they still don’t have time is that they’re still bringing the new people up to speed. Everyone’s also developed ways of communicating, socialising and interacting. The whole office is a web of interactions that form what we call the Company Culture. Alice is easy to deal with as long as you don’t mention politics. Bob doesn’t like extraneous chatter, and is happiest with the fewest words – but he makes an exception for Carl who feels undervalued of you don’t pause for a moment to at least talk about the weather. Diana and Ed don’t know the social circumstances yet. Diana mentions stops and tries to talk politics to Alice and Bob. Ed whizzes past Carl’s desk, pauses for a second to give a status report and is off without a wasted word. Friction, friction, friction. And friction is never a one-sided affair. We’re not just talking about the way Product Development works both as a unit and within a larger context – we’re talking about use of the coffee machine, timing of breaks, placement of the printers and photocopiers, configuration of the hunt-groups on the telephones, and allocation of shift work and parking spaces, and yet more. The new folks are a must, and yet everyone is disrupted. Existing employees who suffer too much friction will leave. Enter Harry and Ivan to replace Bob. Harry and Ivan don’t have the Company Culture either. Sure, they have the mission and vision statement – and the company values are on the backs of the business cards, but they don’t fit into that web yet. A web that’s already starting to break down. Older employees feel friction because of the newer ones who just don’t fit in yet. Newer ones feel it because they…well, they just don’t fit in yet. Given time, metastasis is achieved and the company culture settles into a new form. A new society is formed from the old one, plus the addition of the new members. Wise companies use managed growth – almost any person can be added to a company given the time to do so. Most companies aren’t wise about this and grow to their own destruction. Now we’ll talk about SL – but of course you’ve already drawn the necessary parallels, and you can see where I’m going already. You can see this happening in SL now. Look at any of the communities in SL right now and see how they respond to growth. Thousands of new people every day. How fast can a community absorb one new person? How fast can it absorb a hundred? A thousand? The absorption of new members inevitably changes the community. Growth and assimilation are how communities naturally grow (or die). Communities don’t die from atrophy nearly as often as they die from growth and friction. Well, people are confused. It’s like the hall-monitors versus the skateboarding graffitists depending on how you look at it. From another aspect, what you see are two groups who (in percentage terms) aren’t really all that distinguishable creating unnecessary friction from insecurity. You could call it growing pains. And you’d be right. But I remember my own growing pains so many decades ago (I have them indelibly burned into my memory), plus any number of cultural and community growing pains since, and the naming of them doesn’t make them any easier to go through. Communities and businesses also have something that bodies don’t normally have. Recurring growing pains.
Organising the SL anniversary has taught me a lot of things. I’ll likely talk about a bunch of them in time, but here’s one. SL communities (at the present time), form around seed people. If there aren’t any pre-existing ones, or they becomes absent for a long period, the community self-selects them.Usually it’s one or two. Rarely as many as four. SL communities organise themselves around who they see as the key person or people. One of the downsides of this is the tendency for a community to suffer from organisational paralysis if the person or persons are absent, unavailable or just too busy. We encountered a lot of that with the community groups for the anniversary, many of who were just not able to get anything together in the temporary absence or preoccupation of their chosen folks. In the end, nine out of ten of the communities who we were in touch with never got it together. Many more never contacted us at all. Certainly a lot of groups thought “Who? Us? Why would people be interested in us?“. We missed you folks. Please – whoever is organising next year – contact them. SL is full of diverse communities and viewpoints. It’s worth showing what you’re all about, and any celebration of SL is diminished by your absence. We got some of you, at least. I wish we could have gotten more. SL doesn’t seem to lend itself to very well to non-hierarchical autocratic communities (there are some wonderful exceptions, of course), but the constraint of having a first life, makes it easier for people to pick someone to follow, and just follow along. When the majority do that, it makes things harder, both from the point of view of the leader(s) and the remainder who have other ideas. I’m sure that will change over time – while SL has the tools to let you run a business that makes or loses real money, it’s support for communication and collaboration is much more limited, and that puts very high prices in time and effort on better organisational models. Those prices are higher than most people with first-lives can afford. Perhaps by the next anniversary things will be very different on that front. So..
|
Support us |