I've been sickened for weeks thinking about this, watching it -- sickened metaphorically in the virtual world, but physically nauseated as well. It's been awful to watch -- made all the more awful by finding that few are noticing, few are bothering to care; those who do see and do care on their own, or when it is pointed out to them, don't have the time or energy or capacity to do anything.
The irony of course isn't escaping me. For years on these online worlds, there'd always be talk about the hateful resident government. Nobody could ever take over! Well, of course, you could be clever and run an avatar named Nobody who was ostensibly anti-resident-government, anti-"having people take over" and then get himself elected on that platform and...take over -- in the most thorough way, winning trust, literally rebuilding everybody's house (as happened in the The Sims Online in Test City when Guard of Traxx pulled this stunt) -- but not take over much, as the game is pretty much a static walled garden inside a magic circle made by game-gods.
Second Life is bigger and more complex and more serious, of course, so it took a little more doing -- a little more studying, planning and effort -- but not an awful lot.
All those people on the forums aren't doing anything about this now -- the jackals and jackasses and jack-off artists -- who were screaming hysterically about illegitimate and undesirable resident government when a group of land-owners asked for a meeting with the Lindens in August 2005 in order to...obtain a copy of their ethics guidelines for their own behaviour -- among other issues involving conflict of interest from the "your world/your imagination" gang. The Forums Five-Percent FIC booed and hissed viciously over an interest group -- which is a normal thing in a democratic society -- demanding -- and getting! -- the telehub payback plan over a potential claim of "bait and switch" (one of the biggest victories for civil society in Second Life, though it isn't official entered into the tekkie's history books; you won't find it on the SL History Wiki; and the Lindens themselves, who love to tell war stories about the Prim Tax Revolt as proof of their liberalism, are only embarrassed to remember this chapter.)
Yes, all those forum-watchers, all those nay-sayers and haters who would pound to smithereens anybody who raised up their heads in Land and Economy or Poly Sci to say they had a plan to take over and a great idea for running a society or even just a sim -- they were all completely oblivious to this coup that has taken place.
Here's how it worked -- and bear with me, as I am still studying it.
First, a furry -- hey, what are you against furries or something??? -- came into the world on March 3, 2006. His/her (I'm not sure about the gender or cross-gender status so I'll call him 'he' just for practical purposes) name is Angel Fluffy -- what could be more cuddly??? "I'm a friendly, soft wolf/angel cross who seeks to enjoy, learn, and improve. Respect is mutual :)" he writes -- and what could be sweeter and nicer?
Those attuned to the BDSM set-ups in SL of course will hear a warning bell go off. Here's a guy hung up -- nay, obsessed -- with respect. Respect is something that the BDSM types often wield not only in their own sims and their privacy places but in the public domain -- in a manipulative, duplicitious and indefensible manner.
That is, they invoke respect as a concept that civil and democratic society recognizes as something of a value -- we must respect one another, we must listen to one another, speak respectfully, not angrily, etc. However, in the BDSMer's hands, "respect" begins to acquire an edge, an undertow and a heavy manipulation. Respect me...or ELSE. Respect -- or I will not only claim you've violated my sectarian BDSM code of the private sphere -- I'll claim you're violating your liberal values in the public sphere. This is one of the most common sleight-of-hands that the BDSM cultists use on those who aren't part of their cult, don't wish to be part of their cult, and are made uncomfortable by their cult. In 9 out of 10 tries, they get what they want -- they silence discomfort, quell dissent, and make criticism of something that people are naturally and rightfully critical of seem like "intolerance" or "disrespect". Hey, nice work if you can get it!
Angel Fluffy of course draws heavily on this manipulative trait, and not only demands "respect" but tells you "it's mutual" -- you behave nicely and decently to me, I will to you too -- well, what could be wrong with that? Sounds like the Golden Rule, no? Except...it goes so, so much farther.
For Fluffy has *rules*. Rules that YOU must obey -- whether you are in the BDSM group or on his sim or in his private domain *or not*. It's a good example of how the problematic BDSM ethos bleeds out into the public sphere and begins to take hold, all the while clamouring for respect of privacy, tolerance of lifestyles, concession to the hallowed SL credo of "I can do what the fuck I want on my land and fuck you". Except...now we're in a different place. We're in the world of interactions. It's what Travis Lambert calls "SL Citizen Mode" -- a kind of space and place and mode of being that he tries to carve out as a kind of PG, neutral area where all these lifestyles -- some of them pretty repulsive and pretty raunhy stuff -- have to keep their stuff at bay. Except...Travis is one of those overthrown in the coup...as we shall see.
So...as some people instantly realized, and as others gradually came to see...Fluffy has rules. Rules for this, rules for that, rules for the next things. Rules that you MUST obey -- and, you won't mind because they're eminently sensible, no?
The kinds of rules he establishes are the notorious kinds of rules that secret police organizations the world over are famous for. It works like this. You get a person on the hook -- say, an informer that you need to inform on someone else. They agree to work for you -- perhaps for money, perhaps for ideological zealotry. You start them out on the small stuff, getting them just to do a few things - things that won't trouble their conscience or make them realize they've joined something as nasty as the secret police. So you get them to send you, say, newspaper clippings. What could be wrong with sending newspaper clippings? They're just stories in the public domain. The KGB would have them anyway, geez. So you sent a clipping? That doesn't mean you're an informer.
...Yet. So in that same logic, if you agree to Fluffy's rules, and speak only in the way he tells you on his profile, you'll merely be doing the common courtesy, no? Fluffy tells you not to speak in vague generalities like "tomorrow" or "later today" with so many people on so many time zones! Hey, respect here, people! Instead, use terms like 5 pm SLT! That's the RIGHT thing to do! So...you'll comply on that...and a few other things...and you're in. They've got you. As you'll see.
The Helpful Hal or the Helpful Hannah role in SL is the most insidious, and one I've constantly railed against. It's the most emotional and manipulative card people play in a game notorious for its sheer hardness to learn, it's sheer impossibly steep learning curve. So the experts and helpers and trail blazers and smoothers acquire power -- over the newb, who feels so helpless. That's why you find a lot of people keen to gain reputational enhancement in SL in the newb-help biz. Angel Fluffy is of course no different in this regard and even better, having put together an *incredibly helpful* guide to just about every form of BDSM/Gor/stuff there is in SL -- and then some. The group "Angel Fluffy's Pet Play Guide" is something that gets you savings off products; keeps you in the loop for upgrades, etc. -- and puts you under Fluff's power. That's the idea, for all of this activity -- power. Over you.
But in a world where BDSM is actually a bore, where the clanking of chains and the collaring of men and women in slave markets and the creation of kennels underground where humans are supposed to sit in their animal avatars and feed out of bowls as "pets" are all things that people are actually terribly jaded about and thoroughly inured to now -- you really would have to come up with some really new franchise idea to make your mark. So what could that possibly be? Ageplay has been done and re-done; there are pets and pony girls and all manner of obscene variations. What's left?
Here, the Fluffy talent for merchandising and franchising of the control role-play reaches new heights. With the Capture Roleplay group, Fluffy accomplished a number of things.
First, he drew into his circle legions of newbies looking to be told what to do. There are no shortage of them in SL. Young people, often staying that they are 19 but often no more than 15 or even less, using their parents' credit cards or cell phones or simply nothing at all (you don't need a CC anymore to get the free accounts) come in and look around for a protector -- SL can be so thuggish and cruel, and you can get ripped off emotionally, if not literally. The roleplay sims with their gorgeous builds, their phalanxes of eager helpers looking for new recruits, their generous dommes willing to incorporate you into Mistress' circle of subs might seem repugnant to adults who feel they are modern liberals and products of the women's rights era.
But to new, uneducated people from the wasteland that is America's suburban tracts and warehouse high schools, to people fascinated with any kind of mass American culture -- they seem like the parents and neighbours and friends they never had. BDSM/Gor/etc in fact fill a gigantic, gaping wound in America and Europe -- the wound left open in society by women achieving equality and going to work yet not achieving enough freedom from male domination to obtain equal help at home from males in household management and child-rearing. BDSM and its roaring popularity and violent virulence spreading in online games is not only about filling the in loco parentis missing in so many homes because the parents are literally not home; it's about providing relief from the stresses and strains of what women's lib has meant for both the women and men who had to adjust way too quickly, and without much help, to the tides of the last century.
Women in Second Life now even *more* aggressively defend their right to "chose submission" and their concept that BDSM is "consensual" than they defended the feminist ideals. And feminists, who don't have a lot of good ideas left these days, are rendered silent and uneasily passive by this ultimate of all "rights to choose" from their own gameplay book of "choice".
Trust me, all of this is really, really not pretty. And will get even more unsightly. And will begin to get lots more scrutiny from the RL media, RL congresses and parliaments and such -- except, with the coup under way, it's going to be an interesting battle.
So the group Angel Fluffy made, "Capture Roleplay," involves having humans hunt down other humans and rape them, or humans hunt down animals and have sex with them, or however you wish to describe it. The builds, rituals, chat, socializing are all elaborate. As Frank Lardner, that odious student of the seamier cults of SL which he likes to style as communities worthy of study by his Law Society of SL (where he is the sole officer), put it, he found intelligent and helpful beings on the sims where the capture roleplay was underway.
Here's what CARP has to say on the group charter -- and note the theme we've already established as the hallmark of the ill-named demonic and iron-fisted Angel Fluffy, the control with rules about what people should do in public spaces.
"Group for CARP, the consensual, BDSM roleplay area based around the theme of predators (dominants) hunting, capturing and using prey (submissives). We are not Gorean, but polite avatars of any race/sex/sexuality/etc are welcome.
IMPORTANT
1) NON-STAFF TALKING ON THIS CHAN GET EJECTED/BANNED! DON'T TALK HERE!
2) For information about how to get an invite to join this group, or other information about CARP, put "Capture Roleplay" into Search->Places, visit our HQ, and click the sign in our lobby. Enjoy :~"
So don't chat in the group! Go in the other, controlled group called Capture Roleplay Chat for that!
And remember to contact Fluffy *only* in the way he prescribes at his hard-to-spam secret email address; remember your manners listed on the Picks Rules page ("1) When you want to talk, get straight to the point. Instead of saying "can I ask a question", just ask :) )
.... and keep in mind that Fluffy, whoever he/she/they is, is very happy with his RL and doesn't wish to speak to YOU about it!
And in fact, that's just it. Who is Angel Fluffy? It could be one person or 10 (in fact I suspect it's more than one judging from several clues). He could be 21 as he claims, or 51. He could be US or UK or Hong Kong -- and who's to know? It's not our business. Indeed, it is not.
And who could care, if Angel Fluffy gets together a whopping 1,100 people to be in Capture Roleplay? Hey, that's pretty big for a group! that's possibly the largest group in SL. Yes, in less than five months, a furry, without any help even from the existing furry franchises like Lusk, was able to create and sustain a gigantic group of 1,100 people -- just like that. Anyone who has ever tried to get a group going about anything in SL knows how hard it is to get and keep people involved.
That is, if I were to put all my tenants in one giant group, I'd have more people, or Anshe would have many more people, but I don't do that, to make management easier. Perhaps some other sex group has as many -- but I think it's probably safe to say that Capture Roleplay, if not the biggest (we don't know the sizes of groups in SL) is among the top 5. Power. Clout. Swinging the Lindens. Telling them hey, we're a big constituency, we bring in *subscriptions* so listen to us.
What, are you intolerant or something? You're going to criticize a group of furries...furries chasing each other...furries engaging in consensual acts? What, do you have something WRONG with you? Are you a bigot? A Nazi? You wish to control others? Is that what's this about? But SL is about tolerance!
So they influence the Lindens, get into forums, get into meetings, get their way? Who could care about that? That's life. Democracies mean that big interest groups form, and form as majorities. Minorities, especially in the tekkie wikian wiktatorship view of democracy, where minorities are urged to leave rather than to enjoy protection, don't count with the Lindens. Right now, the Lindens want two things: a) subscriptions b) community leader residents to manage newbies and keep constituencies in the game. So Angel Fluffy and the others like him accomplish this goal handily for the Lindens. They're reliefed. That's why they've even feted the Goreans and BDSM in their latest Second Opinion. If Angel Fluffy didn't exist, the Lindens would have to invent him.
I'd like to think the Lindens themselves aren't practitioners of BDSM but of course, I sincerely doubt it. They're practitioners of so much else! I used to think Will Wright didn't really facilitate the Sim Shadow Government, either...
But...hey. Why should we care? So some furries want to chase each other around in a maze and then lift up their tails? I mean, honestly, this is a game? And not our business, anyway? Well...but there's a LOT more up, as you'll see.
Study all of Fluff's groups, and you'll see he's strategically joined the mainstream groups to carry out his mission -- groups like Thinkers and Sci-Fi Geeks which are the time-honoured Brahmin groups of Second Life -- as well as some of the very new and popular and fast-growing creator-fascist FIC groups like the bullying Sellers' Guild. He's got all his bases covered with his FIC pipelines, Linden pipelines, furry pipelines, BDSM pipelines, and GLBT pipelines established, flowing...and keeping him mainly visible and in charge in most of the groups --with little dissent (because you're not allowed to chat in these groups unless he says so).
Which brings me to the *real* coup perpetrated by the non-cuddly and not-so-soft Fluffy -- the takeover of the Feature Voting Tool. I've written about this before, and held a meeting or two about it, but it's really quite breath-taking. I don't care about people's lifestyles. It truly isn't our business what they chose to do. Neither Lindens, nor RL governments should become involved. But when these groups with "lifestyle culture" of force and dominance and respect take over democracy itself, and its tools, then I complain loudly.
Within the space of a few weeks, hiding out in "Feature Suggestions," Fluffy was able to systematically catalogue and analyze *every single one* of something like 1,400 voting proposals; present them to the Lindens; get many of one he and they felt extraneous, redundant, not doable, etc. removed, and establish himself as the go-to vote guy.
This remarkable feat was only greeted with shock and awe by those who bothered to notice. Because the FVT is badly broken, silly, and complex. It's filled with junk, hard to use, and yet...and yet...the one window for democracy we formally possess. Surprisingly, people -- people who tend, when left alone, to actually prefer freedom and not chose being dominated by others -- like to express their voice. Lots of people make proposals; even more vote on them. It's the single most impressive community effort in Second Life, dwarfing just about every other resident activity in size, numbers involved, and persistence -- in spite of a badly hobbled tool made by the Lindens, where, as I often point out, you can't even vote "no" on the damn thing.
I've already written at length about the most broken part of this device -- the inability to vote no -- and of course Fluffy pushes proposals to remove that flaw way down on the list as he covers the different features, and he himself very duplicitously says that while he concedes it as an observation, he doesn't advocate "no" himself. Of course...he wouldn't. He doesn't want people EVER to say no to Angel Fluffy! And they won't be able to, under his rule.
By culling, gathering, sorting, analyzing the monstrous mess of the voting page, Fluffy brought relief to busy Lindens feeling guilty about not attending to the voting feature. That is, when we trailblazed this issue through several rounds of interest group lobbying with the Lindens in the summer of 2005, long before Fluffy was born at least in this incarnation (he was likely present in another), we urged them to take the voting tool seriously, respond to it, do more than just give a pony in the Welcome Area, answer that they couldn't do certain ones sooner, etc. They vowed to clean it up -- and did. Then fell behind, not surprisingly.
So...Angel was there to help them. Helpful Hal! Who could complain? What, did YOU work on the voting, Prokofy? So STFU, etc. And...if you have any comments or criticisms, why, you can join the group called SL Voting Awareness, founder/owner Angel Fluffy. It's got Jeska and Jean Linden in it! It's official! of course...Angel is the only officer. And...you're not allowed to chat in the group! You can ONLY chat in the group forums...where Prokofy cannot post, and which the Lindens are going to dump in 90 days, so they say. But...you can complain by email...or IM...just as long as you are RESPECTFUL.
Would you find anything to criticize about this amazing work, however? After all, we can all agree that stupid crap about pandastrong's cock as a voting proposal is rightly removed from the list. people write badly spelled nonsense about getting higher stipends -- no can do. They urge all kinds of stuff that is badly conceived and even more impractical to actually do. Let's say 50-100 out of that morass has any viability -- well, Fluffy is here to guide you to that core.
Of course along the way, he dropped the half dozen proposals urging that "no" be put in (Fluffy doesn't *like* no -- no is gamed, no is a spam, no shouldn't be allowed). And he dropped Prokofy's proposal to name forums abusers. He cleverly concealed this act even by IMing Prokofy helpfully to point out Prokofy's link to his own proposal was now broken (and such links instantly pulling up a proposal aren't even available anymore, oddly enough, although you can put them into the browser manually and still pull it up.)
Angel *might* have taken me on and put my proposal, which is borderline on the not-feature type, and axed it. But...why antagonize the Infamous Antagonist? He just let it go...because it's about the forums, the forums abuses that happened in General...and General is no more. Any more elaborate poroposal about naming names and getting transparency in justice in SL will not be a feature, but a policy. And everyone *knows* we don't have policies in the FEATURE Voting Tool because well, this isn't our world, the Lindens run it and it's their call. After all, they know best.
And they know best when they can have experts -- helpful, positive residents who don't just flap their jaws, but *do the work*. Like Stalin, they take the notes, keep the record, and handle the administrative work! So how can you complain? YOU didn't do that work!
So...that's why Angel, alone among residents, gets a sticky in the forums. An entire sticky unto himself called "Voting Awareness" which, like that destrcutive notecard written by oldbie land-baron-haters about land in SL, is tendentious sometimes in subtle ways under the guise of providing generic information. Who wouldn't be for becoming more aware about voting!
Now...there's lots more work to do -- and I don't have time even to do it all myself. But the thing to watch carefully now is to see what agenda Mr. Fluffy in fact has buried under this mountain of rules and Helpful Hal work. This isn't just public service. You don't get 1,100 in a group, take over a group forums; start or man dozens of groups in SL; write the definitive handbook to all forms of BDSM in SL; and do the work of 10 Lindens and 20 residents culling out the crap from the voting pages with just the idea of being a cheerful, friendly, soft, fluffy, furry. No. Not on your life.
It's about power, control, sometimes for its own sake, but of course, possibly covering for something more sinister, it's hard to say. So...what are some of Fluffy's actual ideas, when you strip away all the roleplay stuff?
Well, one thing is SECURITY. Fluffy, as we see from his groups, is big on strategic, masterful, management thinking. Big Picture. Concepts. Large groups. So, no accident, comrade, that we find Fluffy front and center in something called "Proactive Security".
My, what a welcome group, with all this griefing we're having in Second Life!
" group for estate owners/managers, owners of popular SL locations, and others with a serious interest in SL security.
We unite to share infomation on how to proactively prevent griefing via the use of shared ban lists like BanLink (http://www.slbanlink.com).
Sharing of ban lists amongst group members is suggested, but not required.
For more information, contact Angel Fluffy."
Travis, of course, went to great lengths to tell us how his BanLink is not a master shit list. He claims that it is opt-in and trust-based and appealable. But now...now...it's in the hands of Angel Fluffy. And we know Angel likes rules. And he doesn't like group discussions. Here, he was forced to give officer status to some of the community leaders of SL -- but they wouldn't have it any other way, no doubt.
Pay attention to what the charter says, however: "like BanLink (http://www.slbanlink.com).
Sharing of ban lists amongst group members is suggested, but not required."
So now, the ironclad rule that Travis claimed for his service is eroded. It's eroded by saying "like" BanLink. And it is eroded by "suggesting, but not requiring" sharing of ban lists...but we all know that will lead to sharing. Of course it must. Because griefing is so rampant in SL.
Getting Michi Lumin and Cindy Claveau and others running venues harassed by griefers gives Fluffy further street cred as a community manager and organizer -- and oh, so helpful! What, you're against banning griefers or something???
So what else is there? A key proposal Fluff has been pushing in his groups is the concept of a secure notecard, like a texture with permissions. Hey, this would be a revolution in SL! As an author, Fluffy says modestly (remember he's the author of the BDSM guide to end all BDSM guides!) that he is concerned about copyright. He'd like to be able to check off "no copy" on his notecards. Of course, there's another reason, and that's to keep people in line, to keep power over them, to make it impossible for people to cut and paste and save chat and move it around. The erosion of the right to distribute information freely will start with ostensibly preserving "author's copyright" and making it optional to check off "no-copy" on something you send to one other person. How much further it will go and how fast is anyone's guess.
Which brings me to my actual confrontations with His Fluffyness in world. I had one confrontation where I challenged him on the voting take-over. That was just plain wrong. Such an effort should have been organized by Lindens and residents together in a more democratic and accessible group, with a *process*. It might have been slower and less efficient -- democracy always is -- but more legitimate. Instead, all that's happened is the tekkie-wiktatorship has once again been strengthened -- why, an expert and someone who bothered and who was obsessed came along and cared. They did the job. Now it's done. Why are you bitching? Join the wiki...join the group where you can't talk...and change things yourself.
At a meeting of Digital Cultures organized by Tom Bukowski, the transcript of which he is not giving permission to publish (he doesnt' have that custom unlike the Thinkers), Angel Fluffy was in fine form. The meeting was about the group tools -- where Angel was quick to promote his concept of having granularity of group chat and mutes to be added to the tool set. That would enable masterful managers such as himself who didn't want backchat to set permissions on other people -- deciding who got to talk and who didn't in each group. Hey, we're very very VERY far from the old Lindenworld hippie days when groups of tekkies all talked at once and any majority of them could overthrow even the group's founders! These are the new flexible group tools, remember?
However, I feel that in matters of national importance in the public interest, the conversations in public spaces at public meetings openly advertised on the events calendar, should be openly quoted and discussed. We certainly can't do that on the forums! They're closed!
So here's the sort of thing cropping up at this meeting, where I was the only one to challenge Angel Fluffy:
"Prokofy Neva: the group tools are typical of things the Lindens make to try to take care of the governance problem and try to mechanize human relations
You: they have illusions this will "scale" and be "efficient"
Angel Fluffy: perhaps in future, there could be a 'democratic' style of group where the owner (renamed to 'president') is elected, or something?"
" LL will have worse and worse knowledge of everthing going on in sl as it grows, and resident self-governance is thus the wave fo the future," says Tom -- and here, he's saying nothing different than what Philip Linden himself says inworld. The world is too big; they can't follow it; they wish to turn it more and more over to residents.
That they haven't created a viable and legitimate process for this is painfully, acutely obvious. But...they have helpers...helpers like Angel Fluffy. Contemplating the notion of how presidents could possibly legitimately come and be elected out of large groups, says Fluffy, "I don't know, ask the Lindens? I suspect they're too busy to do it soon, but it might be possible in future."
Busy, busy Lindens! Fighting off crashes, glitches, bugs, and this big hack, and much much more. And their VC money will start to run out soon...they will be heavily stressed...and more and more, they will just want *somebody to do it*. Somebody to take care of the world they wish to turn their backs on. Take care of newbies, and management, and groups and finding something for people to do so they stay on line, buy Lindens, are happy and add more subscriptions. Angel Fluffy is here to help!
So there's more:
"Angel Fluffy: this is true. I do suspect that the Lindens realise they can no longer control or even know all of SL, so they're delegating a lot of the mangement to residents."
Oh, they are? And how does that happen? By just...doing it? But...how? Just putting up a sticky when someone is helpful. Joining their group when they've done a lot of impressive work. Giving them the nod to speak...to chair meetings...to take charge.
I know I didn't ask to have a BDSM furry pet owning capturing roleplay obsessive take over my world. Not on your life. Nor did I agree to have just one resident, self-appointed take over content and remove it (proposals he felt were extraneous) -- a new and highly troublesome chapter for Second Life, where the Lindens have always been scrupulous about leaving people's content alone and acknowledging their IP. It's been made palatable by being related to the morass of the voting list with the junk on it from jackasses like Siggy. That shouldn't obscure the principle at stake: one resident has removed content by other residents with barely any Linden supervision.
Jeska -- Jeska who does everything! -- got to pass on it...and Jeska's a member of the Voting Awareness Group! Where you can't talk. So...talk to the busy Jeska if you feel anything you put in was unfairly removed. You'll not likely come up with much, however, and if proposals for "no" or Prok's own proposals are what's moved or missing, well, that's just sour grapes, it's a partisan issue, nothing generic about *that*!
And here's more, from the same session -- me raising the larger matters of principle, like the importance of not conceding too much power in governance to groups and individuals, but agreeing ahead of time on a rule of law, a framework under which the process can take place -- and Helpful Hal talking about very specific ideas for adding more control, control, control over other human beings, and Tom bobbing his head enthusiastically:
Prokofy Neva: Law should be above the tools and the humans implementing it -- if you don't have a sense of higher law, you get tyranny by those who are the programmers of the tools.
Angel Fluffy: here's a question. What are the most urgently needed additions to the group tools? Personally I would suggest a way to limit who can send/recieve/replyto group IMs (to limit spam on popular groups), better muting options... group financial options too.
Tom Bukowski: those are all great ideas Angel
Angel Fluffy: thank you Tom :)
Angel Fluffy: Tom: one of my current projects is finding ways to use the new group tools for anti-griefer security. So far I've come up with a few, though one major one was removed from the group tools ("bypass no scripts"), others ("bypass no rez", etc) still exist :
"Angel Fluffy: anyone have interesting ideas about how to use the group tools for security? I'm writing howtos on it atm for SL residents, so if you have suggestions, please offer them and I may use them in the articles :)
You: The single greatest thing the Lindens could do to curb griefing is not have more scripts and orbs and mechanisms but have their police blotter longer, fuller, and with all names named of abuse reporters and perpetrators and Lindens
You: I wonder really who you all think you will get to live in this mechanized world that only you control?
Angel Fluffy: I'm not sure where I will post them. I'm talking with the Lindens about various methods of adding my writings to the SL docs, either in the official guide, via forum stickies, notecards added to the 'Library' or other means.
Angel Fluffy: If you're interested in them, IM me in a week or two and I will let you know :)
(Note all the smug little smilies -- smilies deployed aggressively like that are always a sign of absolute arrogant smugness, I find -- and the absolute arrogant and unshaking confidence that Lindens will put Angel in the library..)
Now, here is where Tom's meeting ends, and my own debate with Angel begins, and I really bear down on him for his arrogant notion that HE alone should get to write manuals on voting and group tools and have them just put in the library, just like that!!!!:
Angel Fluffy: Prok: they're not just blindly adding my ideas - they are reviewing them first :) I make mistakes in places, I have had to correct flaws in my work on many occasions before the Lindens would accept it should be distributed to residents.
You: Angel, I didn't elect you.
You: I didn't acclaim you.
You: I didn't nominate you to fix up the voting tools by "just cleaning them up"
You: so your notion that you just "just get to do it" is illegitimate
You: ugh
You: you get to just work up stuff and have the Lindens distribute it?
You: and we don't get to discuss the *powerful influence* you will have by just taking on "a chore" like the voting tools? hello???
You: hell no
Angel Fluffy: no :) They read it and check it first, often requiring me to make changes to my work on points of factual accuracy. :)
You: Since when does one resident just get to "add their ideas" into the client???
You: Yes, and with such modesty too I see : )
Shutter Renneville: easy
You: And, so qualified!
You: easy nothing Shutter
You: This is an outrage
You: this is what the hell is wrong with this world
You: a few pets of the Lindens come in and take this or that feature over of what is supposed to be *our world*
You: *ours*
You: that means more than just you and your Linden pals
You: ?
You: how does that work?
You: I make suggestions in the forums in open with a group discussing it about changing the group tools
You: it was debated for months and months
You: I didn't just sidle up to the Lindens and say "add my writings to your wiki, would you?'
You: ?
You: I mean this is about *process*
You: The voting tools have much that is wrong with them.
You: Starting with the failure to ensure a "no" vote.
You: You completely sidestepped that and completely shoved down to the bottom all the proposals to put in "no"
You: simply because you don't like that idea
You: well, why? who are you?
You: Honestly, this isn't a process, it's tyranny, it's wrong.
You: I've never seen it so aggressively defended with fake smilies, either!
Angel Fluffy: I'm just a normal resident who has stepped up to the plate to try to help. I don't really have any control of what work of mine is passed - the Lindens check it and reject parts of it.
You: At least most people who get the Lindens to throw this platform their way do it in secret or on the IRC channel.
You: Well I'm a normal resident TOO
You: and I make suggestions too
You: but they are put in a process called "the forums"
You: which are no more
You: or in "the covenants groups" -- which ceased to work
Angel Fluffy: Y'know, you can email Lindens too.
You: I was in a black box all through the previous
jYou: I kept raising things and bug reporting them and only getting funneled answers.
Tluffy: Take care jesz :)
You: There are a number of us who have howled about the voting tools and suggested some key reforms
You: why should just one person be fixing them? hello?
You: with no accountability
Shutter Renneville: maybe her Ideas are solid?
Shutter Renneville: well written?
Shutter Renneville: nicely offered?
Shutter Renneville: she said they were reviewed
Angel Fluffy: Prok, I just try to be helpful. I do read around, I do try to do what is right... I do try to consider all points of view. I fail sometimes, but I try, and I make sure to never make it personal - we're all trying to improve SL, why not co-operate?
Scope Cleaver: Take care every one, thanks Tom. :)
Angel Fluffy: be well Scope :)
Tom Bukowski: cu soon Scope - thanks for coming!
Shutter Renneville: bye :)
You: No, they are not solid shutter
You: they were not reviewed with us
You: nothing about us/without us
You: there is no "no"
You: there cannot be a voting system with no "no"
You: that's just morally and legally wrong in every way
You: Angel, this is all fluff, what you say.
Angel Fluffy: Shutter: thank you for your suggestions. I try to make my work as good as possible. I try. If you have any suggestions to improve em, please let me know, I'm always open to new ideas :)
Tom Bukowski: when you vote for mayor or city council or whaterver, there's no "no"
You: You never consulted; you railroaded this through
Tom Bukowski: I guess you can leave the ballot blank
You: I'm challenging it fundamentally at the root in the most profound way I can.
You: Tom, that's ridiculous
You: ther'es more than one candidate for mayor!
You: and if the city has a proposition
You: like "should we balance the budget?"
You: there is YES or NO
You: that's the equivalent
Angel Fluffy: Prok, with regards to the 'no "no"' objection... actually, I have supported the ability of residents to object to proposals for a long time, I just think that objections are better served by giving reasons and arguments, either instead of or in addition
You: I'd love to see you try to live in Real Life with no "no"
Angel Fluffy: to a 'no' vote. Debate, after all, is the most constructive way to move ideas forward most of the time.
You: no you don't supoprt it and don't talk tripe that way
You: then turn around and disprove it in the next sentence
You: that's really disingenuous and I call you on it
You: it's a very important feature of a democratic society
You: not to be socially engineered and pushed and pulled into only producing "positive proposals"
You: but to be able to vote "no"
Angel Fluffy: Please Prok, I am not referring to anything you say as 'tripe', or labelling you as 'disingenuous'. I realise you may not like me, but please be civil to me when talking with me. [Note disingenuous, over-polite, controlling invocation of 'rules'--PN]
You: that forces these game gods to pause from a moment from their creation of a this dystopia
You: to see what are they doing that isn't right?
Angel Fluffy: I don't ask you to agree, all I ask is that you're polite in discussing it :)
You: there is no other way for feedback, you cannot require everyone to fight the other competing proposals
You: only the Gorean master with 800 subs to push around can then flashmob the machine
You: other people with reasoned and democratic debate put up 87 votes and don't count
You: no is the only way to correct that skewed situation
Angel Fluffy: so, you're saying that more democracy is the best way to combat 'mob rule'?
You: Angel, you are using an extremely disingenous method of rhetorical debate and need to be called on it.
You: You say you support these proposals.
You: But you do not!
You: so at least be honest about that
You: you turn around and then trash them in the next sentence
You: where is the support?
Angel Fluffy: erm... what makes you say that?
You: you deliberately down-played them in your presentation
You: read what you wrote Angel
You: it's a fake technique, I'm sorry, I'm calling you on it
You: read what you wrote
You: "Prok, with regards to the 'no "no"' objection... actually, I have supported the ability of residents to object to proposals for a long time,"
You: that's what you wrote
You: to give yourself all the rhetorical value of *appearing* to support it
You: but then here's what you said *next*
Angel Fluffy: to be fair Prok, there were *so* many ideas I had to deal with - I tried to cut down the list to a few of the most important ones. I understand you are mad that your pet proposals were not in my list, but please don't take it personally.
You: "I just think that objections are better served by giving reasons and arguments, either instead of or in addition"
You: so you completely trash it under the guise of sounding "woeful and reasoning" -- it's fake.
You: and yes, the answer to mob rule is MORE democracy not less
You: No, Angel
You: it's disingenous to claim that my principled objection to your high-handed hijacking of the voter feature
You: is about my pet proposals
You: they mean nothing really
You: the no "no" has OTHER people making them besides me
Angel Fluffy: Prok, I do not pretend to know what you are thinking, or to know what you really believe. Please extend me the same courtesy by not acting like you have a detailed knowledge of what I think.
You: it's definitely not about that but the principle of the thing -- that no one resident should be allowed to hijack something like the sole democratic machine in this dystopican mechanistic world.
You: It's wrong.
You: Wrong, wrong,l wrong.
Shutter Renneville: O Kaaaay...see you mr livid and everyone else :)
You: It's so of a piece -- taking away the forums, allowing someone to just "fix up" and "shape" the voter
You: it's really awful.
Tom Bukowski: See you soon Shutter!
Tom Bukowski: Thanks for coming
You: Well that's how you lose your freedoms.
You: That's how it happens.
You: You roll over and take the removal of the forums lying down.
You: And this is what you get now -- closing off the voting feature to one person who will "mechanize it better"
Tom Bukowski: I've gotta go eat irl, so I'm gonna log out myself, but feel free to hang here as long as you wish!
Shutter Renneville: thanks c ya
You: Of course the Lidnens *love* this.
Tom Bukowski: thanks again everyone for coming
Tom Bukowski: cu soon!
You: I will fight you hammer and tongue Angel.
You: You cannot just hijack something like this, it's wrong.
You: With all your sectarian beliefs, too.
You: You are doing it in stealth;
You: most people don't even realize the consequences.
You: I do.
You: I see it.
You: And I will go on publicizing it.
You: And challenging it.
You: And I'll be calling you on these fake rhetorical devices you use, too.
You: "I just think that objections are better served by giving reasons and arguments, either instead of or in addition"
You: THAT is what you said, don't pretend otherwise.
Angel Fluffy: What makes you think that I am taking the removal of the forums lying down? Also, the Lindens review my ideas selectively... they make the choices, not me. Finally... fighting with me is pointless, you'd be better off with me as an ally.
You: "better served"
You: No, I don't wish to have as an ally someone who thinks they can just go and hijack something.
You: No thank you.
You: Not at all.
You: I don't WISH to be your sub or be co-opted by you.
You: I don't wish to have your *lifestyle choices* bleed into the body politic.
You: and I will resist that sort of method of doing things
You: that only "masters" get to run things
You: hell no
You: and that's *exactly* what is up, and you know it
You: we see it
Angel Fluffy: ... you have a vivid imagination Prok :)
FireTyger Stonecutter: ...Don't run...
FireTyger Stonecutter: ...we are your friends...
You: No, I have clear insights : )
Ludo Merit: Oh, let him run. That might shut him up.
Angel Fluffy: Prok: if I am so different to you that you are opposed to my whole lifestyle, then maybe, just maybe you don't understand my lifestyle?
You: Oh bullshit
You: That's the argumentation you sorts always use
You: everyone is always in the wrong
You: they never "understand it"
You: they must be "initiated into its mysteries"
You: they aren't educated
You: they are always to be kept off balance
You: this is the argumentation always used by cults
You: no one can understand them -- ever
You: unless they "believe"
You: well, I don't believe, it's not a basis for civilization
You: I reject it.
You: : )
You: So no, I won't be "educating" myself and "studying up" and "understanding"
You: you can study up on my belief systems then and be in the wrong about my cult if you like LOL. Angel Fluffy: You can understand lifestyles without believing they are right for you, that is fine. But please do not assume that other lifestyles would try to get you into them unless you wanted to be there.
You: yes cults are are all over SL
You: it's a ripe matrix for them
You: they flourish
You: Oh? then why do they go after our voting tools?
You: hmmm?
Angel Fluffy: so, you're saying there are all these cults out there trying to take over SL and bend the world to their own agendas?
You: why are they in the public domain?
You: with these beliefs?
You: Of course there are.
You: All over, and you 're in them yourself LOL.
You: I don't have to buy your belief systems and I don't.
You: I think you'll find that these Lindens you now feel you have eating out of your hand
You: will bite back hard
You: all you who suck up to them find that out
Angel Fluffy: the Lindens are *not* eating out of my hand at all.
You: ROFL
You: You just told us how they reviewed your work and how you just add your writings -- after review of course!
You: lol
You: what the hell system is that?
You: that's a new one
You: "if you have an ideology to add to the client, why, just do it!"
Angel Fluffy: I have no problem with Prok :)
You: no thanks
You: I'l be exposing this crap wherever I see it
You: the voting tools need to be reformed
You: but not by one tekkie grabbing them and hijacking them
You: pretending to "help out" and then subtly grabbing at them
bump: R2 BOMB
bump: R2 BOMB
bump: R2 BOMB
bump: R2 BOMB
bump: R2 BOMB
bump: R2 BOMB
bump: R2 BOMB
You: jok bye
[END]
It ends in someone bombing me out of the sim. Whatever.
So...stay tuned. Watch for more stickies, groups, essays, hey, even notecards in your *library* for God's sake, from Angel Fluffy.
I've already begun a number of efforts to counteract the Fluffization of Second Life. I don't have any illusions they'll be successful. Why? Because the Lindens just want someone to do the dirty work of managing a lot of unruly kids, and it takes a rule-y kid to do that -- so they don't care how unpretty it is.
What it prefigures for our Metaversal civilization is highly troubling, however.
I wish I could have said this better, shorter, more effectively. But it's a complicated and long story with many parts, and most people haven't noticed most of them.
In later years after dictatorships get started, people sometimes ask -- but you were near that dictator...but you were in a beer hall with him...but you were at a party meeting...why didn't you shoot him...why didn't you strangle him with your bare hands right then, and there?
In a virtual world, you can't strangle an avatar --even shooting him only teleports him home. And you wouldn't want to advocate such violence anyway, in the polite and thoughtful discourse at something so elegantly called "Digital Cultures".
I'm not reading this, I just wanted to say that when you said "the Blob" I was all "LMAO"
That was a funny moment
Thank you Prokofy
Posted by: Baba | September 28, 2006 at 12:40 AM
Well that's what we're all calling it now. Puffy, white, vague -- the Blob. I thought I coined it but Coco swears she did. Actually Belaya says that Eggy called it that in Beta.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | September 28, 2006 at 12:54 AM
Damn Eggy! I saw it here first ;0
Posted by: Baba | September 28, 2006 at 09:55 AM
What came first?
The chicken or the Eggy?
Posted by: Brace | September 30, 2006 at 10:21 PM
Sadly, it is too late for justice. SL is entering a feudal, "warring states period." As the mainland withers, it will be replaced by a gaggle of privately owned island fortresses. Nor will the private sims have any way of resolving their own internal conflicts. All they will be able to do is constantly ban and ban and ban some more. They will therefore continue to fragment into smaller and smaller fractions until they disappear.
Posted by: Mikyo | October 01, 2006 at 02:13 AM
http://forums.secondcitizen.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2109&d=1159770497
Whatcha got to say about the screenshot in that link, eh Prok? OMG it's clearly a vast conspiracy... it's RAPE when a Linden is in a resident's business group... blah blah blah.
Posted by: Prokofy Is A Hypocrite | October 03, 2006 at 02:23 PM
I'm hardly a hypocrite, don't be silly.
Lindens do not belong in resident groups, and they shouldn't join them permanently. That's my firm position.
They were forced to join my rentals group when I was offline to help my tenants who were bombarded with tub-girl script attacks, which exploits the shared objects in the group. Lindens needed to become members temporarily in order to put kill scripts in the objects or delete them.
Such a very narrow, technical joining of a group for a very brief purpose like stopping a griefing attack or exploit, placing a building or a telehub, is hardly what we're talking about.
If you imagine that's what the essence of the discussion is about, you have your head up your ass -- you may be suffering from the literalist tekkie wikinista mind disease, or having a "gotcha" seizure, but these are emotional and psychiatric ailments unrelated to the discussion.
I suspect you don't care about the substance of the matter, you're just looking for ways to harass me.
I'm taking the trouble here to answer you, though you have no legitimate name, because I had a lot of other forums fucktards like Cindy Clavea do the same little gleeful gotcha dance, thinking they were catching me at "hyprokisy".
Very lame, and says more about them than they know.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | October 03, 2006 at 04:57 PM
This blog has too many words in it.
Posted by: Disco Duck | October 05, 2006 at 11:21 PM
strange to hear Prokofy talk about justice when his personal point of view is really dictatorial
Posted by: Prokofy commentator | October 10, 2006 at 12:22 PM
strange to hear Prokofy talk about justice when his personal point of view is really dictatorial
Posted by: Prokofy commentator | October 10, 2006 at 12:23 PM
"strange to hear Prokofy talk about justice when his personal point of view is really dictatorial"
call that irony of fate (^_^)
Posted by: Kyrah Abattoir | October 10, 2006 at 07:58 PM
I have sad news. "Prokofy Neva," who was always a kind and gracious aunt to me, succumbed to heart disease last night. When I figure out how to access her typepad account I will post contact information and/or details. Please don't gloat, this is a hard time for our family. She was a very special person and she touched many lives.
Posted by: Andrea Kent | October 12, 2006 at 08:18 PM
*Rolls eyes*. Nice try, but um, no, I'm not dead. What, desperate to find someone to pick on? You all should be ashamed of yourselves.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | October 13, 2006 at 10:05 AM
!
*hugs you* Oh, I am so glad you aren't dead, Prokofy darling! Squee was sooo worried!
Posted by: Squeedoo S | October 14, 2006 at 05:57 PM
I find your views quite interesting and agree that conflict resolution and justice are two different approaches. Personally, I think both have there merits, depending on the situation. What I would like to refute is the following: That it is a judaeo-christian notion. It actually is not: It is based on greek and roman law, most of the basic notions evolved during a time BERFORE christianity, in a polytheistic society. If it were solely judeao-christian aka religious law, I do not think a lot of people would like to live under this kind of law nowadays. In the contrary: the interesting thing about roman law is, that it is quite secular, compared to what we find spelled out in the bible. Religion and law should be kept seperate: There is no qualitative difference, between an Islamic Republic, a Jewish Republic or a Christian Republic. All of these tend to be highly exclusive and unbalanced in how they apply law. One should also mention that Law in islamic societies had a time when it was quite secular and advanced for the given time. It is not a nice thing to give all the credit to Judeo-Christian societies, the majority of people on this planet are not christian and may take offense. I, personally grew up atheist, so I don't have a personal interest in taking one religions side or the other.
Well, if you so see me online, I'm always up for a good discussion...have a great day!
Posted by: Gwynedd Langwarrin | October 30, 2006 at 08:20 AM
Of course Judaism and Christianity were influenced by belief systems that came before them in the Roman and Greek cultures. But it's certainly accurate to describe Western societies today as coming from Judeo-Christian civilization. That doesn't imply that "everybody is Christian," it merely acknowledges that there are certain core ideas that belong to this civilization.
I don't believe in political correctness or being hobbled by multi-cultural notions that try to make all heritages and cultures equally valid. They aren't. Some prevail; some don't.
Of course there is a huge difference between an Islamic republic, Jewish republic, and Christian republic, today, and at different stages in history. Notions of God; the law; the inherent dignity of the individual; the role of the collective; punishment; the afterlife -- these differ, and differ in significant ways, and it's fine to say that, and it's fine to show a sliding scale of freedom or tyranny one can find across these religions and say "this is what we want" and "this is what we don't want".
If there is an idea that does belong to Judeo-Christian civilization, than fine, give it credit. You can't hobble and restrict the study of the past and present by trying to play "equal opportunity".
Whether a believer or not, there are certain core ideas that you may take for granted, and even value. These values or beliefs are present to a greater or lessser extent in religions, and that can and should be acknowledged. Such values include:
1) The notion of universality; that higher law can govern human beings and order their lives
2) Pluralism -- that there are many ideas and ways and approaches , not just one true path
3) Adversarial notions of events can be presented to arrive at a decision
4) Punishment is not only retribution but rehabilitation; atonement
5) Separation of church and state
6) Equality of men and women; education of women and public role of women in society
7) Equality of all races and creeds; protection of minorities
8) The concept of covenant; the social contract; civil society.
Etc. Some of these ideas do not shine at certain historical periods; others do. Some are common to other bodies of belief like Confucianism, others aren't.
I don't shrink and convulse in politically correct horror at the idea that some belief systems are free and some aren't. The Judeo-Christian civilizational ideas evolved to the point of an attitude for, and role for women that I'd much rather live under than the Islamic or Confucian roles -- and no doubt *you* do, too. You get all the benefits of the Judeo-Christian civilization you loathe, you see, and these ideological systems even grant you the freedom and tolerance to stand around and say, plead the case for women to go under the hajib, or anachronistically spout passages from St. Paul -- and keep your freedoms : )
Of course, Sansarya will come along any minute now to explain that Judeo-Christian civilization is all a myth, and the U.S. Constitution is actual a product of the Iroquois federation lol.
In any event, I tend to avoid real-life debates with people in Second Life because it usually involves somebody pasting Wikipedia entries and Googling and fails to reveal, often, differing levels of education and true cultural backgrounds informing the debate.
The other day, I was standing around debating at the Memory Bazaar with a fellow who was reproaching the build because it had pictorial symbols and hadn't been fastidiously true to an Islamic code of architecture that would have involved only geometric symbols because of the taboo on images.
But this is Morocco c. 1920, I countered, and the posters used in the build were taken from that period.
Oh, but that's French colonial influence, he countered. To which I said, but what, we're supposed to recreate in Second Life only absolutist idealized cities or states -- here is Morocco shorn of its French colonial influences ?!
And besides, what of it? That's life in the big city. Countries get influenced. Too bad -- you can't sanitize it out. And this is Second Life, and actually, we can commit any cultural or anachronistic or impure faux paux we like because it's all a big mash-up, no?
I knew I was dealing with a European in this debate; they are often cringing at Muslim pressure on their old cultures these days and the debates with them get really acrimonious because they don't see it (one of the reasons Americans have less trouble with the Danish cartoons issue, for example, it they tend to recognize religious belief and respect it more than post-religious Europeans).
Or perhaps my interlocutor was Muslim himself, not from Europe, or recently come to Europe?
No, of course not, he came from the same Catholic and Celtic roots of Northern Europe that I did ROFL. And that's often what I find -- the person most flakking the multi-culti agenda and trying to dismantle the values of "the West" are those most firmly planted in its catholic traditions. It's a hallmark of these traditions that they spawn their utopianist or anti-monotheist opposites, even paganism and communism.
I couldn't help chuckling at all this -- many people come to America as they come to Second Life, frankly, to escape the oppressiveness of cultures they leave behind, cultures that demand a geometric rigour in architecture and abhor the pictorial, for instance. They head for the smorgasbord of what freer societies offer, and that includes ideologies that are about their undoing.
Posted by: Prokofy Neva | October 30, 2006 at 01:37 PM