Jump to content

these are hard times and we all know it


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3150 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts


16 wrote:


JeanneAnne wrote:

i use2 call myself an anarchist but then i found a better word .. autarchy .. i dont see any conflict between communal living & autarky .. every1 governs his or her own self & every1 has a say in decisions that effect the entire group .. if some1 is so independant that they dont even want to live in a group .. nothings stopping them from going it alone .. i dont see why SL cant be a communal group of autonomous self governing individuals .. i think itd be a much better place if it was

Jeanne

 

so what happens when an individual disagrees with the group. do they just get ignored?

what happens if is like 49% disagree? do they get ignored as well? what happens if they choose not to pay the $200 each bc of that?

 

the group strives for consensus .. if 1 or a few disagree w/ the group decision .. then yeah .. they get ignored .. if it comes down to it then the issue gets put to a vote .. if 49% disagree they get overruled .. but if a community is that evenly divided somethings wrong .. if sl was being run correctly & things were going smoothly there should be broad agreement about issues

ppl would pay by the month .. i figure about $15 - 20 per month altho thats just an estimate & would depend on how many were paying & what the actual operating expenses are .. if they were too far in arrears they eventually couldnt log in

Jeanne

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 145
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


JeanneAnne wrote:


16 wrote:


JeanneAnne wrote:

i use2 call myself an anarchist but then i found a better word .. autarchy .. i dont see any conflict between communal living & autarky .. every1 governs his or her own self & every1 has a say in decisions that effect the entire group .. if some1 is so independant that they dont even want to live in a group .. nothings stopping them from going it alone .. i dont see why SL cant be a communal group of autonomous self governing individuals .. i think itd be a much better place if it was

Jeanne

 

so what happens when an individual disagrees with the group. do they just get ignored?

what happens if is like 49% disagree? do they get ignored as well? what happens if they choose not to pay the $200 each bc of that?

 

the group strives for consensus .. if 1 or a few disagree w/ the group decision .. then yeah .. they get ignored .. if it comes down to it then the issue gets put to a vote .. if 49% disagree they get overruled .. but if a community is that evenly divided somethings wrong .. if sl was being run correctly & things were going smoothly there should be broad agreement about issues

ppl would pay by the month .. i figure about $15 - 20 per month altho thats just an estimate & would depend on how many were paying & what the actual operating expenses are .. if they were too far in arrears they eventually couldnt log in

Jeanne

 

yes. thats pretty much how all human societies work when dealing with dissenters. they get ignored, shunned, exiled, imprisoned, gulaged and even killed sometimes. when thats questioned the group remaining usual justifies it to themselves by saying well they brought it on themselves. if they had just tried a bit harder to fit in with us the dominant group then everything would have been OK and we wouldn't have had to deal to them

what also happens is that as time passes the dominant group gets smaller and smaller. it dont really matter what is the actual political system in place. it just seems to end up that way. well so far in history thats been the case

Link to post
Share on other sites


16 wrote:



the group strives for consensus .. if 1 or a few disagree w/ the group decision .. then yeah .. they get ignored .. if it comes down to it then the issue gets put to a vote .. if 49% disagree they get overruled .. but if a community is that evenly divided somethings wrong .. if sl was being run correctly & things were going smoothly there should be broad agreement about issues

ppl would pay by the month .. i figure about $15 - 20 per month altho thats just an estimate & would depend on how many were paying & what the actual operating expenses are .. if they were too far in arrears they eventually couldnt log in

Jeanne

 

yes. thats pretty much how all human societies work when dealing with dissenters. they get ignored, shunned, exiled, imprisoned, gulaged and even killed sometimes. when thats questioned the group remaining usual justifies it to themselves by saying well they brought it on themselves. if they had just tried a bit harder to fit in with us the dominant group then everything would have been OK and we wouldn't have had to deal to them

what also happens is that as time passes the dominant group gets smaller and smaller. it dont really matter what is the actual political system in place. it just seems to end up that way. well so far in history thats been the case

well 16 .. im talking about running SL as a members owned cooperative here .. i dont think anyone is goin2 be imprisoned, gulaged or even killed over disagreements about how to run SL .. the only way someone would get exiled would be if they didnt pay the user fee or engaged in serious griefing .. & they might get ignored or shunned if no1 like them .. but no1 is going to tell anyone else how to live their SL .. so long as they do no harm to others they can do whatever they want

its silly to expect 100% agreement on how SL should be run .. from experience w/ food & babysitting cooperatives the members strive for consensus & sometime achieve it .. if theres only a few dissenters they simply dont get their way this time .. maybe next time most everyone will agree with them .. if the members hav2 resort to a majority vote its kinduv a failure of community .. but sometimes its necessary to put things to a vote .. @ least thats more fair than some unaccountable corporate bigshot dictating terms .. like it is now

Jeanne

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


JeanneAnne wrote:


16 wrote:



the group strives for consensus .. if 1 or a few disagree w/ the group decision .. then yeah .. they get ignored .. if it comes down to it then the issue gets put to a vote .. if 49% disagree they get overruled .. but if a community is that evenly divided somethings wrong .. if sl was being run correctly & things were going smoothly there should be broad agreement about issues

ppl would pay by the month .. i figure about $15 - 20 per month altho thats just an estimate & would depend on how many were paying & what the actual operating expenses are .. if they were too far in arrears they eventually couldnt log in

Jeanne

 

yes. thats pretty much how all human societies work when dealing with dissenters. they get ignored, shunned, exiled, imprisoned, gulaged and even killed sometimes. when thats questioned the group remaining usual justifies it to themselves by saying well they brought it on themselves. if they had just tried a bit harder to fit in with us the dominant group then everything would have been OK and we wouldn't have had to deal to them

what also happens is that as time passes the dominant group gets smaller and smaller. it dont really matter what is the actual political system in place. it just seems to end up that way. well so far in history thats been the case

well 16 .. im talking about running SL as a members owned cooperative here .. i dont think anyone is goin2 be imprisoned, gulaged or even killed over disagreements about how to run SL .. the only way someone would get exiled would be if they didnt pay the user fee or engaged in serious griefing .. & they might get ignored or shunned if no1 like them .. but no1 is going to tell anyone else how to live their SL .. so long as they do no harm to others they can do whatever they want

its silly to expect 100% agreement on how SL should be run .. from experience w/ food & babysitting cooperatives the members strive for consensus & sometime achieve it .. if theres only a few dissenters they simply dont get their way this time .. maybe next time most everyone will agree with them .. if the members hav2 resort to a majority vote its kinduv a failure of community .. but sometimes its necessary to put things to a vote .. @ least thats more fair than some unaccountable corporate bigshot dictating terms .. like it is now

Jeanne

 

just on the prison stuff. sounds silly and over the top yes

but SL is a human society. same like any other online social environment. temp bans are online exile/imprisonment. permaban is death

what you seem to be saying is that is ok for this to happen if the group agrees to do it. i disagree with the premise that somehow this is more fair on the dissenters when is a group doing it rather than an autocrat. it might be more fair for the group remaining but the dissenters would disagree i think

+

the other thing is that you seems to kinda expect everyone in the group including the dissenters to act rationally. what happens when they don't? is not just dissenters who sometimes act irrationally. sometimes the dominant group does as well

+

these not easy questions to answer. if they were then we would already be living in some whole other way in the real world. so am not expecting you to solve them. i just raise them for discussion

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


16 wrote:


JeanneAnne wrote:


16 wrote:



the group strives for consensus .. if 1 or a few disagree w/ the group decision .. then yeah .. they get ignored .. if it comes down to it then the issue gets put to a vote .. if 49% disagree they get overruled .. but if a community is that evenly divided somethings wrong .. if sl was being run correctly & things were going smoothly there should be broad agreement about issues

ppl would pay by the month .. i figure about $15 - 20 per month altho thats just an estimate & would depend on how many were paying & what the actual operating expenses are .. if they were too far in arrears they eventually couldnt log in

Jeanne

 

yes. thats pretty much how all human societies work when dealing with dissenters. they get ignored, shunned, exiled, imprisoned, gulaged and even killed sometimes. when thats questioned the group remaining usual justifies it to themselves by saying well they brought it on themselves. if they had just tried a bit harder to fit in with us the dominant group then everything would have been OK and we wouldn't have had to deal to them

what also happens is that as time passes the dominant group gets smaller and smaller. it dont really matter what is the actual political system in place. it just seems to end up that way. well so far in history thats been the case

well 16 .. im talking about running SL as a members owned cooperative here .. i dont think anyone is goin2 be imprisoned, gulaged or even killed over disagreements about how to run SL .. the only way someone would get exiled would be if they didnt pay the user fee or engaged in serious griefing .. & they might get ignored or shunned if no1 like them .. but no1 is going to tell anyone else how to live their SL .. so long as they do no harm to others they can do whatever they want

its silly to expect 100% agreement on how SL should be run .. from experience w/ food & babysitting cooperatives the members strive for consensus & sometime achieve it .. if theres only a few dissenters they simply dont get their way this time .. maybe next time most everyone will agree with them .. if the members hav2 resort to a majority vote its kinduv a failure of community .. but sometimes its necessary to put things to a vote .. @ least thats more fair than some unaccountable corporate bigshot dictating terms .. like it is now

Jeanne

 

just on the prison stuff. sounds silly and over the top yes

but SL is a human society. same like any other online social environment. temp bans are online exile/imprisonment. permaban is death

what you seem to be saying is that is ok for this to happen if the group agrees to do it. i disagree with the premise that somehow this is more fair on the dissenters when is a group doing it rather than an autocrat. it might be more fair for the group remaining but the dissenters would disagree i think

+

the other thing is that you seems to kinda expect everyone in the group including the dissenters to act rationally. what happens when they don't? is not just dissenters who sometimes act irrationally. sometimes the dominant group does as well

+

these not easy questions to answer. if they were then we would already be living in some whole other way in the real world. so am not expecting you to solve them. i just raise them for discussion

 

 

yeah .. i do expect ppl to act rationally .. for the most part .. i think that irrational behavior stems from oppression .. oppressed ppl behave irrationally outuv resentment or as a way of getting back @ the oppressor .. in a community that isnt oppressive i dont expect much irrationality .. some perhaps .. due to mental or emotional illness .. but not nearly as much as is seen as is

the difference between the group making decisions by consensus or by majority vote & an autocrat doing so is that the group exercises compassion towards all .. dissenters included .. the autocrat or autocratic corporation has no compassion .. only profit matters not people .. when the group behaves compassionately dissenters & their opinions are accomodated as much as they possibly can be .. compromise may be reached that all can agree on & if not .. @ least the dissenters got the chance to have their opinions heard & taken into consideration .. LL currently neither listens to SL residents or takes anything into consideration besides maximizing profits .. corporatism is so pathological that any attempt to make decisions according to resident consensus is an improvement

Jeanne

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

JeanneAnne wrote:
i dont know mucha bout Marx .. i do like his saying "
from each according to ability, to each according to need"
tho .. thats 1uv my favorite quotes .. when you say that communism is about getting fed clothed housed medical treatment & education .. that sounds better than many get under greed-based fascist corporatism .. but why does that have to be "about it"? why cant that just be the beginning? in exchange for what youre able to do why not get whatever you want ..
so long as its no more than anyone else gets?


The first quote I bolded basically means that one person can become a slave to another.  Institutionalized slavery.

Second quote I bolded, results in loss of incentive and motivation.  Why work harder or smarter if you get no more than anyone else? 

Here's real life:  

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/01/20/145360447/the-secret-document-that-transformed-china

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:


Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

Second quote I bolded, results in loss of incentive and motivation.  Why work harder or smarter if you get no more than anyone else? 

Because it is the right thing to do.

Ah, but under what kind of motivational system did you learn what's "the right thing to do", Knowl? I was raised to do my best because it's the right thing to do, but also to believe that doing my best would ultimately benefit me. What if my parents had been raised under a system which, in general, offered no benefit to those who did their best? Would they have taught me a different "right thing to do"?

It's difficult to extract yourself from your own history and imagine what it's like to have someone else's.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:

Yes, in it for Society.

 

A Joke for you.

A farmer, a coal miner, and an auto mechanic, are sitting in a Country Club  :smileyvery-happy:

 

The coal miner is coughing up all the time due to anthrosilicosis, the mechanic has headaches, tremors and rashes due to contact with engine oil for a working lifetime and the farmer never had any money due to the government subsidies running out and being price squeezed by Walmart.  Newsflash:  They're in the Country Club car park but can't afford the member fees.

;)

Link to post
Share on other sites


Celestiall Nightfire wrote:


JeanneAnne wrote:
i dont know mucha bout Marx .. i do like his saying "
from each according to ability, to each according to need"
tho .. thats 1uv my favorite quotes .. when you say that communism is about getting fed clothed housed medical treatment & education .. that sounds better than many get under greed-based fascist corporatism .. but why does that have to be "about it"? why cant that just be the beginning? in exchange for what youre able to do why not get whatever you want ..
so long as its no more than anyone else gets?


The first quote I bolded basically means that one person can become a slave to another.  Institutionalized slavery.

Second quote I bolded, results in loss of incentive and motivation.  Why work harder or smarter if you get no more than anyone else? 

Here's real life:  

 

that was a really neat article and very true to what America pretty much has to do..well not exactly that but a drastic change like that..

the corporations are killing them pretty much with the economy and jobs and pay scales..

like small towns letting in these big corps that promise more roads and more things to the community..

 

the only thing they don't realize until it is too late is that..now they have lost being self reliant on each other..

instead of eating foods grown in the area they get food from all over that are the same foods they could have gotten already..

they eat less healthy and have lost community togetherness..

pretty much gave away a lot of freedom for more invasive way of life ..all because of wanting to grow bigger..

when really being smaller and more local was much more prosperous for the many..now the wealth goes to the few..and the many end up working more for less..

when they were working more together..they were all  stronger in the community..when they grew and became spread out ..the many became weaker in their part..while only a few thrived..

America needs to work on it's communities again to ever be strong again..

 

a community over here and over there and over there all self reliant..and when trouble hits their nation..they can all come together as stronger people able to withstand hits to their country..because if one part takes a hit..

it doesn't have the domino affect that one nation spread out and thin does..

this is why farmers do so well in hard times..

they have much more things to make them more self reliant..

like making their own clothes and growing  their own foods and things that  hurt in hard times..

with small businesses going away from smaller communities and having to deal with large corps..people have become slaves to the prices of the world rather than their community..

a community that covers all it's own trades is a wealthy community..

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:

Because it will make you a better person.

 

 

hehehehe

no i thnk it will make you a more worn out person..

becoming a better person usually ends up with results for someone..

you've helped someone or felt accomplishment..working for no results won't make you feel better to go out and do some more hard work for no reason..

just getting up to grunt and strain for not is a toll on a person..

people don't kill themselves working to become a better person..they do it for some other reason..

either pay or inspiration or to feel good about making some ground or making a difference..

you become a better person by making a difference not spinning your wheels

hehehe

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeanne said:


yeah .. i do expect ppl to act rationally .. for the most part .. i think that irrational behavior stems from oppression .. oppressed ppl behave irrationally outuv resentment or as a way of getting back @ the oppressor .. in a community that isnt oppressive i dont expect much irrationality .. some perhaps .. due to mental or emotional illness .. but not nearly as much as is seen as is

the difference between the group making decisions by consensus or by majority vote & an autocrat doing so is that the group exercises compassion towards all .. dissenters included .. the autocrat or autocratic corporation has no compassion .. only profit matters not people .. when the group behaves compassionately dissenters & their opinions are accomodated as much as they possibly can be .. compromise may be reached that all can agree on & if not .. @ least the dissenters got the chance to have their opinions heard & taken into consideration .. LL currently neither listens to SL residents or takes anything into consideration besides maximizing profits .. corporatism is so pathological that any attempt to make decisions according to resident consensus is an improvement

Jeanne

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeanne, we have to remember that SL would not survive without financial contributions - either through land sales, tier, premium memberships, or income from the Marketplace. If I remember my SL history, it started out to be free for all, but due to "the tragedy of the commons" the Lab started charging a "prim tax" on users based on how many prims a person created. It costs a lot to run servers and pay staff. These costs eventually led to the land/tier system and the marketplace as a means of revenue.

I am glad to pay for SL use, because I appreciate all the wonderful things and people that are here. My alt pays nothing, though, and that is fine, too. I am one of those weird people who doesn't mind paying taxes, if it means that my poorer neighbors will get help without my having to personally go over and play "lady of the manor" by giving them a chicken once in a while.

I have gotten good support from Linden Labs in the past for different issues, but I can imagine that they get a bit tired hearing all the complaints about minor stuff.  True, there are a lot of things that could be better, but then, we the residents can do our parts, too: befriend a newbie, make beautiful things, pay our way if we can afford it.

I am less hopeful about SL ever being run by a consensus of residents. Humans are not rational, more "Man is a rationalizing creature." (Robert A. Heinlein). I can imagine it getting all political. Consider all the different groups in SL, each with its own agenda, for example, those who want "sex clubs" vs. those who want "pure meditation temples".

There are some group-run areas in SL, but they are not for everyone.

Sincerely,

Rufferta Resident

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Ceka Cianci wrote:


Celestiall Nightfire wrote:


JeanneAnne wrote:
i dont know mucha bout Marx .. i do like his saying "
from each according to ability, to each according to need"
tho .. thats 1uv my favorite quotes .. when you say that communism is about getting fed clothed housed medical treatment & education .. that sounds better than many get under greed-based fascist corporatism .. but why does that have to be "about it"? why cant that just be the beginning? in exchange for what youre able to do why not get whatever you want ..
so long as its no more than anyone else gets?


The first quote I bolded basically means that one person can become a slave to another.  Institutionalized slavery.

Second quote I bolded, results in loss of incentive and motivation.  Why work harder or smarter if you get no more than anyone else? 

Here's real life:  

 

that was a really neat article and very true to what America pretty much has to do..well not exactly that but a drastic change like that..

the corporations are killing them pretty much with the economy and jobs and pay scales..

like small towns letting in these big corps that promise more roads and more things to the community..

 

the only thing they don't realize until it is too late is that..now they have lost being self reliant on each other..

instead of eating foods grown in the area they get food from all over that are the same foods they could have gotten already..

they eat less healthy and have lost community togetherness..

pretty much gave away a lot of freedom for more invasive way of life ..all because of wanting to grow bigger..

when really being smaller and more local was much more prosperous for the many..now the wealth goes to the few..and the many end up working more for less..

when they were working more together..they were all  stronger in the community..when they grew and became spread out ..the many became weaker in their part..while only a few thrived..

America needs to work on it's communities again to ever be strong again..

 

a community over here and over there and over there all self reliant..and when trouble hits their nation..they can all come together as stronger people able to withstand hits to their country..because if one part takes a hit..

it doesn't have the domino affect that one nation spread out and thin does..

this is why farmers do so well in hard times..

they have much more things to make them more self reliant..

like making their own clothes and growing  their own foods and things that  hurt in hard times..

with small businesses going away from smaller communities and having to deal with large corps..people have become slaves to the prices of the world rather than their community..

a community that covers all it's own trades is a wealthy community..

 

Gotta be careful here, Ceka. Self sufficiency is terribly inefficient. While farmers might do well in hard times, constructing a society to have small scale self sufficiency may well guarantee hard times.

One could argue that decentralizing our power grid with local generation and storage facilities is a good idea, because it reduces any community's dependence on the transport of energy (with the vulnerabilities and inefficiencies that entails), but it would be hard to imagine decentralizing the manufacturing of the technologies to make that possible. The building of solar cells isn't something one can do in their barn.

"with small businesses going away from smaller communities and having to deal with large corps..people have become slaves to the prices of the world rather than their community.."

Being a slave to ever decreasing prices hardly sounds terrible.

"a community that covers all it's own trades is a wealthy community.."

I don't believe this is necessarily true, unless you are talking about the community of mankind. For any community smaller than that, I believe (fair) trading between communities is a good thing. Of course, as always, the definition of "fair" is subject to debate.

I lament the loss of my small local retailers and service providers, and the sense of community that seems to be vanishing with them. At the same time, I'm able to obtain goods and services now that I couldn't dream of affording years ago,  and I'm able to join online communities that welcome me with open arms.

It's been a while since I watched Hans Rosling work his magic in this TED talk, but I think he makes a pretty good argument for taking advantage of specialization and trade to improve our lives, which had been so dependent on "self sufficiency".

Link to post
Share on other sites

We already have a system very much as you have described. That is one of the reasons why it is important to strive to be better.

Just knowing the difference between right and wrong, should be reason enough.

I believe that many of our qualities, as humans, are inherent.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:

We already have a system very much as you have described. That is one of the reasons why it is important to strive to be better.

Just knowing the difference between right and wrong, should be reason enough.

I believe that many of our qualities, as humans, are inherent. 

Again, you are speaking from inside your particular frame of reference.

Not everybody believes as you do, though I might ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:


Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

 

 

Second quote I bolded, results in loss of incentive and motivation.  Why work harder or smarter if you get no more than anyone else?

 

Because it is the right thing to do.

Wow!  Just think, all those Chinese farmers who had starving children only needed to be told this bit of morality wisdom, and they could have had a bumper crop year!     You'd really think that someone would have thought of it?!  

 

REALITY: 

""Work hard, don't work hard — everyone gets the same," he says. "So people don't want to work."

 

In Xiaogang there was never enough food, and the farmers often had to go to other villages to beg. Their children were going hungry. They were desperate."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/01/20/145360447/the-secret-document-that-transformed-china

Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:

We already have a system very much as you have described. That is one of the reasons why it is important to strive to be better.

Just knowing the difference between right and wrong, should be reason enough.

I believe that many of our qualities, as humans, are inherent.

Gee Knowl, how do you propose to make everyone adhere to your vision of morality?  How does everyone come to see the world exactly the same as you?    If you know the answer, tell me, because I'll use it too, so everyone can think like me!  

Oh, damn...now, see...we have a problem already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking we could Waterboard them, or, send them to Justin Bieber concerts.

 

We start by acting with courtesy and respect for all people. Treat each person to honor and dignity, unless given sufficient cause to treat them otherwise.

 

I do not have a single answer to the World's problems.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Knowl Paine wrote:

Treat each person to honor and dignity, unless given sufficient cause to treat them otherwise.

What constitutes "sufficient reason"?

;-)

ETA: I might also ask what constitutes "honor". Is it like the honor in Afghan honor killings?

"I do not have a single answer to the World's problems."

None of us do, there isn't one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3150 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...