Ebbe's Keynote Critiques

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Additionally I refer you back to the points you made about the Government of Ireland at the time of the Potato famine. The Government then was more like a Mafia organisation than one that was democratically accountable. The points you made there are arguments against the position you are taking here.

---

Only in your mind, cause you, like many of the socialist and marxists, think we have yet to do government right, and it is all about the rules and people you elect. I say, you can't have government without massive corruption. It is impossible and there are no examples, in the history of man, that in any way lead to this conclusion. The US tried it's best to do this with the constitution, but from the first day people sought to corrupt it.

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

---

When the government acts in a state with elections, it is acting as a group of people delegated with that power by the PEOPLE, who are participants in the market and

decided

to put those people in power. Just because you don't

like

the decisions other people make doesn't mean the decisions themselves weren't made freely.

---

So, what you are telling me, is if we vote on something, that makes it legitimate? So, if we vote and the result is that all abortions are illegal, then that must be correct, and moral, cause we voted? Definitions of words do not change because you voted. Theft has a definition. If everyone voted to steal from me, that doesn't make it right, nor does it change the definition of theft. It is still theft. Voting is a totalitarian tool, because if you can get 50% of the morons in society to fear something irrationally, then you can steal from them and abuse them as much as you want. Voting is simply using the irrational fears of ignorant people to do whatever the government wants. How do you think the US got into Vietnam, which was based on a lie? How do you think the US got the people to agree to bomb Iraq? All lies again. Seriously, does it make any sense at all to allow irrational morons to dictate the direction of a whole nation of people?

[irihapeti]

you listed Freidman as a source

Milton Freidman hypothesised monetarism in his early years. This was also proofed not true back in the 1970s. He actual abandoned monetarism when that happened and jumped on the efficient market, rational actors, etc hypothesis. Which was also proofed as being not true

+

a hypothesis is built on axioms that are assumed to be true. They need not be actually true. Just that if they were true then the hypothesis would also be true

the axioms of this hypothesis is that actors are rational. That rational actions/behaviour result in efficiency. From this the hypothesis extrapolates that efficiency leads to equilibrium in supply and demand. Equilibrium in supply and demand provides the greatest totality of benefits to market participants. both suppliers and demanders (customers)

as any market participant can show (and they have) this is not the actual case. The market never reaches equilibrium due to the irrational behaviour of some market participants

the meaning of rational behaviour in this hypothesis is given as: market participants act in their own best interests. That it is irrational for them to not do this. This meaning is also a tenet of all forms of market capitalism

+

Freidman and his fellow acolytes also hypothesis on the other point I noted also. One even more axiomatic in its construction. The axiom being that when a individual derives a benefit from the market then there is a corresponding benefit for the person they are doing business with. Is then hypothesised further that bc there is a corresponding benefit for that person then this means that there is a benefit in aggregate for society as a whole

again as any market participant can show (and they have) this is not always the case. That often there is no benefit for society as a result of a person obtaining a benefit for themself thru the market. Also in quite a number of cases the person benefiting did and does so to the detriment of society

+

am not quite sure what is your argument now. Like you list Freidman as a source and now you arguing against him seems like     

[LlewLlwyd]

CHANGE is the only constant in a developing global market; intransigent economists will continue to make fools of themselves if they persist in believing that the future is a function of the past; they will make even bigger fools of themselves if they carry on believing that market choices are made as a result of rational thought

***particularly as men become lazy and increasingly leave uncritical, but voluminous, buying decisions to women***

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

---

When the government acts in a state with elections, it is acting as a group of people delegated with that power by the PEOPLE, who are participants in the market and

decided

to put those people in power. Just because you don't

like

the decisions other people make doesn't mean the decisions themselves weren't made freely.

---

So, what you are telling me, is if we vote on something, that makes it legitimate? So, if we vote and the result is that all abortions are illegal, then that must be correct, and moral, cause we voted? Definitions of words do not change because you voted. Theft has a definition. If everyone voted to steal from me, that doesn't make it right, nor does it change the definition of theft. It is still theft. Voting is a totalitarian tool, because if you can get 50% of the morons in society to fear something irrationally, then you can steal from them and abuse them as much as you want. Voting is simply using the irrational fears of ignorant people to do whatever the government wants. How do you think the US got into Vietnam, which was based on a lie? How do you think the US got the people to agree to bomb Iraq? All lies again. Seriously, does it make any sense at all to allow irrational morons to dictate the direction of a whole nation of people?

---

Ahhh, so in the interests of freedom, sounds like you're calling for a dictatorship?

Once a group of humans reaches a not-particularly-substantial size they'll form some sort of hierarchy or government. A pack of dogs will do the same thing. The group may then decide to do things that are detrimental to some of the group if the naturally-evolved power system wants and there isn't much the less powerful will be able to do about it unless they join forces to become more powerful themselves.

In other words, there's only one way your "free market" will ever be formed...

By regulations - enforceable ones - that prevent it from being "regulated." Humans and dogs not only both form governments, they also both chase their tails.

[LlewLlwyd]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

Ahhh, so in the interests of freedom, sounds like you're calling for a dictatorship?

---

BENEVOLENT dictatorship has long been recognised as the most stable, rewarding and efficient method of government.

***Unfortunately, the human race seems unable, even in its great variety, to produce benevolent dictators***

[Medhue Simoni]

---

irihapeti wrote:

 

am not quite sure what is your argument now. Like you list Freidman as a source and now you arguing against him seems like     

---

What exactly was the point of typing all that, only to realize that many Freidman's view are not mine, nor many other economists. Freidman did well on many aspects of economic theory, but I'm an Austrian, not a Chicogian.

I've already explained why the rational actors theory can't be proven, but I will explain it again. It can't be proven 1 way or another because rational can not be known, and can't be judged. It is impossible for anyone else to know if I am acting rationally in the market. Now, I could argue that the rational nature of the market is obvious, simply because no1 is starving and most people's needs are met.

Rational is also affected by knowledge and information. So, if you have more knowledge, and information, you will make better rational decisions. The core of the problem with the arguments around rational, is that it is subjective. You can't do good science or analysis on something that is subjective.

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

---

Ahhh, so in the interests of freedom, sounds like you're calling for a dictatorship?

Once a group of humans reaches a not-particularly-substantial size they'll form some sort of hierarchy or government. A pack of dogs will do the same thing. The group may then decide to do things that are detrimental to some of the group if the naturally-evolved power system wants and there isn't much the less powerful will be able to do about it unless they join forces to become more powerful themselves.

In other words, there's only one way your "free market" will ever be formed...

By

regulations - enforceable ones -

that prevent it from being "regulated."

Humans and dogs not only both form governments, they also both chase their tails.

---

How exactly can a dictator dictate if he can't use force? Did you read anything I've typed, or do you just forget easily?

Unlike dogs, humans can learn from their mistakes. It's sad to see you have so little faith in humanity. Plus, if you have read anything I've written here, you will see that the distinction is the use of force, not whether people form a hierarchy. Businesses are examples of hierarchies that don't use force.

[irihapeti]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

---

irihapeti wrote:

 

am not quite sure what is your argument now. Like you list Freidman as a source and now you arguing against him seems like     

---

What exactly was the point of typing all that, only to realize that many Freidman's view are not mine, nor many other economists. Freidman did well on many aspects of economic theory, but I'm an Austrian, not a Chicogian.

I've already explained why the rational actors theory can't be proven, but I will explain it again. It can't be proven 1 way or another because rational can not be known, and can't be judged. It is impossible for anyone else to know if I am acting rationally in the market. Now, I could argue that the rational nature of the market is obvious, simply because no1 is starving and most people's needs are met.

Rational is also affected by knowledge and information. So, if you have more knowledge, and information, you will make better rational decisions. The core of the problem with the arguments around rational, is that it is subjective. You can't do good science or analysis on something that is subjective.

---

now you really got me wondering

you dont even seem to know what the Austrian school is. If you did you wouldnt be arguing against it. Which you have just done with what you wrote here

Praxeology yes. the actual forreal Austrian school. The axiom of praxeology is:

"Human action is necessarily always rational" -- Ludwig von Mises

+

some Ayn Rand for you. Another person's works you assume is in accordance with what you are actually saying here

"The moral justification of capitalism lies in the fact that it is the only system consonant with man’s rational nature" -- Ayn Rand

+

edit add

i dont mean to mean or nothing. but why dont you know the actual works that your beliefs are based on. Is a bit kinda like ffs sometimes when this happens in these kinds of convos 

 

edit add more

seems to me based on the convo that you are not actually what you think you are. You are not a ancap (whatever you might think that means). You are a buddhist. In the way you think and in what you say. So why dont just be that. bc you are right on that part. Some of the Buddhism teachings do accord with your market pov and you can reconcile them as a personal belief foundation and life guide

 

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Medhue Simoni wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

---

Ahhh, so in the interests of freedom, sounds like you're calling for a dictatorship?

Once a group of humans reaches a not-particularly-substantial size they'll form some sort of hierarchy or government. A pack of dogs will do the same thing. The group may then decide to do things that are detrimental to some of the group if the naturally-evolved power system wants and there isn't much the less powerful will be able to do about it unless they join forces to become more powerful themselves.

In other words, there's only one way your "free market" will ever be formed...

By

regulations - enforceable ones -

that prevent it from being "regulated."

Humans and dogs not only both form governments, they also both chase their tails.

---

How exactly can a dictator dictate if he can't use force? Did you read anything I've typed, or do you just forget easily?

Unlike dogs, humans can learn from their mistakes. It's sad to see you have so little faith in humanity. Plus, if you have read anything I've written here, you will see that the distinction is the use of force, not whether people form a hierarchy. Businesses are examples of hierarchies that don't use force.

---

How can a dictator be stopped from using force? How can anyone be stopped from using force if they decide to, other than by using greater force? And what is "force" anyway? "Businesses don't use force." Is firing someone force? Is cornering a market force?

(Incidentally, dogs can learn from their mistakes, and humans often don't.)

And I've been reading everything you've written - over, under, sideways, down, backwards, forwards, square and round. It wasn't me that said over half of the people who vote are "morons" (if they vote for something you don't like.) Yet you trust the exact same people to make good choices in an unregulated free market? Why can't they be influenced to make a bad decision just as easily? Will a new "pure" economic system change people? That's basically the same thinking that the Bolsheviks used when they talked about the "New Soviet Man." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Soviet_man

[Deltango Vale]

Thank you, Innula, for your excellent overview.

Note that it is you and not Linden Lab performing this valuable service.

Having been away from this forum for a while, I'm appalled how little has changed. Linden Lab has got to be the worst company in the known universe for customer/public relations. It becomes even more apparent when one looks around at other VR companies who gather thousands of players to annual fanfests and produce stellar trailers. Here in SL, the best we can hope for is a clunky YouTube video maybe once every couple of years or a brief notice in SLU. In contrast to the enthusiasm and professionalism of the VR community, SL comes across as granny's knickers.

 

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

Linden Lab has got to be the worst company in the known universe for customer/public relations. It becomes even more apparent when one looks around at other VR companies who gather thousands of players to annual fanfests and produce stellar trailers. Here in SL, the best we can hope for is a clunky YouTube video maybe once every couple of years or a brief notice in SLU. In contrast to the enthusiasm and professionalism of the VR community, SL comes across as granny's knickers.

---

Hi there, Del!

Second worst. The worst would be the local Pontiac dealer, who denied screwing my 94 year old neighbor on car repairs, claiming that, while the owner's manual says the automatic transmission needs no service, it really needs a complete flush/fill and new filter every 30,000 miles... for $500.

Okay, as for the fanfests, I don't think even a well run SL would generate them, as there's no unifying story to bring people together. There would be no Star Trek conventions if every episode of the series was about a different subject, written by different people and using different actors. SL may be self limiting in ways LL can't fix.

And this may explain why Ebbe talks of making The Thing After SL™ into a platform for creators to curate experiences. That's a step in the direction of VR games, which are making all the money because more people want to enjoy experiences than want to create them.

[DejaHo]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

Thank you, Innula, for your excellent overview.

Note that it is you and not Linden Lab performing this valuable service.

Having been away from this forum for a while .

. .

 

 

 

---

Yes.  Some of us have noticed. You have such a tremendous voice on this forum; filled with wit, sarcasm, humor, and eccentricities of all sorts. . .  I really enjoy and have missed reading your words. 

[Markham Weatherwax]

Deltango Vale stated a very important thing which is Linden Labs not performing the valuable service, and that is telling. It unfortunately has been that way and looks to continue on that way. Madelaine McMasters had some other good observations in her reply.

The problem with Linden Lab is that it doesn't see the obvious. So many people lost money in SL, creators and innovators left for other platforms after being either scared away or ticked off, so that any new project LL does no one is going to trust them. Very few will invest time or money or effort in that new project. If LL won't take care of the primary (Second Life) then it is assured that they won't take care of anything else they do. In the beginning they always go all out, then sort of abandon whatever it is they create to it's own devices.

Second Life is not going anywhere for the forseeable future, but unfortunately... it's not going anywhere at all.

 

 

 

[LlewLlwyd]

---

Markham Weatherwax wrote:

any new project LL does no one is going to trust them.

Very few will invest time or money or effort in that new project.

If LL won't take care of the primary (Second Life) then it is assured that they won't take care of anything else they do.

 

---

THIS this and this.

***The problem must be the Board, as the CEOs come and go without making any difference***

[Derek Torvalar]

---

Markham Weatherwax wrote:

Deltango Vale stated a very important thing which is Linden Labs not performing the valuable service, and that is telling. It unfortunately has been that way and looks to continue on that way.

Madelaine McMasters

had some other good observations in her reply.

The problem with Linden Lab is that it doesn't see the obvious. So many people lost money in SL, creators and innovators left for other platforms after being either scared away or ticked off, so that any new project LL does no one is going to trust them. Very few will invest time or money or effort in that new project. If LL won't take care of the primary (Second Life) then it is assured that they won't take care of anything else they do. In the beginning they always go all out, then sort of abandon whatever it is they create to it's own devices.

Second Life is not going anywhere for the forseeable future, but unfortunately... it's not going anywhere at all.

 

 

 

---

Really? You impress rather easily.

Here is a good read.

http://www.fleeptuque.com/blog/2012/07/personal-perspective-the-end-of-the-second-life-community-convention/

Perhaps McMasters forgot about these, flummoxed by her inapt comparison to Star Trek. The SLCC's or 'fanfests' ended 4 years ago. I think that this was the type of thing Del was referring to and lamenting. The (a)pathetic LL attitude. When Ebbe first blurted out the plan for a new platform he didn't have anything to show anyone as opposed to other companies which actually wait until they have a bird in the hand to show everyone when they announce something new.

[Deltango Vale]

Linden Lab has a promising future...and always will.

I'm watching other companies move forward in leaps and bounds. Even stodgy old Facebook is getting in on the act. Meanwhile, Linden Lab, the extraordinary, innovative first mover into virtual worlds has squandered Second Life's potential on plastic surgery and social engineering.

The plastic surgery included:

• Avatars United (to compete with Facebook) - fail
• SL Enterprise (to provide independent platforms to corporate clients) - fail
• rezoning the grid (to 'clean up' SL) - fail
• Linden Homes (to provide large-scale zoned, prefab housing) - mixed results (giving new residents easy access to a home, but, coupled with a massive oversupply of mainland, resulted in a price collapse and the dereliction of the mainland)
• V2 and Display Names (to squeeze the user interface onto new server software) - fail - thank all the gods for the Phoenix/Firestorm team for providing a replacement user interface (does anyone actually use the SL viewer anymore?)
• mesh (to enable 3rd-party creative tools) - mixed results (great furniture, lousy clothes)
• SL Marketplace (to promote commerce) - mixed results (it required a concomitant reform of the land pricing model, which never happened, resulting in a further collapse of land use)
• LL's recently aborted romp into tablet games (to compete with Minecraft) - fail
• LL's attempt to put SL on the head of a pin (tablet, cellphone, wristwatch? fingernail? toothpick?) - fail

The social engineering has been a 7-year attempt to convert 'Las Vegas' into 'Disneyland'. The result is neither fish nor fowl, but instead a forlorn playground for senior citizens (no 13-18-year-old would be caught dead in Second Life) dreaming of the world that might have been had John Lennon not been shot. Now, it's all about kids, education and charities. Yes, there is a grudging acceptance of the need for commerce (the way the Ferengi are tolerated in Star Trek), but LL's heart isn't in it. One need only observe the sophisticated markets in other virtual worlds to appreciate how delinquent LL has been in creating commercial/financial tools to promote economic growth.

So now Linden Lab wants to build another world. You won't be surprised to learn that I'm unimpressed. While I have no major disagreements with Ebbe's speech, it came across as banal and uninspiring. At least he admitted - finally - that the land pricing model is a disaster. He'd like to generate revenue through commercial transactions. Sure, no problem, that's how it's done elsewhere, but I see no strategy other than enabling better 3rd-party tools for creating content (one day, some day, eventually). There is no vision for the economy as a whole - no overall strategy - only tactics.

As for the presentation itself, come on! Really? Is that the best you can do? Either construct an impressive avatar or take the show to RL. Either way, get beyond the 2007 look of a tired old world going nowhere.

[Markham Weatherwax]

Actually I wasn't referring to the fandom related parts, I was talking about her last paragraph; It leads into the second paragraph of my post.

I really don't have much interest in conventions, fandom, or like-kind.

I did read the linked article you provided and I thought it was a good read and informative.

[Markham Weatherwax]

Excellent post! Well said.

 

[Deltango Vale]

Maddy, been ages

Look at Hippistock. Why hasn't LL tried to promote it with a cool YouTube trailer as an example of self-organizing inworld communities? Or music videos done in nightclubs (some of which have extremely well-dressed avatars). Where is the glossy coffee-table book outlining interesting stories of SL residents? Or a limited-edition book on SL jewelry or fashion? Has LL contacted any of the long-standing SL merchants to publish such artwork? Where is Torley? Where is the LL staff? Where are the videos of devs talking about their projects? Where is the annual fanfest at which LL managers and devs outline the future plans of the company? I'm sure residents from across SL would attend, either in costume or to meet others in RL or incognito, to interact with the staff, formally and informally, at various side events or in the bar. Where are the guest speakers from related projects or academia or education or inworld merchants or related industries? SL is full of brilliant people. Who are they? Where are they? What are they doing? What are their stories? Many would love to share their experiences with other residents in a social setting.

Linden Lab is a sealed envelope, stuffed into a folder, wrapped in a box, locked in a drawer, enclosed in a safe, hidden in a storeroom, located in an abandoned warehouse. Second Life is a distant memory in the media. The official SL blogs consist of 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day' and 'update 2011'. It's appalling!

The standard responses when I tell people I'm in Second Life are:

• what is Second Life?
• does that still exist?
• you're joking
• why would you waste your time in a virtual world?

That's when I send them info and videos about virtual worlds OTHER than SL because the SL promotional material is crap. I then try to work backwards from there to explain SL. Linden Lab is a huge handicap in getting people interested in SL. Do you think I'm going to send them a link to Ebbe's speech? I blush at the embarassment it would cause me. Surely to god, Linden Lab can do better than that.

[Deltango Vale]

I agree that the problem lies at the doorstep of the Board of Directors. I believe they were largely responsible for pushing out Philip Rosedale in 2008, replacing him with Mark Kingdon. While it's true that Philip supported Rod's nomination, I can't help but feel it was under duress or, if not duress, then deception. Kingdon lasted two years before being replaced by Rod Humble, who lasted four years before being replaced by Ebbe Altberg. None of the three CEOs since Philip Rosedale has shared his vision. Indeed, they have taken SL in the opposite direction. I therefore doubt that any CEO appointed by the Board will be effective in achieving Second Life's full potential. I have long maintained that progress will only be made when the Board sells Second Life to a company with the vision and courage to achieve that potential.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

Maddy, been ages

Look at Hippistock. Why hasn't LL tried to promote it with a cool YouTube trailer as an example of self-organizing inworld communities? Or music videos done in nightclubs (some of which have extremely well-dressed avatars). Where is the glossy coffee-table book outlining interesting stories of SL residents? Or a limited-edition book on SL jewelry or fashion? Has LL contacted any of the long-standing SL merchants to publish such artwork? Where is Torley? Where is the LL staff? Where are the videos of devs talking about their projects? Where is the annual fanfest at which LL managers and devs outline the future plans of the company? I'm sure residents from across SL would attend, either in costume or to meet others in RL or incognito, to interact with the staff, formally and informally, at various side events or in the bar. Where are the guest speakers from related projects or academia or education or inworld merchants or related industries? SL is full of brilliant people. Who are they? Where are they? What are they doing? What are their stories? Many would love to share their experiences with other residents in a social setting.

Linden Lab is a sealed envelope, stuffed into a folder, wrapped in a box, locked in a drawer, enclosed in a safe, hidden in a storeroom, located in an abandoned warehouse. Second Life is a distant memory in the media. The official SL blogs consist of 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day' and 'update 2011'. It's appalling!

The standard responses when I tell people I'm in Second Life are:

• what is Second Life?
• does that still exist?
• you're joking
• why would you waste your time in a virtual world?

That's when I send them info and videos about virtual worlds OTHER than SL because the SL promotional material is crap. I then try to work backwards from there to explain SL. Linden Lab is a huge handicap in getting people interested in SL. Do you think I'm going to send them a link to Ebbe's speech? I blush at the embarassment it would cause me. Surely to god, Linden Lab can do better than that.

---

Gee, maybe they should sponsor a video maker who puts together a series of videos about people who do a wide variety of interesting things in SL.

Oh wait, they have...

https://community.secondlife.com/t5/Featured-News/The-Drax-Files-World-Makers-Episode-27-Nylon-Pinkney/ba-p/2907688

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

I agree that the problem lies at the doorstep of the Board of Directors. I believe they were largely responsible for pushing out Philip Rosedale in 2008, replacing him with Mark Kingdon. While it's true that Philip supported Rod's nomination, I can't help but feel it was under duress or, if not duress, then deception. Kingdon lasted two years before being replaced by Rod Humble, who lasted four years before being replaced by Ebbe Altberg. None of the three CEOs since Philip Rosedale has shared his vision. Indeed, they have taken SL in the opposite direction. I therefore doubt that any CEO appointed by the Board will be effective in achieving Second Life's full potential. I have long maintained that progress will only be made when the Board sells Second Life to a company with the vision and courage to achieve that potential.

---

As I remember the chronology, the credit or blame for both rezoning the grid (i.e. adult content) and the Enterprise Project should go to Phillip.   The Adult Content policy was announced when Phillip was still in charge, though it was implemented under Mark Kingdon's administration, and I'm pretty sure that work started on the Enterprise Project (aka "Nebraska") when Phillip was in charge, too.

Certainly, too, come to think of it, Phillip was running SL when it acquired SLEX (later renamed "Xstreet" and then"The Marketplace"), another initiative you criticised in your earlier post.,   

[Derek Torvalar]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

Deltango Vale wrote:

Maddy, been ages

Look at Hippistock. Why hasn't LL tried to promote it with a cool YouTube trailer as an example of self-organizing inworld communities? Or music videos done in nightclubs (some of which have extremely well-dressed avatars). Where is the glossy coffee-table book outlining interesting stories of SL residents? Or a limited-edition book on SL jewelry or fashion? Has LL contacted any of the long-standing SL merchants to publish such artwork? Where is Torley? Where is the LL staff? Where are the videos of devs talking about their projects? Where is the annual fanfest at which LL managers and devs outline the future plans of the company? I'm sure residents from across SL would attend, either in costume or to meet others in RL or incognito, to interact with the staff, formally and informally, at various side events or in the bar. Where are the guest speakers from related projects or academia or education or inworld merchants or related industries? SL is full of brilliant people. Who are they? Where are they? What are they doing? What are their stories? Many would love to share their experiences with other residents in a social setting.

Linden Lab is a sealed envelope, stuffed into a folder, wrapped in a box, locked in a drawer, enclosed in a safe, hidden in a storeroom, located in an abandoned warehouse. Second Life is a distant memory in the media. The official SL blogs consist of 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day', 'pic of the day' and 'update 2011'. It's appalling!

The standard responses when I tell people I'm in Second Life are:

• what is Second Life?
• does that still exist?
• you're joking
• why would you waste your time in a virtual world?

That's when I send them info and videos about virtual worlds OTHER than SL because the SL promotional material is crap. I then try to work backwards from there to explain SL. Linden Lab is a huge handicap in getting people interested in SL. Do you think I'm going to send them a link to Ebbe's speech? I blush at the embarassment it would cause me. Surely to god, Linden Lab can do better than that.

---

Gee, maybe they should sponsor a video maker who puts together a series of videos about people who do a wide variety of interesting things in SL.

Oh wait, they have...

https://community.secondlife.com/t5/Featured-News/The-Drax-Files-World-Makers-Episode-27-Nylon-Pinkney/ba-p/2907688

---

Oh christ!

Yes, that weasel Despres is a fine ambassador.

https://my.secondlife.com/draxtor.despres/posts/54960e85a8014171be0000ec

Be sure to checkout the link he posted for 'context'.

Then there is this gem, which he refused to clarify.

https://my.secondlife.com/fl0.cale/posts/54037418661f031bf4000001

There are other examples where he manages to alienate a significant proportion of the SL population through his exclusionary socio-political views.

You had better be careful Theresa or you may be one of the 'crazies' he intends to have rounded up.

Not since Sus posted how people who were not optimists suffered from a genetic deficiency have I read such drivel. Except of course mona's psychotic diatribes.

[Theresa Tennyson]

So your position is that people should be subjected to a political litmus test when considering things they do completely unrelated to those beliefs?