LEA Is Back! Sort of! Second Life Endowment for the Arts Announced

[Prokofy Neva]

14 hours ago, Gatogateau said:

Wait. Wut?

You didn't set it up as a false dichotomy, Prok did. I thought I said something along the line that "support" whether it came from having the space to create (that would be SLEA) or whether it came about from financial (people buying art), can help artists, yes. But helping artists doesn't equate into better art necessarily.

As far as the subjectivity of art, yes, there are certain conventions that list this as "good" and that as "bad" but... wut?

Um, there are several garbles here. First, I didn't set up any false dichotomies. I said artists need to get paid, they should sell their work, and how does LEA make that happen? If it doesn't sell on site, it has LMs back to galleries that do. So now the question becomes: do they have a credible board and good selections so that this potential cash cow is properly milked. And I have my doubts. THAT it should involve indeed basic monetary support of artists is basic reality in SL as in RL. They need to offset upload costs if nothing else.

Scylla then interpolated this whole curious side debate about whether selling your art makes you a better artist or not, which is truly relevant to anything in real life or even SL but exists as some ideological warfare somewhere on another planet. Many artists are dead when they see their works sold for phenomenal prices. Some artists can sell a work for $10,000 and it really makes a difference because they are freed then from bar-tending or making kitsch for art sites on the Internet or whatever. But it's not the way to understand the question.

True story: one of the various things I have done in my life was make some drawings that got sold in an artwork for $10,000 and is now worth much more. How did this happen? I can't draw to save my life. I flunked high school art class, which is actually pretty hard to do in the hippie era of 1975. My own children are constantly appalled at how bad I work at even Paint.net. But for a time my partner was a fairly famous artist who had as part of his style various parodies and pranks. And he asked me to put a few of my really bad drawings into a set, to see what would happen. It was one of those stories like people taking a kindergardener's painting and claiming it was made by a famous abstract artist. Except this actually sold. And the first and subsequent buyers probably have no idea that some of the pieces of it were done by a really bad amateur. Or maybe they do and it is part of a glorious legend of the type the art market likes. Did this act make me a better artist? It didn't make me an artist, period LOL. No, even if I collected the fee instead of my friend. It doesn't work that way.

Edited September 12, 2020 by Prokofy Neva

[Chroma Starlight]

2 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

So democracy and accountability are a "luxury". Merely because the community is small. I never think it pays to make democracy and accountability "a luxury" as history shows. I think a minimum amount of transparency and open competition could help this be a better and more credible effort. In fact, the design of it as we see now is quite bureaucratic indeed even without the burden of fund-raising. Boards are important. Who gets on them affects who gets seen. So there should be a credible process here.

I'm sorry, can you point to a credibly liberal democratic system in the world today? I guess there's New Zealand?  Actual democracy and accountability was never the literal agreement or social contract between members of this community and its technological hosts, for all the reasons. Credibility of a public system of governance should be measured in absolute terms and benchmarked according to compliance with Universal Human Rights, but I'm not aware of an Internet-accessible virtual world anywhere that meets an absolute global high benchmark for liberal democracy and Universal Human Rights, if only because all the ones I know exist within flawed systems, but some have come close to being healthy communities with careful cultivation and a lot of love and effort.

I thought the results of LEA that I saw were lovely. Why not just let this thing exist and see without prejudice what results? This entire endeavor, Second Life, is a creative enterprise and that assumes a certain frame of open-mindedness and a willingness to enable others to take artistic risks and grow. To promote that, the first thing we can do is encourage rather than disparage. And then beyond that, perhaps if we volunteer, we can contribute to and influence the organization toward the stellar standards we value.

Edited September 12, 2020 by Chroma Starlight

[Gatogateau]

/me waves hand around. "oh! oh!" This will deviate a tad off topic but I think it is a valuable bit of information germane to things in this thread. A PSA! Because I'm a giver...

There was this fellow, Duane Gish, who was a biochemist but who was noted as an outspoken creationist. Perhaps, though, his greatest claim to infamy was his rapid-fire debate style, in which he would present arguments and change topics quickly, while in a never ending spew of words. This was intentional, as it prevents a logical rebuttal to any single point. This fallacious logic style used to be known as "proof by verbosity" has since been renamed as the "Gish Gallop."

In a Gish Gallop the tactic is to drown your opponent in a torrent of single, weak argument points, thus preventing a rebuttal of the whole argument collection, at least without a great effort, time, and writing walls of text of one's own to refute, point by point. It is the sort of thing where it is always easier to make the mess than clean it up.

Because of this inherent tangle, the Galloper will then cast doubt on an entire refutation if one of his Gallops holds true.

Gish Gallops rarely are the single logical fallacy in the screed. The key is to include some basic, irrefutable facts, which leads the listener or reader to believe the entire argument is sound. Among the rhetoric will be the normal things like half-truths, red herrings, straw men and there may also be gotcha arguments — which take little time to state but take a lot of work to deconstruct.

So, just remember good old Duane Gish the next time you see one, two, three or more walls of text to state A SINGLE point.

If you have the ten hours to haul out and make point by point refutations, good on ya! Part of the Gish Gallop is that it ensures total boredom of the listener or readers. Or, in Internet lingo: TLDR.

If you don't have the ten hours, or the interest, then I offer another suggestion, one that is tried and true. Log into SL and let yourself have some actual fun and/or (and being my preference):

 

Edited September 12, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Gatogateau]

@Scylla Rhiadra  still not poking you, btw.   But passes you an adult beverage of your choice.  Sees some dust marring the sheen of your footwear.  And to get back on topic regarding SLEA:

Thank you for pointing to Inara's blog. I missed that and so missed the news. My fingers toes are crossed, and I hope the group can make a go of it, without the caveat of needing to solve world hunger, the troubles in the Middle East, COVID, or society's general lack of support of art and artists on any large scale.  

 

[Prokofy Neva]

59 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

/me waves hand around. "oh! oh!" This will deviate a tad off topic but I think it is a valuable bit of information germane to things in this thread. A PSA! Because I'm a giver...

There was this fellow, Duane Gish, who was a biochemist but who was noted as an outspoken creationist. Perhaps, though, his greatest claim to infamy was his rapid-fire debate style, in which he would present arguments and change topics quickly, while in a never ending spew of words. This was intentional, as it prevents a logical rebuttal to any single point. This fallacious logic style used to be known as "proof by verbosity" has since been renamed as the "Gish Gallop."

In a Gish Gallop the tactic is to drown your opponent in a torrent of single, weak argument points, thus preventing a rebuttal of the whole argument collection, at least without a great effort, time, and writing walls of text of one's own to refute, point by point. It is the sort of thing where it is always easier to make the mess than clean it up.

Because of this inherent tangle, the Galloper will then cast doubt on an entire refutation if one of his Gallops holds true.

Gish Gallops rarely are the single logical fallacy in the screed. The key is to include some basic, irrefutable facts, which leads the listener or reader to believe the entire argument is sound. Among the rhetoric will be the normal things like half-truths, red herrings, straw men and there may also be gotcha arguments — which take little time to state but take a lot of work to deconstruct.

So, just remember good old Duane Gish the next time you see one, two, three or more walls of text to state A SINGLE point.

If you have the ten hours to haul out and make point by point refutations, good on ya! Part of the Gish Gallop is that it ensures total boredom of the listener or readers. Or, in Internet lingo: TLDR.

If you don't have the ten hours, or the interest, then I offer another suggestion, one that is tried and true. Log into SL and let yourself have some actual fun and/or (and being my preference):

 

I generally find it not a good use of time to argue with anonymous cats on the Internet. But I think you mistake long texts with points laid out rationally to be something that you believe it is -- just because. And there's little I can do to dispel that rigid ideological position so I won't bother.

In general, I don't think it's useful to debate the prospects for democracy in virtual worlds with people with pseudonyms who no RL connection or at least -- because I don't believe identity has to be forcibly revealed -- at least with some kind of recognizable persona and body of work so you can understand where they are coming from.

I'd beg to differ that "actual democracy and accountability was not the social contract". And this statement, "I'm not aware of an online world anywhere that meets an absolute global high benchmark for liberal democracy and Universal Human Rights, if only because they must exist within flawed systems" is beside the point because the call isn't to meet a high global benchmark, a Denmark or a Germany or even a United States, even under Trump, but to meet some of the basic criteria. And there is such an online world. It is Second Life, since 2003.

One way you can prove this is by the Lindens' actions over the years:

1. When the prim tax became overburdensome and harmed not just creativity but normal land use, people rebelled, and the Lindens were forced to revise their system.

2. When the Lindens were confronted with examples of biased behaviour (Lindens appearing on inworld billboards to promote just one resident's products and site, to cite one of many examples), and demands were made for them to develop a code of conduct, they did. This wasn't the Magna Charta. But it was an important restraint.

3. When Lindens though that they could sell grandfathered sims only to a list of insiders involved in selective development work with Linden business contacts, and that fact was publicized, they opened up the sales to anyone.

4. When Lindens decided unilaterally to withdraw telehubs, relying on the opinions of a few, mainly non-land owners, or those without telehub ownership, and did this abruptly, to install p2p teleportation, a group of land merchants, some of their biggest customers confronted them, threatened them with a "bait and switch" lawsuit (because right up to the moment, they sold this highly sought and highly expensive land on the auction), they did the right thing. They offered a buy back at $6/m of any telehub-adjacent land OR a plan to make a resident-run Linden telehub. That this was undermined by other things later doesn't matter; they faced a lobby that had an important principle at stake; they responded correctly.

5. When some of the general public, as well as more selective entities like German prosecutors, confronted the Lindens with the problem of their tolerance of "age-play" content in SL, they decided to outlaw it.

6. When land buyers were dismayed at the Lindens' decision to pull their "void sims" product because it was being misused and they were being stuck with the customer service, they created another product, the homestead, to serve some of the same purposes, while adding the restriction that ownership of a full-prim island had to be undertaken.

7. While it took more than 4 years, when land owners, whose land was devalued or crippled by extortionist ad farmers and provocateurs using political or other content to force land sale, the Lindens finally created a policy about ad farms which, while unevenly enforced, 

I could go on with other examples. The point is, the Lindens are responsible to democratic pressure; they are responsible to calls to have them adhere by their own laws or by certain liberal or universal principles of the rule of law. That's important. That's why these smug invocations of the right of corporations to be as rapacious and abusive as they want don't apply to *this* company. They have a history, and an interesting one.

What have they done lately? That's a good question to ask, but I think the decision to end Sansara and increase Bellissaria is a response to democratic public input; adding to Bellissaria at this point, with the volume and rate they have, is an investment in Mole time and server infrastructure that likely the new premium account revenue has not yet exceeded. This kind of give and take matters. It is not on Facebook. It is not on Google. It is not on Twitter. It is on Second Life.

[Chroma Starlight]

23 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I could go on with other examples. The point is, the Lindens are responsible to democratic pressure; they are responsible to calls to have them adhere by their own laws or by certain liberal or universal principles of the rule of law. That's important. That's why these smug invocations of the right of corporations to be as rapacious and abusive as they want don't apply to *this* company. They have a history, and an interesting one.

What have they done lately?

I think everyone's making their best efforts through what have been some very dynamic years. Careful though about some of these words, like 'democratic' when you mean 'popular' or 'social,' or 'laws' when you actually mean 'internal policies,' because different standards apply and you cannot conflate them. 

What have they done lately? How about SLEA, or just keeping the lights on and the grid habitable on an aging MMO and contributing to the community despite their newer endeavors? How about the new creation tools/features/improvements?

Edited September 12, 2020 by Chroma Starlight

[Gatogateau]

29 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I generally find it not a good use of time to argue with anonymous cats on the Internet. But I think you mistake long texts with points laid out rationally to be something that you believe it is -- just because. And there's little I can do to dispel that rigid ideological position so I won't bother.

snipped: More of the same Gish Galloping... yeesh

I generally find it not a good use of time to argue with anonymous cats on the Internet. But you'd be ok arguing with recognized cats on the Internet? In another thread you said you couldn't argue with someone with unknown age or educational background, too. (Apparently quality of words mean nothing, just their provenance.) All of that makes it terribly puzzling as to why you spend so much time and energy on an Internet chat forum.

But I think you mistake long texts with points laid out rationally to be something that you believe it is -- just because.  Not at all. Facts not in evidence, quite the contrary. If anyone bothers to launch into the notoriously predictable walls of text will find, they match the definition of Gish Gallop beautifully, as does the stuff I snipped out of your last post—which just with a cursory glance (all it is worth) has several other logic fallacies as well, including red herrings and straw men. Quelle surprise!

And there's little I can do to dispel that rigid ideological position so I won't bother. Ideological? LOL! :::hands you a dictionary::: Rigid or otherwise. You quoted me giving a rather textbook definition, or explanation of a logic fallacy. That is not ideological.  "so you won't bother" followed by reams of virtual paper of bothering.

Ah, Prok, I have seen your Gallops for years. They bore the living daylights out of me. They are not intellectually challenging, unless one takes that to mean wading through the convoluted morass that you seem to want us to take so seriously. The fact that you cannot make a cogent argument without those reams of virtual paper is proof in itself that there is no real substance there. This anonymous cat, of unknown age, place of residence, and formal education is simply not impressed. I'd rather pull the sand from between my toes than get into one of your ridiculous, never-ending, wtf-ery faux debates.

Edited September 12, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Prokofy Neva]

1 minute ago, Chroma Starlight said:

I think everyone's making their best efforts through what have been some very dynamic years. Careful though about some of these words, like 'democratic' when you mean 'popular' or 'social,' or 'laws' when you actually mean 'internal policies,' because different standards apply and you cannot conflate them. 

What have they done lately? How about SLEA, or just keeping the lights on and the grid habitable on an aging MMO and contributing to the community despite their newer endeavors?

I'm not going to be "careful" using the word "democratic" because I mean it: it means open, transparent, under the rule of law" and it isn't merely "popular". I won't get hung up on whether you can compare the TOS and social contracts of this virtual world with real-life law because guess what -- you can in some circumstances in a general way. There are principles at stake.

Anyone paying for this platform or contributing to its content gets to ask what they have done lately, and to ask "are you better off today than you were four years ago"? If residents did the work of trying to keep the LEA-revival effort and lobbied Lindens to revive it, then I don't view the Lindens so much as getting credit for SLEA; I see them reluctantly deciding to do it, then more enthusiastically as they could see "what's in it for them". I don't think you get life credits for keeping the lights on when people pay you to do so. I don't weep because they are caretakers of an aging MMO; they just sold it, although it is awaiting regulatory approval. I don't weep for the Lindens under COVID, because they have no suffered in the same way so many of us in SL have; there are people in SL who died of COVID or became terribly sick and crippled; there are people who lost their jobs; there are people who had to downsize their SL projects; there are people who left because they can't afford it any more due to COVID. COVID has been good for LL's business. The changes brought about by COVID will make their business even better unless there's something I don't understand. So let's put this into proper perspective here.

I hope you enjoy your Second Life.

[Prokofy Neva]

1 minute ago, Gatogateau said:

I generally find it not a good use of time to argue with anonymous cats on the Internet. But you'd be ok arguing with recognized cats on the Internet? In another thread you said you couldn't argue with someone with unknown age or educational background, too. (Apparently quality of words mean nothing, just their provenance.) All of that makes it terribly puzzling as to why you spend so much time and energy on an Internet chat forum.

But I think you mistake long texts with points laid out rationally to be something that you believe it is -- just because.  Not at all. Facts not in evidence, quite the contrary. If anyone bothers to launch into the notoriously predictable walls of text will find, they match the definition of Gish Gallop beautifully, as does the stuff I snipped out of your last post—which just with a cursory glance (all it is worth) has several other logic fallacies as well, including red herrings and straw men. Quelle surprise!

And there's little I can do to dispel that rigid ideological position so I won't bother. Ideological? LOL! :::hands you a dictionary::: Rigid or otherwise. You quoted me giving a rather textbook definition, or explanation of a logic fallacy. That is not ideological.  "so you won't bother" followed by reams of virtual paper of bothering.

Ah, Prok, I have seen your Gallops for years. They bore the living daylights out of me. They are not intellectually challenging, unless one takes that to mean wading through the convoluted morass that you seem to want us to take so seriously. The fact that you cannot make a cogent argument without those reams of virtual paper is proof in itself that there is no real substance there. This anonymous cat, of unknown age, place of residence, and formal education is simply not impressed. I'd rather pull the sand from between my toes than get into one of your ridiculous, never-ending, wtf-ery faux debates.

I realize young people find it hard to read anything bigger than their hand or the size of a phone screen nowadays. 

I think the tactic of labeling something you apparently don't fully understand as some kind of negative type of writing isn't very compelling. It's especially not compelling when your zeal for detecting and calling out weak arguments, tangents, and tangles doesn't extend to the actual practitioners of that technique in a thread like this.

What I've found over the years is that people like you imagine you are beating out other people with your various fabulous fabulisms, but there's a silent majority that watches and doesn't share your opinion of yourself that people like you have. I've found that even Lindens write to me especially after they have left the Lab and tell me to keep doing what I do, which is to write criticism of SL based on experience. Your inability to value it certainly doesn't phase me.

I won't say "Enjoy your Second Life" because I'm not sure you have one.

[Gatogateau]

Speaking of LEA, or now SLEA...

I hate speaking on behalf of others, but I will go out on a limb here (quick call the fire dept! kitty in a tree!), that not everyone who participates in LEA is interested in making money, needs to make money, or wants fame, or anything else along those lines. For some it is the ability to create for the joy of creating. One of my good friends had several LEA installations over the years, and I'm pretty sure that making a $L wasn't an issue for her. Being given the opportunity to express her thoughts in a non-verbal way was reward enough. Not everyone thinks in terms of cash or political ideologies when creating art. Some do. Some do not. It is a fallacy to claim otherwise.

My friend has tried to convince me to apply for LEA or similar installations over the years, I declined, for a variety of reasons. But had I chosen to make a proposal, I can guarantee that making some kind of monetary result from it would never have crossed my mind. Nor would the publicity, other than to get people to enjoy (or not) and experience and think about whatever it would be that I would have created. I have a love/hate with the impermanence of the exhibits, which brings a whole other creative element into the mix.

 

Edited September 12, 2020 by Gatogateau

[Chroma Starlight]

27 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I hope you enjoy your Second Life.

I hope you can. And come out and check out SLEA exhibits/events, I know I will!