Scylla Rhiadra

Qie Niangao wrote: There is, however, a whiff of that repulsive indulgence in this thread. Not that it needs to be expunged or anything, but one hopes it remains as quaintly irrelevant and out-of-place as it is now. Thanks Qie. While it was not my intent to start any drama here, I agree with your comment, and wish, in hindsight, that I hadn't posted it. I don't delete my own posts, but I will accept the admonishment. The last thing I want, truly, is to infect these forums with the kind of personal bashing we had in the past, and this post may have the unintended consequence of doing that.

Oh, a final thing . . . largely unrelated to the thread. I'm sorry to hear of Amanda and Courtney's departure. I hope Courtney was not scapegoated for that absurd logo embroglio . . . and I hope Amanda was not driven away by a sense of being persecuted (although I doubt the latter). In general, I don't like the system here -- but I do like the people, including the mods (except for the ones who don't get "irony" :matte-motes-wink:). And I like that Lexie occasionally interjects a personal note!

Storm Clarence wrote: ETA That post was one of three or four that explained themselves; answered the letter writer. Your response was another. I am sure your response was in jest; might not 'his' have been in jest? I doubt it. But who knows? Again, only the mods can tell us if they have actually been getting the PMs the OP claims to have been sending.

Thanks for the nice words, and even the admonishment, Del. The fact is . . . and Peggy seems not to believe this either . . . I didn't really write this out of petulance. I actually, seriously, don't care that much. If I felt half as violently about it all as Peggy apparently feels about this thread, you might have a point. But I really don't. I've had DOZENS of threads pulled over the years. The one to which I refer was not even a particularly special or interesting one. But what did make it different was that it was a) ARed not because someone was actually aggrieved by it, but because someone was playing games with the moderators, and b) that it resulted in my being accussed of "harassment" by a mod either too stupid to understand irony, or (what may be worse) a mod who knew that the thread was ironic, but decided to appease the complainer anyway. So I reposted the threat at SLU. Meh. The degree to which I am not particularly upset about this should be evident by the fact that I didn't post the name of the OP, and that I really and truly have nothing more to say here about this. The only ones who know if the mods are actualy being messed with here is the mods . . . and they ain't going to tell us. As for me, I'm working . . . slowly . . . on a future thread for here on the subject of desire in SL. Coming soon to a forum near you!

And looking and yawning may very well be the correct response, Marigold. I have no idea. But if I had any personal investment in a forum, and found out that someone was deliberately trying to sabotage it, I might want to know. To paraphrase the homely advice of Squashy, Read or don't read. Care or don't care. I put this here largely as a sort of PSA -- and because I know for a fact that threads -- including at least one of my own -- have been needlessly pulled because of the activities of this person. But my own investment in this forum is not such that I have much more to say about it than I already have. /me shrugs

What seems to be going on here is that someone -- the OP -- believes that he is wreaking havoc and manipulating the moderators here in order to deliberately sabotage the SL forum and embarrass the moderators. The OP in question is a very well known poster here, although he has not posted for some time. As to whether this actually has any real significance, I don't know. It may well be that the OP of the excerpt I've pasted here has huge delusions of grandeur. Or it may be that he actually is having an impact upon the moderation here. Only the mods will have any real sense if this poster is blowing smoke, or if he really is causing damage here. In any case, I think the mods have a right to know, especially if they aren't aware that someone is deliberately trying to manipulate them. ETA: And it is the fact that most posters here don't read the attack blogs that leads me to post this here.

This was recently posted on one of the external attack blogs. It may explain a lot about what is going on here . . . or maybe it doesn't. I'm pretty sure that the only objection the OP (who is emphatically not me) is likely to have to it appearing here is that I haven't given his name -- and have removed all other names as well except that of my own alt, Richard. And as the OP admits to ARing one of Richard's threads merely in order to "get at" the mods, I don't much care if he does object. Other than that, I have no comment to make on it, other than that it is . . . interesting. ----------------------------------------- I haven't posted to the official forums for some time now. Instead I have been firing off a torrent of private messages (not ARs) to the various moderators, using several different personae with different "bigotries" but all of them entirely legitimate within the scope of the official Terms and Conditions. If you want to blame anyone for the tedious, bland desert of unimaginative and ungrammatical crap to which the forums have descended, don't blame ME though - blame LL who wrote the T&C, blame XXXXXX for encouraging her Mod Team to interpret them so stultifyingly, and blame the Mod Team for not having a sense of humour or proportion. Hell, if they aren't going to let me have the Forum ***I*** want, then no-one else is going to enjoy themselves either! I will continue to piss in their water supply until the Mods realise that they are getting played, and see through my multiply-proxied "Annoyed of Tonbridge", although by then I shall have a dossier of their idiocy that will embarrass and humiliate XXXXXX. It started off being funny (them not understanding that Richard Parkes anti-furry post was a joke) but their stupidity has become ridiculous now. Sorry xxxxx; I started off trying to make the Forum a better place, but LL didn't want what I wanted, so I am enjoying myself selfishly.

There is a list of the Linden Endowment for the Arts Committee here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Linden_Endowment_for_the_Arts_Committee It looks fairly current. I wonder if it is worth putting together some sort of appeal to this committee about setting up sims for rotating exhibitions of "heritage" art installations in SL?

Nima Benoir wrote: Wise city governments know this as well and make a point of creating an environment favorable to artists in hopes of attracting them. To me Scylla’s writing is a plea for LL to recognize that they are at a crossroads. Will they recognize the depth of what they have created? And in recognizing, will they than take responsibility as they guide it into the future? Beautifully put.

You make some really worthwhile points; generally, I agree with pretty much all that you have to say. Any "outrage" that I feel, personally (and in this regard, I can only speak for myself) is directed not against AM Radio, who may well have simply decided that it's time to "move on," or IDIA or any of the other private sponsors who, of course, have the right to decide what they sponsor. I'm not even particularly peeved at Linden Lab: on the contrary, I think that the LEA is a far-sighted and very worthwhile endeavour, and I applaud them for it, and, in fact, hope that it can be applied here. Really, what does peeve me are those (I call them "Neoliberals" in my OP, but that is probably far too narrow a categorization) whose argument that "art must pay its own way" is based upon an extremely crude analysis of the value of art. To continue your comments on practices in RL, governments and private individuals sponsor and support public art galleries, not because they will make a profit (art galleries and museums seldom do), but because they understand that art contributes value to society -- some of which is translatable into actual dollar figures -- beyond what it pays through the RL equivalent of the "tip jar." At the most basic level, for instance, they are magnets for tourists -- the RL equivalents of those who sign up for SL because they are attracted by the visual culture here in its many manifestations. But in a larger sense even than this, art contributes to the cultural health and vitality of society. It enriches our lives not merely when we visit galleries, but daily, through its aesthetic and cultural influence upon our quotidian lives. In Second Life terms, this can be translated simply: SL art makes SL a nicer place to be. And that, although not easily quantifiable, is important. It is, of course, important to remember that LL is not a "government," but a private corporation. But I would argue that it is very much in their best business interests -- and the LEA i think shows that they understand this -- to encourage and nurture art here because it simply makes SL a more enjoyable and attractive place to be. There are a variety of ways in which they can foster and nurture art, but one important way is to preserve, where possible, the best that has been produced in the past. Assuming AM Radio is willing (and of course he may not be), protecting and hosting his work as part of SL's "heritage" is going to be to LL's advantage. Personally, I think the idea of rotating exhibits and installations housed on a few protected LEA-governed sims is a fine idea, and one which would very much rebound to LL's advantage in the long run.

leliel Mirihi wrote: I care, but I don't think LL is going to be doing much about this sort of thing anytime soon. Quite possibly you are right. It might be worthwhile investigating the administration of the Linden Endowment for the Arts. Are there transcripts? I believe, somewhere, that there is a list of those who sit on the board or whatever it is called. Is it worth considering putting some pressure on that board, not just about AM Radio's sims, but with a mind to "Heritage" art sims in SL in general? Could not a few sims be reserved to show such installations on a rotating basis, as any public gallery in RL might do?

Well, this one hasn't generated a whole lot of discussion, has it? Can I take it then that we are most of us agreed that LL should make efforts to retain AM Radio's work, and maybe that of others, through the LEA? Or is this just a sort of backwater forum? Or maybe no one cares sufficiently about art?

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: And yet Shakespeare's work did outlast him and has survived the centuries. I somewhat doubt that Shakespeare himself thought of his work as art btw; it was probably more of a craft for him, one that paid well enough to support him and his family. As for preserving artistic work in SL, I think that might be a bit of a problem when Linden Lab turns off the servers. Which might happen in five or ten or even twenty years from now, but it's bound to happen at some point. It's a bit sad, but our current social networks and virtual world MMOs are less enduring than a Pac-Man arcade console. The latter might still be around in some computer game museum 500 years from now, when SL's server park has long been dismantled and scrapped and no operating system will be able to run or emulate an ancient SL client anymore. Well, interestingly, "Shakespeare's" art hasn't really "survived." What has survived are the reconstructions of successive generations of editors and critics. The history of Shakespeare scholarship is fascinating for that reason: every new generation remakes him in their own image, to some degree or another. An excellent example is Kenneth Branagh's movie version of Hamlet, which presented to audiences a monstrous mélange of that play based on multiple conflicting versions: much of the language may have been Shakespeare's, but the play certainly wasn't. Another example is Nahum Tate's "happy ending" version of King Lear from the 18th century, which entirely pushed all other versions of that play off the stage for the space of over a century. I think you are likely right, that much SL art won't survive. And that's actually fine: it's part of the nature of the beast. A great musical or theatrical performance may well not "survive" longer than the night of its appearance upon threatrical or concert stage, but it need not be less "artistic" or impactful for that. SL art contributes now to the culture of SL. I hope that some of it is preserved for longer than the decade or so you describe, but even if it doesn't, it is still fulfilling a function.

Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Call me a "neoliberal", but what you think of as the Linden endowment for the arts, I simply call marketing. "Hey look people, there is more than just 3D porn in SL! We have art and culture and stuff!" It is nothing but an attempt to polish SL's bleep stained public image up and gain a little media attention, even if that attention is mostly limited to the blogosphere nowadays. Personally, I haven't seen anything in SL that I would call art, and I seriously doubt that a lot of people join Second Life to visit virtual museums run by hobbyists and marvel at the virtual equivalent of macramé owls. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of beautiful artistic work, especially when it comes to commercial items such as virtual architecture or fashion. But none of this will ever make it into a real world museum, and all of it will be gone at some point in the foreseeable future. One trait of real art is that it lasts longer than a lifetime and inspires future generations, which is why you don't find a lot of art in short-lived computer games (or on a stage where some "performance artist" makes a complete and utter idiot of himself, for that matter). Another trait of real art is that it has indeed monetary value. If nobody is willing to pay for it, there is obviously not much of an artistic appeal. Which other institution than the market, and thus the people, is qualified to judge what is art and what has aesthetic value? I think I might question your assumption that "real art" necessary lasts longer than a lifetime. There has always been a place for the ephemeral and the transient in art. Shakespeare himself didn't think fit to have his own works printed within his lifetime, or even leave an authoritative manuscript of them: that was left to others to do after his death. For Shakespeare -- and for many others -- his art was performance, bound in time, changing with each new incarnation on stage, and not some kind of eternal monument. And performance art is only one example: literary history is replete with "great" writers, for instance, who circulated their work only in manuscript to a small coterie, while there have been many visual artists and musicians who toiled to produce occasional art that was used once, and often lost. Inigo Jones and Handel are two instances I can think of. Modern art in particular is, I think, interested in exploring the notion of the aesthetic as it exists bound in time, and of the notion of art as process rather than as static monument. As for how "good" SL art is . . . well, I don't know that we've produced a Velasquez, or a Bach, or a Goethe yet. But I think that one of the values of such art as we have is to force us to confront how we define art. And I think that one day, probably sooner than later, someone will write the first serious book on the art of virtual worlds. Really, I don't much care why we work to preserve the artistic heritage: if it's only because we recognize the way that it adds "value" to LL's assets here, then so be it. What is important is that it be preserved, and nurtured.

AM Radio’s installations will be closing down in six months time. For many of us, the impact of this will seem profoundly personal: AM Radio’s poignant explorations of the nature of memory, of nostalgia, of time, and of love speak to a great many people at a profoundly individual level, finding resonances and echoes in our hearts and memories. Sims like The Faraway and The Refuge certainly have impacted upon my experience of Second Life; they have always been amongst my favourite places here. In the final analysis, however, AM’s imminent departure raises larger issues, about the role, place, and function of art in Second Life. Art has always had an important place here, from the very inception of Second Life as a concept born out of Philip Rosedale’s experiences of Burning Man. Art is, thankfully, to be found everywhere in Second Life, in forms that range from machinima and sim-sized installations, to the idiosyncratic and expressive stylings of individual avatars. One index of Linden Lab’s awareness of the impact of art upon Second Life has been its sponsorship of events like Burning Life (since turned over to private residents), the Second Life birthday celebrations, and, most recently, the creation of the Linden Endowment for the Arts. At the same time, however, with the ending of the discount for educational and nonprofit institutions at the beginning of this year, times have also become tougher for artists and their exhibitors and sponsors. I know of at least one major and longstanding gallery that is on the verge of having to fold due to these new financial pressures. And now, of course, we have the announcement of the upcoming departure of AM Radio who, along with Bryn Oh, has become by virtue of his talent and vision a sort of standard bearer for the place for art in Second Life. There are some here, of course, who will shed no tears for the loss of such art from Second Life – art that didn’t monetize, that wasn’t merely intended to bring more people to a shopping mall or increase traffic at a club, and that had the temerity to “undercut” the “free” market by daring to be . . . free. The Neoliberals among us complain that AM Radio’s effusions – he gave away many of his creations for free – don’t show up on the ledger books in the “assets” column. Art in the view of such people should “pay its own way”; if it is not producing traceable transactions in the monthly accounting spreadsheets , then it is at best “populist” and “middle brow,” and at worst, part of a socialist conspiracy to undercut those artists who are content to yoke art to the profit motive. What such commentators fail to understand is that art in Second Life does “pay its own way.” The health and stability of any society – its “quality of life” -- can be measured by the vibrancy of its art and culture. Second Life is no exception: art is one of the reasons people come here. It is a central and absolutely vital part of the experience of a great many of us, and our experience of Second Life would be diminished immeasurably by its loss, perhaps to the point where we would stop coming here. Linden Lab, despite some of its missteps, recognizes this, even if the Neoliberals don’t. Art is monetized here: it is one of the things that keeps us logging in on a daily basis. What is more, it impacts upon everything else here, setting new aesthetic standards and prodding us to question, to explore, and to discover. I don’t begrudge LL its largely crass perspective on the uses of art in Second Life, in part because I also acknowledge that Linden Lab is not entirely sordid in its approach: I think that they do, unlike their Neoliberal critics, understand the more ineffable and subtle ways in which art contributes to the health of the community here. As to the Neoliberals . . . as Oscar Wilde’s Lord Darlington said of cynics, they know “the price of everything and the value of nothing.” It is to be hoped that Linden Lab recognizes the contributions that AM Radio has made to Second Life, and sees fit to extend their support to his continued presence here, perhaps by means of the Linden Endowment for the Arts. And if they do, the Neoliberals can take some solace, as they return muttering to their shopping malls, in the possibility that maybe, just maybe, LL knows its own business better than they do.

Jane, give me a shout in-world when you can.

Silence is golden, Michael? Conversation and discussion, as exercises in communication, are always worthwhile. Shutting it down merely because there are people who abuse it merely panders to the abusers, and silences the valuable contributions of those who DO have things to say.

Storm Clarence wrote: I was under the impression that what is discussed in the forum is the 'agenda' of the in-world CTUG meetings. I thought the 'topics' on the agenda are what is, and should be, open for discussion. The CTUG agenda is available for all to read and post an agenda item. Each CTUG agenda item *should* be an OP in this sub-forum: Community Feedback, before it is 'formally' brought to the attention of the Lindens (if Lindens read the forum then the Lindens should know what is coming their way in the meeting; they should be prepared.) The OP should be debated by those that want to have a voice on any particular agenda item. The people that attend the meeting hold the Lindens accountable for an answer. I think one of the problems, Storm, is that none of this has been formalized anywhere. I was only barely aware of the existence of the CTUG until relatively recently myself. What Darrius and others are talking about is a more recognized, public, and formalized process, I think.

I think that a forum-based venue for these kinds of discussions is much superior, even while acknowledging some of the drawbacks that Void and Del have raised. LL, on the other hand, may not be so keen. It would be much more difficult to control and contain the discussion here than in-world. ETA: Just thought I'd better clarify. I don't mean anything sinister by "control" or "contain" -- just that the conversations here are more likely to branch off in all sorts of directions, and more prone to digressive or spammish contributions.

Nathaniel Scorpio wrote: If that really is him, what does it say about this place that he's posting there and not here? (I think we all already know the answer to that...) Yeah, it really is him on SLU; he's posted there a few times, most notably in general response to the concerns over RedZone. And yes, it says just about everything you need to know about this place, and LL's attitude to it, that he has never posted in the forums here.

Virtual Harlem is, I am about 99% certain, still there, although some of the original elements are gone or have been changed. Certainly, it still appears in Search, and in the Destinations Guide.

Tank Camino wrote: redzone has on numerous ocassions ejected alts of people ive already banned for various reasons Tank, you can continue to complain about the loss of a system that is gone, and is not coming back. Or you can explore alternative existing methods of security. In any case, this is not the place to debate about the efficacy or ethics of RedZone. Again, I suggest that you post somewhere in the Commerce section, or at SLU, where people can provide some suggestions as to how you might replace RedZone with something more ToS friendly.

Potosi Abonwood wrote: I would like to add also be wary if you've logged onto the RZ site isellsl.ath.cx that is where the harvesting of passwords comes from I believe. Well according to the video on the herald that's where it's done at. This is an important point. Also, anyone who has ever appealed a ban by RedZone had to log on to the isellsl.com site: they are also potentially vulnerable. One of the great unknowns here is what has happened to zFire's database. The original seems to have been deleted by the hackers, but it appears that zFire himself had a backup.

Tank, this thread is probably not the best place to put these posts. A serious suggestion -- if you post it here somewhere in Commerce, or even at SLU, I'm sure you will find people happy to suggest alternate ways of arranging security for your sim, including the use of land tools and orbs.

Josephina Bonetto wrote: I won't use Red Zone and understand the frustration about it but I certainly don't feel you should be hung, drawn and quartered for using it either. Enough has been said about what it does and does not do - I am profoundly disgusted I have been scanned against my will by others and entered into the database but I think your approach is polite and pragmatic. Certainly undeserving of a preach speech. It is for you to make your own, educated, decision. I'm certainly going to be able to forgive someone who has used it, but has, when given the appropriate information, removed it. I am frankly less charitably inclined toward someone who continues to use it even after it has been made clear to him or her that it is a violation of the privacy rights of others. Suggesting that its employment should, in the face of the evidence of the harm it can cause, be left to the individual user's decision is a bit like saying that the wisdom of firing a gun in a crowded place should be left to the discretion of the gun-owner.