[MUD-Dev] The State of Play: On the Second Life Tax Revolt

[F. Randall Farmer]

Monday, September 22, 2003 8:16 AM, J C Lawrence said:

> The State of Play: On the Second Life Tax Revolt Posted by James
> Grimmelmann on Sunday, September 21 @ 19:11:48 EDT Governance

I couldn't let this one go without comment:

  JC quotes a rather lengthy article attempting to tie a "tax
  revolt" in Second Life to an emergent democracy. As a long-time
  beta tester of Second Life (and a a User Experience/UI design
  contractor a few months back), I'd have to say that it is all much
  ado about nothing. The 'protest' was neither widespread, nor was
  it as 'intense' as as it could have been (see below).  Virtual
  Press photos had to be re-enacted for the staff-written newsletter
  and the vast bulk of users didn't know it had happened until he
  wrote about it, days later.

Specifically, Grimmelmann said:

> Other than quitting the game entirely (the threat which lurks
> behind all such protests), a street party is just about the only
> action you can take that will even come to the attention of the
> authorities.

This is an understatement of some scale for all systems, but
especially Second Life.

A protest party is pretty much the _easiest_ action you can take in
SL.

I personally (along with many others) have generated significant
attention and action from 'the authorities' (and fellow citizens)
using the built-in scripting, object creation mechanisms, and
persuasive reasoning on the game Forums.

During beta, I built an invisible teleporting auto-cannon that fired
100 invisible rounds per minute and unleashed it in an area of WWII
Online folks who had been at 'war' with my clan. It killed hundreds
for about an hour before I was asked by the 'authorities' to remove
it. Changes were made so that invisible objects can be seen in
authoring mode.

After release, I created a world-touring, talking airship ALA
Blade-Runner.  Logs indicate that thousands of people had seen and
interacted with over a two month period. It became well known, and
the subject of some debate. This airship (along with various
user-run air taxi services) often became 'stuck' over people's land
because of a mis-tuned property feature. One good rant posted on
their forums stating a rational case and citing Lawrence Lessig
citing the Supreme Court's decision in US V. CAUSBY

  http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4179

and the problem was fixed in the next build.

<EdNote: Forum requires registration, and registration is
disabled.  Full text copy trails this message.>

And I'm not even close the most skilled or prolific
scripters/artists/politicos on that system. Though my personal
reputation may have helped convince the authorities in the case of
the airship right-of-way discussion, that serves to reinforce my
point: Well considered and executed individual action often
facilitates change more efficiently than any mob-party.

Honestly, the Tea-Party in Second-Life had little in common with the
historic event: Destroying ships and tea did real financial harm to
the King of England (and loyalist businesses). The tea crates in the
SL protest were bought and paid for by the protesters, who were
taxed for them anyway. On the other hand, those few who tore down
the structures that they knew Linden Labs liked to visit during
their press demos (thus removing value from the system) were closer
to those great American terrorists of old. :-) They were few and far
between.

Most of the tax protesters aren't all that serious. They aren't
en-mass taking the actions that would cause a change, because it
isn't that important to them. It is a street-party because they'll
keep playing even if the tax structure doesn't ever change.

So, asserting that a real-time 'street-party' protest within a
virtual world is the most effective forcite Lawrence Lessigm of facilitating change we
can hope-for/expect is a supposition that I think deserves serious
challenge. Users can (and will) do so much more.

The so-called Second Life Tax Revolt is a bad example of 'emergent
governance' for the reasons stated above: Taxes don't matter enough
for the users to do anything significant, even though they have the
power and the skills.

Randy

<EdNote: Text follows>

From:

  http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4179

--<cut>--
Rant #3: Privately controlled airspace - 'Common Sense Revolts at
the idea'

As background material for this rant, I'm going to cite Lawrence
Lessig's blog which sites Philip Greenspun:

----

  Lessig: Phil tells this bizarre story about how Disney World has
  apparently succeeded in getting the airspace above Disney World
  assigned to it.

  Greenspun: Ever since the dawn of aviation it has been held that
  airspace belongs to the public and is to be regulated for the
  benefit of all by the FAA. This is what, for example, prevents the
  owner of a farm in Missouri from demanding that Delta Airlines pay
  him a tax every time they fly over his farm.

  Lessig: (for more than 400 years) in fact, the law was that the
  owner of a bit of land owned not just the land, but all the land
  to center of the earth, and, as Blackstone put it, 'to an
  indefinite extent, upwards.'


  This, of course, created a problem once the history of aviation
  was born. For obviously, if I own all the space above my land,
  then companies like United are just napsterizing my property as
  they fly above my land.

  The Supreme Court finally resolved this matter in 1946. The
  Causby's, North Carolina farmers, complained because military
  aircraft were causing their chickens to fly in panic to their
  death as they smashed into the walls. The Causby's claimed
  'trespass' and demanded the military stop flying over their land.

  The Supreme Court rejected the argument that airplanes
  trespass. As Justice Douglas wrote for the Court,

    Supreme Court: '[The] doctrine has no place in the modern
    world. The air is a public highway, as Congress has
    declared. Were that not true, every transcontinental flight
    would subject the operator to countless trespass suits. Common
    sense revolts at the idea. To recognize such private claims to
    the airspace would clog these highways, seriously interfere with
    their control and development in the public interest, and
    transfer into private ownership that to which only the public
    has a just claim. '
----

Just like the ancient code of RL property being obsolete when the
airplane was invented, the SL land option called 'Outside Scripts'
disabling all objects 'all the way up to heaven' is a Byzantine
restriction which will ultimately destroy all air travel and
unfairly restrict creativity for all kinds of objects.  As Justice
William O. Douglas said: 'Common sense revolts at the idea.'

As with all my rants, I'd like to make a concrete
suggestion:

  Limit the effect of the Outside Scripts land attribute to a height
  of 50 meters above land/sea level.

Comments?
--<cut>--
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev