-
Website
http://phasinggrace.blogspot.com/ -
Original page
http://phasinggrace.blogspot.com/2008/09/virtual-world-business-licenses-we-need.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
This system could be a part of the SL profile, either the official one or through a separate network of "business alliance" scripted attachments that allow you to see that information. A system like this can also be easily integrated into a website, which is what (I think) OnRez was trying to do - they have some rudimentary rating & review system implemented on their website.
Ratings are a thought, but they're also notoriously gamable and subject to drama and disputes. Some means of getting the RL identity of someone that you have a monetary dispute with in a VW would seem like a good idea, letting us easily fall back on RL small-claims courts and the like, except that to at least some VW residents RL identity is a *very* valuable piece of data that they wouldn't want to give up, and such a system could therefore be used basically as extortion against them ("give this to me free, or I'll bring a dispute against you and your RL name will be all over the Web").
I think what we ultimately need is a functioning justice system within the VWs themselves. But exactly what that would look like, and how we get there from here... too much for a Monday morning! :)
End rant. :)
However, a reference to a 2001 article on disintermediation when I am suggesting that we should protect our ability to conduct business in virtual worlds in a manner that allows "people to be able to maintain their privacy, and manage their online identities in ways that best suit them, but with provisions for equal access to the virtual marketplace."
I'm still confused.
There are basically two ways to get accountability: the easy way, by linking digital and physical identities (the way the rest of the internet functions); and the extremely hard way of implementing a good and trusted reputation system. As fond as I am of digital reputation systems, the ones that kinda work require a lot of ratings by many individuals over a long time - not really applicable for doing business in SL in the near future.
I admit to leaning to the simplistic solution here - "anonymity is great if you use marketplace for amounts up to X, and after that you must link your RL to VW identity". You can't do business in real world anonymously and unaccountably - should you be able to do it in VWs?
Do you think we should link identity verification to the ability to conduct business? I have not kept up with the state of the IV program, I may have to go do more research there.
What about some kind of insurance/escrow middle man institution?
But the downside of a grassroots effort (notice how many rating systems have failed since LL disabled their system ) is the lack of consistent standards and in this case, I am not as concerned about an individual's credibility as I am with their commitment to conduct business ethically and consistent with a set of social norms. An example: when the grid is unstable, expect to respond to failed transactions and make good on delivery.
Few months ago, when one of the virtual credit cards businesses appeared in SL I had to question myself what would make any of those institutions sound trustful after Ginko affair. So, I consulted a couple of economists to see what actually make a RL bank trustful. To my surprise, answer was: "almost nothing". They have to have a certain amount of money on their account (depending on the state law, usually several millions of US$) to register and start business but their trustworthiness is based on the reputation. That's why banks are so proud of their founding years. Sure there are names of the members of the board and employees, but nobody is protected in the case that bank crashes unless some of those persons actually transfered money to the private account.
But let's take a look at simple on.-line business. What makes us trust to a biz based on the web? Whois gives the name of the person who registered the domain, but we're all aware (hopefully) that that name might be not responsible for the actions of those who are running the site, like in the cases when registrar is the person who did the setup of the website. And we know that name can even be faked. Even if the name is true, is it always reachable by the law? If an US resident is cheated for US$100 on the site registered by an European (or any similar scenario) law suite is a very complicated and very expensive thing, much more than those US$100.
But still, for my SL affairs, I would check the web site and search for the section that clearly states that SL resident with specified avatar name is approved to do biz in the name of the company whose site that is. And to trust the site, well I'd expect registrar to be registrated company not a person name. And would hope for the best.
To roll this back to IMM/AUG problem... I wouldn't trust Artesia because there is iAlja's and iYan's RL names and photo on the site, but because the site is registered by a company that I can find responsible by the court of law in the country that I can reach.
But ideally, IYan should clarify. (goes to drag IYan back over here)
If the bank thing surprised you, brace yourself: even money itself is a social construct. The second people stop trusting it it becomes worthless. As is almost anything - what exactly can you really do with a pound of gold? So I do not regard this as relevant to current debate - it's more of a psych/cultural thing.
Your main argument is that RL identity does not confer trust, hence the RL-SL connection is meaningless. You trust accountability, instead. (BTW, naming employers like that in a private debate is in poor form).
What's wrong with that?
A) That means that reputation is meaningless to you, as well - as reputation is tied to identity. Do you buy stuff from Ebay from "-1 -1 WOULD NOT BUY AGAIN" sellers?
B) Your position might not be universally shared
C) No RL link means no RL accountability. SL accountability is limited to banning and having to use an alt. Again, if you are comfortable with that, no problem; not everybody else is (as witnessed by a few real SL cases to stand trial).
But that's not really a clarification, more of a rebuttal, so I'll clarify, too: an agency *could* conduct reputation management in virtual worlds in a way that would guarantee both security and anonymity. Will it? See what happens every time there is a clash with RL authority: LL caves and surrenders another piece of the world. So what do you think will happen?
But if reputation system fails only thing we can have is law. And law is not efficient in the cases of small amounts of money in the international cases.
LL is obliged to give info to the RL authority in the cases of criminal prosecution. As is any other ISP. problem with LL and the law is that they are holding all of us as hostages of one country's law. As an European I am allowed to gamble online and to make drawings of whatever. Still, they break my rights and prevent me from doing do on the account of the country their servers are in. But, that's beside the topic now.
Third party agency that would handle the reputation system and/or RL data might be something I don't want to trust in a way I trust LL. So it has to be opt-in thing.
I know I sounded a bit confused up there, but I actually tend to trust people (even if they are presented by avatars). Call me a witch but I largely rely on the intuition :) And call me a geek but I do whois as well to support the intuition.
But I also say that name is not a proof of anything. We can say whatever we want, and we can register our websites with fake names (though it is illegal). There are lot of usable names and pictures on Facebook and scanned ID's and driving licenses on Google image search, people successfully used them to verify on Aristotle. You'll agree that having a company name is a bit more trustworthy. If nothing else, you have to pay that domain from company's account (there is no cash and no questions option) and governments usually take care of companies and their businesses.
As you see it is not a matter of possibility to sue somebody. If things go to the court I find it a problem. Lawsuits take a lot of time and money, and one is in lose even if winning the case. And additional problem is that suing somebody for US$100 costs much more than that.
There are two aspects of reputation. One is old way, the one that is much older than the Internet, and is usually called "word of the mouth". We have heard from somebody we trust that entity X is trustful. That might be or might not be true. And we can hear opposite experiences from different sources, which exactly happened to me recently. Second one is based on reputation systems, like on eBay. That one also may or may not be true. And that one can be cheated. So, both of them involve some risk, but it's better than having nothing.
Problem with reputation systems in SL is exactly what you said, there is not enough data to make it work good.
But there is something about it that we don't agree. Reputation can work without RL names. One can connect reputation with RL name, or avatar name, or company. It doesn't matter as long as that name is a persistent one. If one change the name, reputation rating resets (or at least there is some actions needed to transfer it). Of course, legal contracts are signed with RL names (we got agreed about that on digado blog), but which name will be connected to the reputation is mere marketing decision.
Might it be a cultural thing? Both of us come from places where truth is far from cherished. This does not make it universal, though.
That is EXACTLY what the intent of "Identity Verification" was. Go back to the Second Life blog and reread all threads on it. The original post specifically stated its purpose was to help build TRUST in business transactions in-world.
Unfortunately, the shrill minority somehow turned it into "age verification" then started whining and bitching about 'privacy' and how 'children aren't allowed in SL already' and all that nonsense.
I was all for Identity Verification. Then with the "ageplay expose" y the German alarmist media, the whole idea became bastardized into a way to 'verify' age.
<rolls eyes>
A great idea that went sour for all kinds of reasons, mostly: the idiot loudmouthed whiners usually found at the SL blog, among other places. You know the type, the ones who proclaim Voice features in SL are a complete failure and how dare Linden Lab enable voice to be on by default!
<sighs>
Over time, it morphed into something less than clear, as Robin presented it as a prefabricated trust engine, which as we know is weak at best. She claimed the system would deliver two things:
"First, for Residents, it gives them the chance to independently verify certain aspects of their identity (their name, age, location and sex for instance) if they choose to. This will help establish trust by removing a layer of anonymity for those they interact with. It’s much easier to trust someone who puts their name behind their words and actions.
The second benefit of the IDV system is to help land owners and content publishers be sure that minors do not get access to inappropriate material. ... "
Neither of these reference business practices nor a suitable framework of enforcement, socially or otherwise.
With that, I am not convinced that the marketplace was " EXACTLY what the intent of "Identity Verification" was." And I'm not sure you can lay the blame, if any is warranted, on the doorstep of anyone other than Linden Lab.
Good ideas are heavenly, lousy execution is hell.
It may be a cultural thing, but recently I've heard enough "angry freelancer waiting to be payed" stories that it seems that some things are more in human nature than in local culture. maybe percents differ (I hope they are).
Actually, for me it's more personal thing. Name is also just a social construct. And i happened to realize that fairly early in life. I got my first nickname before I was born and got a real name. And nobody ever use my "real name" to the extent that I might not notice if somebody call me by it. So much about that name being "real". :)
Thanks for the clarification, your answer was what I feared you may have been suggesting.
Perhaps I could explain my thoughts through my own experience here:-
I came to SL two years ago, as many did, out of pure curiosity, following all the media hype.
As many have, I found a world, rich in talent, arts & wonderful people. I was particularly struck by the 'live music' scene.
I was fortunate to make friends and attend concerts and, before long, my circle of friends decided to open a music venue.
By now I was building small items and was encouraged to sell them. I started renting a 25L$ stall and slowly expanded my business shop by shop to help fund live music in SL.
You have written before about the "new user" experience and how bad it currently is. As a mentor who visits Help Islands I whole heartily agree. My own early experience in opening a simple stall and selling my items was fun, care free and enjoyable. If I had needed to go through a 'vetting' or 'licensing' or 'verification' procedure, I doubt I would be in SL now. It's one hurdle too many for a lot of new residents.
Having said that, I do agree that any individual or group, collecting "In world" on behalf of charity should have to obtain some sort of official sanction from both LL and the charity they purport to represent. Perhaps that could be extended to single L$ transactions for any resident over a certain limit - say L$20,000 as an example. But beyond that, lets not make this world more complicated than it need be.
I don't need a licence in real life to rent the shop down the street and sell flowers. And I certainly don't want to have to apply for one in SL either.
Prove your mettle. Go around Secondlife and spend your time publishing and lobbying against the biog businesses that use traffic falsification and profile pick payola to artificially boost themselves in search.
If you are unwilling to take on the existing network of SL Powerhouses that dominate the market then exactly what is your point?
Besides, the Gold Solution Provider program is happening and serves your article's intent anyway. And that too will be abused by unethical people.
I'll have to research the Gold Solution Provider program, thanks for pointing that out.
They have earned a reputation as someone who can be trusted with private information, and a reputation as someone who can be trusted as a verification authority. Short of someone with an existing reputation managing something like this, there will be understandable mistrust of the organization either as an identity authority or as an organization that can be trusted with private data. Mistrust is one of the main reasons that the last verification effort failed.
Finally, I would like to sign on to the "libertarian rant" and add another voice to the idea that any system of this nature should be strictly voluntary. Licensing schemes tend to punish the people who are doing the right thing with onerous bureaucracy and additional business costs, while the truly dishonest will simply choose to operate outside of the "law". As has been mentioned by others, often licensing arrangements are a form of collusion between existing businesses trying to eliminate competition and governments. If you doubt this, I would highly recommend researching alcohol licenses in just about any US state.
I understand the points about licensing schemes in the real world, but what I see is an assumption that we would automatically reproduce flawed systems. Is it inevitable that we cannot evolve, using this platform as a means by which to explore better options?
Do you think that's just a bad case of Pollyanna?
Good Lord, Grace, if you handled large sums of real money and dealt with it only on notecards or handshakes of avatars, that's your problem, not SL's problem. Next time, make a RL contract as people do when they have larger amounts or more complicated deals. I understand when you are an amateur, pursuing a SL type of career different than your first life career, you make mistakes. You get burned. We've all been through it. I've been burned on bad deals myself. Don't then decide you have to regulate all of us and the world because of your personal story. Learn from it and become more professional rather than forcing the Lindens to create more of a playpen for you.
Get a real life name and contact. Write a real contract. Don't impose your RL needs on the virtuality of SL. What enables business to prosper here is precisely that there is no discretionary power that gets to decide whether I can have a business or not, I can just get started. That is the beauty and life of SL, and don't you dare touch that.
The economy has enough problems without overregulatory notions like this. The INSL and SL Devs and SL Certification are all bad developments that harm things enough without you demanding business licenses.
Why do you people always globalize from your own shabby little experiences? It's SO annoying. And when I say "you people," I mean you influential "liberals" of SL who constantly get the podium and the Linden's ear to try to push things through absolutely heedless of your illegitimacy. No mass consumers' movement elected you to do this for them. Try to zoom outside your own clique here. I've worked the consumer groups' angle myself in SL for years -- it is very hard to get started because people don't follow up and ultimately don't care unless they have a large enough sum to take to RL. And that's your answer: it is not needed.
Are you completely mad, trying to regurgitate the idea of the Better Business Bureau? Do you know the first thing about what this is REALLY in RL? It is not a business, for one, nor a group of businesses whitelisting themselves and blacklisting others. Study how it works -- it is apart from business, and its complaints and procedures are transparent. This has been tried numerous times in SL, sometimes with a huge splash, with Linden blessing, big business blessing, and big personalities and it always fails because the business community at large did not ask for it; it's merely one person trying to extrapolate from their own experience or trying to enhance their own reputation; or a small group of merchants with a biased agenda. Be mindful of that, please.
Go and search the term BBB on the forums archives or even on Google with the term "SL". The trail is littered with pretentious crap masquerading as something consumers should trust. The cure was worse than the disease.
First, you need a normal consumer movement. Anyone would do. On TVs. On private islands. On prefabs. And people willing to work hard to process complaints. It's fine to posture on the idea of declaring who is fraudulent and bad and who is good, but a lot, lot harder to process complaints. The last BBB that surfaced here, with some real loony types, could not see its way clear to keep Christian Fassbinder from joining its council and let him become blessed with respectiability, somehow. I filed a complaint against him to that BBB of the time for 16 m2 extortion, as he was a land extortionist for many years, and it went nowhere because, as they put it vaguely, "The mainland doesn't have a covenant."
The real-life BBB and similar organizations take place in a context with separation of powers, democratic government, and the rule of law. Despite Dale Innis' overheated links here, there are numerous black-owned beauty shops -- he's just doing a race hustle here to try to make it seem as if big bad government is to blame for everything that is wrong in society. In RL, licensing is about consumer protection more than about government control. Here it cannot apply until people get into the mindset of consumer protection rather than mindset of business regulation.
There cannot be a "functioning justice system" in a one-party executive authoritarian state, which is what we have here.
The Lindens, when they talked about licensing advertisers, were going down a very bad road, as I wrote in my blog, adding to discretionary powers to influence the economy. It is better when they have the rule of law, and a system that lets anyone advertise, if they follow the same set of rules for everyone, with violations being processed, rather than permissions. Violations are always less, and easier to deal with, than permissions, which queue up.
You're looking at a handful of violations you personally experienced or your friends experienced, and begging for a permissions system. But, instead, you need a system to handle violations, and that has to start with a hard-working consumer rights group. They don't appear in SL just like that because people want to have a good time here, and not fuss with RL stuff.
When you're reading to *personally* do the hard and loathsome work of running a consumer group having to deal with intake from irate customers, Grace, then call me. Don't try to license my business until you first pass that test and finish that stage.
If you think this post is rude and filled with personal attacks, so be it -- you don't get to regulate other people's businesses in SL without them, by getting on Hamlet's blog.
My stated examples weren't large sums of real money, but they were agreements with large and "reputable" business entities which is why I used them as a contrast to the transactions that have resolved positively with other business owners that may not have the same market share or exposure. It struck me as odd, that large businesses in my particular examples certainly not as a sweeping assessment, were not as responsive to a failed transaction, in fact in both cases it is unresolved. Nonetheless, your point is completely valid. I have contracted using RL vehicles for large scale deals, but these types of business deal don't drive the SL economy day to day.
I've had my hand in small businesses and dealing with irate customers is something I understand. I started selling a few pieces of furniture, and grew weary of people wanting me to modify the piece for them (they were sold full perm). I also sold of few pieces of original art and poetry and dealt with requests to "change this line", "make the frame a little darker", etc. Running a business in SL is not for the feint of heart. Being a live musician has it's own set of business challenges.
And as I am writing this response to your points, it dawned on me I think you are exactly right. The need is clearly consumer rights and protection. Deal with violations, not permissions. The question is then, how is that accomplished?
I read back over the Metaplace TOS http://www.raphkoster.com/2008/09/15/declaring-... to see if there was anything in that framework. Under Rights of Users:
#4. Reasonable processes to resolve grievances with Metaplace and world creators.
In contrast, from the SL TOS
5.1 You release Linden Lab from your claims relating to other users of Second Life. Linden Lab has the right but not the obligation to resolve disputes between users of Second Life.
Granted, Areae and Metaplace are no where near as mature as Linden Lab and Second Life, but therein lies the striking contrast and I think highlights your other point about handling violations versus leveraging permissions.
Here's my question for you. How can a consumer rights group deal with violations when LL owns the data attendant to transactions but has excluded themselves from dispute resolution? Who can actually protect consumer rights other than LL?
You create a review procedure, you publicize what you are doing, and you make recommendations. The power of rhetoric and the blogosphere will do the rest.
But...that's where everyone begins and ends, instead of gets to through work and steps.
They start by saying "OMGODZORZ I wuz robbed, an island baron took my home". They demand justice, Lindens, heads to role, and draconian entities to be set up to kill future scammers.
But, we can't even be sure the problem is that they didn't just fail to pay their tier, fail to understand their own need to pay tier after a land purchase, or whether they overprimmed. So we need to document cases first -- the act of documenting gets rid of them.
Next, you invite others to submit their testimony. Everyone on an island is happy with this landlord except one person? Or there are 50 such complaints?
You investigate, discuss, publish and recommend.
For a time, I ran a Consumer Rights Group on televisions. There were severally really notoriously bad ones that were either free and badly made and unserviced (FreeView) or costly and breaking down or losing their URLs because they hadn't paid for licenses, etc. The pattern follows the pattern of all things SL:
o several irate tenants jumping up and down -- it's on your land, it's your fault, the land is not making it work, etc.
o careful documentation to show it's the TV scripter's fault and encouragement to work on the problem in a group
o enthusiasts coming to 2-3 meetings, fuming, confronting, but not willing to work systematically
o a few diligent types continuing the work
o the work consists of overturning wrongful exposes that were the result of refusal to update material based on isolated incidents (Infonet's notorious exposes) just as much as making proper exposes
o everyone gets bored -- a new TV comes out that works much much better with really great customer service, obviating the need to keep banging on the other problems -- this is the virtual market, it goes around problems quickly and makes new offers quickly
I also used to have a kind of "chamber" where I put "thumbs up" for people who had good experiences with prefab makers and their service and "thumbs down" for bad makers. These meetings were mercilessly griefed, not by those accused, but by the w-hats or other types of classic griefers.
Some of my earliest attempts to make projects that involved people and intelligence rather than scripting led to merciless harassment -- making a yellow pages, making a jobs center, making a consumer information center. The PN type griefers hate more than anything when you try to make SL work as a real society -- they instinctively rush to kill it.
When somebody is willing to focus just on this and nothing more, and not create some giant scripty third-party website to do it (other consumer/BBB efforts foundered on the usual rocks of arrogant scripters thinking they could just set up a vast automated system, especially of ratings), but do the work WITH PEOPLE required, it will take off. But knowing what is involved, I myself would not undertake it.
And the out-of-system trust relations won't work, either. For example one could think about asking the BBB to support the inworld BBB with rules, controlling, supervision. But well, why should a weird guy in Germany trust an inworld organization run by anonymous stranges without any reputation just because they are supervised by some organization in the US, which is run by (per definition from the point of view of a European) religious nuts (don't blame me for the bad image the US has outside the US)?
And the last option - having LL run a BBB and supervise it - well, I just say "incompetence in communication" and "FIC" to that. Because that's what we would get - but luckily I don't see LL in any way being either prepared or willing to run something like this.
Nope, sorry, but no kind of inworld organization will ever get my approval as a trusted BBB - not even if I myself would be on the leading chair of it. Why? That's the next problem: egoism and attention span. This world is base don "do what you want, be what you want". You want to roleplay banker? Until recently you could. You want to roleplay mafia? Sure, go on. You want to be a gorean controlfreak? Yep. Vore? Check. Dolce? Check. And you want to give those people a way to roleplay "I control the business"? No way.
Attention span is even worse: people don't invest. Sure, a few people do invest work and money - that's why it still is interesting. But the big majority just plain don't care. They come to enjoy some time off from their RL and just want to goof around. They will drop out just the next hour if they decide so. But any trust based organizational structure has to be built on personal investment and risks of those investments - in RL the BBB can't go nuts, because they would lose all they have if they turned into something untrustworthy. In SL, you just scrap the whole thing and leave SL, or come back with a new alt and a new name and a new "we solve your problems" organization.
And people won't notice, because only those grumpy oldbies remember. Do you think any of the noobs coming in the next months will ever know anything about Ginko or the banking stuff or the big gambling desaster? So there won't be any lasting damage to those who try to ursurp any controlling structure - they can just start anew. And for the same reason - the "no history syndrom" you might call it - noobs won't know who to trust at all. They might go for those organizations that are around the longest - well, but that won't say much if it's an area with high business turnaround.
The same is true for anything like a BBB: you start one, Prok starts one, Crishun Fassbinder starts one. Now look at the noobs coming in December 2008. They won't know about the history of Crishun, because ad networks are regulated and he might have removed all the crap. They might just look at the names and the rez dates and decide to go with his BBB. Would that make it trustworthy? How will you define trust in an essentially untrusted environment? Especially, how would you define it for those that are the majority: the younger (as in rez-date) users?
Oldbies don't need a BBB any more - they know the weird scams out there and if not, they learn and just develop the smarts to not fall for traps. Noobs need it more than others. But why should they trust BBBG and not BBBC?
I'm not sure if you had a chance to read Prokofy's posted comment, but between the two of you, I think you've captured most of the reasons that a classically defined license and BBB would not work.
But suppose you just took a job at Linden Lab (I know, just go with it for a minute). If your ONLY job role was consumer rights protection (to Prokofy's point, that is a main concern) and you were not constrained by anything, policy, resources or otherwise.
What would you do?
(success .. sorry about that)
1. Who cares who the buyer is, he is PAYING. Let him be anonymous or whatever.
2. If you are trading junk for peanuts on a yardsale scale - who cares about such 'business'? Be whoever. If you have a turnover or profit on a level comparable to the average monthly income in the economy - go register as a business. In SL terms it can mean - making your profile PUBLIC as soon as you have this turnover/profit.
That's it. Nothing to discuss actually.
As to the 'reputation systems'... 'wikipedia'-style... They are abused worse than any other alternative everybody who has been using ebay for more than a couple of years knows what a piece of junk it is.
1) A group to set standards - chosen by whom, from what countries?
2) Licensing criteria - developed by what will presumably be a self-appointed group.
3) Staff to evaluate license applications and deal with complaints. customer service, etc. and will they speak many languages?
4) Fees to pay for staff and site
5) Application process - presumably with a fee to support the service. Presumably in English and possibly one or two other languages.
So new SL Residents will have to begin their businesses with a new, higher burden instituted by the older successful businesses.
No, it's a bad idea. It reeks of I made it up the ladder and will now pull the ladder up after myself.
Well, since ping doesn't work with Wordpress i add a link to a post i wrote about all this: http://raulcrimson.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/slb...
Thanks
I may sound rude but the truth is these sort of efforts in SL always fail because the people that run them are the absolute scum of the earth con artists. As it so happens the same goes for RL BBB activities as well. The BBB props up whoever pays the protection money and damns anyone that refuses.
As it stands in RL that business you have a contract with might fail and declare bankruptcy and you will never see your deposit back either.
Life is tough. Don't invest money you can't throw away. Sell your stocks, all of them, when the market is at peak, not at the bottom as the fools are doing today. And never ever pay attention to bogus "associations" or "unions" that exist solely to prop up people they like and disparage people they don't like.
Oh and one last little thing...
There are plenty of people in SL running a business with an RL business license. They simply don't have to tell you about it nor do you have any right to know who they are under the SL TOS. And if you do not agree to the TOS then you are not supposed to be logging in at all are you? Thus the loop is closed to my very first statement.