Friday, May 09, 2008

Upholding Social Norms

Recently, I've been observing what I consider to be an erosion of social norms within the growing resident population within the virtual world of Second Life (SL). I think to some extent, this was to be expected simply due to the explosive growth but I do think there is something a little more "meta" going on and I wanted to share a few observations. Before I go much further, I should say that the following represents my personal world view and is not intended to extrapolate to the general populous. It may simply speak volumes about the Second Life residents I encounter, and have little to do with the average population but at the least, it may provide food for thought and discussion in a larger context.

When Grace entered Second Life in Feb. 2006 the feel of the community was akin to Mayberry, USA. By that I mean, the population was less than 150,000 and residents were generally neighborly, helpful and glad to see you. I was fortunate enough to stumble into the tranquil community of Mill Pond as a home base but I spent most of my time traversing the grid, trying to get my head around the world as it were. Nearly every day of my first few months in world I heard "Welcome to Second Life" as I met new people and visited new places. There were leagues of well organized groups and individuals whose focus was to help acclimate new comers, from NCI to the Shelter and educational groups that taught basic skills. Inherent in these exchanges, beyond just building skills, were simple reinforcements of social norms and acceptable behaviors. It wasn't overt, it was kind and gentle and in the spirit of keeping the world of Second Life a place of community and collaboration.

Beyond the new resident centers, object lessons in de facto social norms were consistently reinforced by my fellow residents. This included simple things such as: greet and welcome people, be kind to newbies, excuse yourself when you left a group conversation, etc. It also included more subtle practices, such as waiting until you've established a bit of a relationship before you offered friendship - at that time calling cards were helpful without the implied social contract of a friendship. This was reinforced somewhat by the feature set because then your friends could not only see if you were online, they could also map you by default. This single point, beyond common courtesy, was a good deterrent to quick friends.

I realize I sound like some old geezer sipping a glass of sweet tea and reminiscing about "the good old days", but really I do have a point beyond simple nostalgia.

Reflecting upon my early Second Life social experiences and those today I see dramatic changes, especially related to social privacy. For example, part of the subtle but consistent reinforcement from the early community was that the separation between one's Second Life (SL) and real life (RL) was assumed, and the merger of those two was the decision of each individual to be exposed, discussed, etc. at their discretion and without prompting and if shared, certainly held in the utmost of confidence. I am not talking about the philosophical arguments related to immersion versus augmentation here, I am referring to simple courtesy and what was then a seemingly set of shared values and social contract terms that embraced the construct and consequences of what it meant to have social privacy.

Social privacy wasn't cast as "hiding behind your avatar" nor were the Second Life Terms of Service waved about by town criers, it was woven into the culture of the early era community and it was reinforced accordingly. Sharing someone's real life information and private chat logs with a third party was not only frowned upon, there was almost a scarlet, maybe crimson, letter cast upon those residents that were careless in that regard. Social privacy was considered paramount, and unfortunately I see that particular aspect of the Second Life culture eroding every day without obvious consequence.

In the material world there are forces that shape our social behavior such as fear of legal and social consequences and attendant regulation, which are largely choreographed by immediate and appropriate feedback. Often in the real world the law often becomes the lowest common denominator to constraint and social decorum.

However without feedback methods, those same consequences in online communities including Second Life are often missing, especially with a Laissiez-faire approach to oversight even in light of the Big Six. The "law" here in Second Life boils down to the Terms of Service, which clearly most people don't read or are otherwise immune simply due to the lack of obvious consequence. Without the means of consequence we know humans will push until there is some edge, and we are left with an eroding and destructive community.

Real world law is not the answer. Real world law doesn't solve destructive social behavior in communities and just to be clear, anonymity is not the problem. The arguments about identity verification and trust, while tuned to the real world, are inherently flawed in a space where new ways of thinking availed because of anonymity and the constraints it imposes. Additionally, no legal system is going to dirty itself by trying to moderate "Don't be a dick".

So what is the answer, or maybe what are the questions?

Are there different moral codes and norms that we are willing to adopt in online spaces to accommodate this new medium? If so, does self-moderation work in large and diverse social spaces to reinforce social norms? For example, are *you* willing to ...

  • gently remind that new friend that just said something like "obtw ABC XYZ is rly a dude irl" that sharing or even discussing another person's real life is not acceptable?
  • delete the notecard someone just dropped on you that contains a private conversation and kindly remind them not to do it again?
  • even if you think you've "fallen in love" with another resident upon first sight, are you willing to give that resident the social privacy they rightly deserve?
  • speak up in a public forum when a resident is being mistreated?
  • defend a fellow resident's right to anonymity?
  • remind the resident that disrupts an event with repeated transmissions of advertisements, sounds or even chat spam, that they might find a better outlet?
  • write a blog post reinforcing your view of social norms?


Well, are you?

15 comments:

Mera 2:32 PM  

I'm with you on this. I walked into the Shelter when I came to be within SL, and have since witnessed the change as you've described. The Shelter is newbie focused, and receives new people with open arms daily. But the mood of the place has certainly changed. Much of that is on the older crowd. The education element has gone. There is so much turnaround, that rarely do you even get a chance to help someone figure out the world and what's acceptable. Just trying to strike up a conversation has become difficult at times. I wish I knew how to fix it. I know I'm trying. It does make for a more jaded experience, I confess. But I still believe.

Charlanna Beresford 2:38 PM  

Wonderful post, Grace! It seems as if the metaverse is faced with the same challenges of social norming that occur with any growing community (atomic or digital). I cannot agree more that we're responsible for creating, living and sharing a social contract. Or, as Ghandi said in one of my all time favorite quotes, "We must be the change we wish to see in the world."

Jacek Antonelli 2:49 PM  

I can echo your sentiments about the erosion of social norms in SL, although it could also be described as a "culture shift".

When there's a steady trickle of new people coming in, it's possible to indoctrinate most of them (in the least creepy sense of the word). The Mentors used to be great at showing new users not only how to do things, but also how to behave.

But when you get massive population influxes, it's just not possible to provide a proper orientation for each person anymore. Inevitably, the old-timers become overwhelmed by the new-comers, and there's tension between the two cultures.

So my point (if I have one) is: while it makes me sad to see the good old ways disappearing, and I can sigh longfully and wonder what things would have been like if SL had grown in a more controlled fashion, I'm skeptical about the chances of restoring the old culture.

If we play our cards right, though, we might be able to ensure that our core values, like respect for personal privacy, become part of the new SL culture that's being formed. I'm not sure exactly how to do that, though.

dyerbrookME 2:51 PM  

I'm here to tell you that this problem of the "erosions of social norms" began long, long before the influx of No Payment Information on File accounts, and long before the corporate invasion began to privilege and statusify realifism.

Merely for criticizing the powers-that-be, the Feted Inner Core, in 2005, a group of really malicious and nasty stalkers first outed my real-life gender, then outed my real-life name, location, and occupation, then, hysterical in their Google-stalking, made a case of mistaken identity and began accusing me of "real life crime" (plagiarism) based on the story of a person *with a similar name in another city who wasn't me*.

My efforts to fight this tooth and nail only got me banned from the forums, and even more vilified.

These capricious, arbitrary worlds owned by private companies with no sense of the common good or their own corporate responsibility are to blame *first and foremost* for not setting the tone.

If Pathfinder Linden sits on his hands and lets me be stalked and exposed on the forums without removing and chastising the persons guilty; if even Philip Linden will call me "she" in a town hall in which he's forced all of us to use voice to hear and speak to him, what's to blame? The low level of social morals? Or the company setting the tone?

If people are allowed inworld and on forums in the SL domain to make false and libelous accusations without the TOS being enforced, who is to blame, then for the chatlog culture to try to set the record straight on those who lie or accuse others of lying? The company, that failed to set the town? or the users?

I now find it almost a commonplace that the minute you disagree with anyone on the JIRA, in the forums, on the Linden blog, or anywhere in the SLosphere, the first thing people will reach for, if they don't accuse you of "having no life," will be to accuse you of having some real life feature or interest that discredits you (i.e. a gender opposite your avatar, lack of IT-related employment or any employment at all, lack of physical beauty, etc.)

You're absolutely right that "Don't be a dick" -- created by people who themselves are Internet geek dicks -- isn't enough of a rule to go by.

I've developed my own personal list of what makes people "Invalid Interlocutors" here:

http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/second_thoughts/2008/05/invalid-interlo.html

I think that if you aspire to power and influence or if you aspire to dissident status, conversely, you almost have to expect that people will pick away at your avatar cover and try to find absolutely anything and everything and nothing with which to discredit you, so great is the fear of power and influence -- and dissent -- on the Internet of Strangers.

You aren't calling out solutions here, but I don't think ratings can be solutions.

I don't know what got your goat at first on this, but it was hardly likely to be somebody using crappy and stupid leet speak somewhere or spamming a group. It strikes me that you may be trying to extrapolate from what in fact is your own private situation of having a RL status position that you are reluctant for others to know about because you somehow want to be judged by your own merits as an SL personage, and you want your SL personage to acquire the same status without a RL status reference, I guess -- I can't parse it. That's valid, but it can only take you so far because sadly, in part because the company itself doesn't set the tone, we do not have a culture of decency in SL. It will not appear magically by consent or fiat because there will always be other unacculturated Internet Strangers.

Each time someone tries to make an anonymous Internet community of avatars or nicknames that they think can last on the basis of common sense or decency, it fails. It usually fails on two kinds of cases: a) insecure and malicious types who use multiple alts to control and harass other people b) transgendered people who refuse to inform their intimates about their RL gender, and thus manipulate and hurt them.

Nobody has ever been able to do anything really valid about this problem.

Things like making an IP address show up a certain texture, as the Lindens are now doing, have real repercussions of privacy. You are forced, if you wish to "play that game" to go to this trust site and sign up with a name and at least avatar picture for consistency. We'll see lots more use of this, especially by geeks who seem to lurch between exposing everybody else and finding ever new ways of hiding themselves to be able to manipulate other people.

Prokofy Neva

Latransa 3:32 PM  

I've been struck by two things in this vein, recently. One is the number of people that have antagonistic statements in their Profile -- an odd way to Make Friends and Influence People. Some even promise violence, what ever that might mean in SL; perhaps some of that is actually in response to rude or oppressive behavior, but it supports your suggestion of a descending spiral. The other observation is how much more willing people are to volunteer real-life information in public chat, or Profiles, now -- much more so than seemed common a year back, or further. I include not only new residents that may have experience in more real-life-oriented social networks, but also people who have been around for quite a while. This more proactive introduction of real life in SL(tm) may in some measure be helping to encourage the pushier -- ruder, if you will -- trends you mention.

Otenth Paderborn 5:09 PM  

What rich food for thought. I'd like to grab one sentence in particular that raises a lot of points: "For example, part of the subtle but consistent reinforcement from the early community was that the separation between one's Second Life (SL) and real life (RL) was assumed, and the merger of those two was the decision of each individual to be exposed, discussed, etc. at their discretion and without prompting and if shared, certainly held in the utmost of confidence."

One key, I believe, is that social norms depend upon the social--they assume a society or community. Your early experiences were of a community (perhaps assisted by the smaller size of the virtual world). This community had the norm you describe. My current experience is of a community, which has by and large the same norm about revealing RL information. The Independent State of Caledon does, as a matter of course and for the most part gently, encourage certain social norms. The price is that some people stay away for fear of violating those norms, or don't come back after a first visit because they experience the community as too tightly-knit and perhaps exclusive. But there *are* the social norms you mention. These patterns of community norms and exclusiveness apply just as much to RL communities, of course.

Two other communities I belong to, both religious, also gently and indirectly but firmly transmit social norms. One of the big differences between the two sets is their approach to RL information. Unlike Caledon, in the other two communities RL information is regularly and openly shared (although still never, in my experience, demanded or expected). Asking where someone is from is often part of early conversations, and as far as I can tell it is not considered rude (even if someone declines to answer). One source of this difference may be that both the Quakers and the Unitarian Universalists belong to RL communities that are small enough to create a reasonable possibility that two avatars do actually know one another in RL. Asking if someone has RL familiarity with either tradition is also seen as a reasonable question to pose.

One effect of the culture shift that you do not mention is an occasional attitude of antagonism towards RL information. I've seen this in some profiles that, instead of leaving the RL tab empty, fill it with a harsh statement that such information is nobody's business. No doubt these individuals may have been burned by the assumptions or presumptions of those who seek RL information. One element of this that I find troublesome is to blame those of us who make RL information available of encouraging the rudeness of others. Early on in my SL, I realized that the avatar and the typist are, for me, the same personality, and I made that understanding clear in my profile. This has not diminished my respect for (and adherence to) the TOS and CS.

Finally, I'm struck once again by the very unusual time frame in SL. Otenth appeared in November of 2006, already a part of the second million avatars. (What are we up to now? Do any of us even mark the milestones any longer?) At the time, I felt like a Johnny-come-lately, part of that first publicity-fueled influx. In the context of today's SL, however, I'm at least middle-aged. And by the time I entered SL, as a new avatar I had no contact with a Mentor. So for at least a year and a half, and many millions of accounts, the experience of having an individual introduction to SL has been nonexistent.

FeelingDoingFranny 7:30 AM  

This post is so bittersweet. Nostalgia is always about the feeling that things were better in the "old days." In so many ways this is true. I remember the heady early days of the Mill Pond, and the feeling upon logging in that my new friends were in world, and I would be cavorting with them.

That hasn't changed in spite of the fact that many of my friends are new, because the gang scattered.

I wonder often what my experience would be were I to join now. I know the vastness of the world can be overwhelming, and the time I spend helping new citizens confirms this.

Yet, if by some happy kismet a person meets the right folks from the start, as I did, their Second Life will be a fulfilling and warm thing.

I have to hope that this is the case for many, and fear that this may not be so.

Grace, you must stop making me think. My head hurts. :-)

Dale Innis 10:03 AM  

I couldn't agree more, with both you and the above comments, that malicious "outing" (as to RL identity, gender, or anything else) is behavior beyond the pale, and that we should use all the force of public disapproval to discourage it.

On the other hand, as previous people have said, there are now significant subcultures in SL where people freely share their own RL information. I think we're at a point now where someone asking an RL question of a new acquaintance is no longer being rude; they're behaving in a way that is perfectly acceptable in some groups, and we should just politely reply that that's not information that we share. People are in general quite okay with that reply.

Maybe I'm just easy :) but I don't think there's anything wrong with private *speculation* about someone's RL qualities. If I'm with a friend and we see some particularly notable behavior, and one of us IMs the other "she is SO a guy in RL!", I don't think anything bad's been done.

(Doing it out loud or in public, on the other hand, is extremely rude if you're just guessing, and certainly bad behavior and a TOS violation if you actually know anything.)

As I said on Ches's weblog, the prohibition on sharing IM logs strikes me as very strange. Someone curses me out in IM, and I'm not allowed to share that with anyone but the Lindens in an Abuse Report? Whyever not? Am I allowed to paraphrase? Summarize? Seems like a very strange restriction on speech.

I guess a good example on the other side is sharing non-malicious IMs, as when an ex-lover threatens to share old amorous IM logs with a new lover. That's bad behavior in some sense, but so would be any harassment of the new lover that didn't involve IM logs (and as a friend pointed out yesterday, the IM log may in fact reflect the truth better than some subjective paraphrase of it).

I think we need to realize that when we text something to someone, whatever the context, we're giving them power over that text, and running a certain risk. And, as Prok points out, not all uses of that text are or ought to be punishable or forbidden.

In general I don't have a strong opinion on the question of whether SL norms are getting weaker, or if it's more that we're seeing a larger diversity of norms and expectations as more groups form. Not being as ass is a great principle :) and doesn't map directly onto what the TOS does or doesn't allow...

Lunette Fouroux,  12:14 PM  

I keep thinking I have it figured out, then read such a thoughtful post (and comments) that get me all confused again. :)

I haven't been around long enough to know how things have changed, but I've been struggling with these things on a personal level. I think it's good to be flexible. At one point I'd decided Lunette was going to be strictly a digital person. Then while shopping I was offered friendship (twice!) by a total stranger who had not even spoken to me. I declined at first, but then started talking to her. I tried to stay "in character" as a digital person, but it became clear she was from a different country, did not speak my language fluently, and had just been "born" that very day! I ended up accepting the friendship offer and dropping some inventory on her. I haven't heard from her since, but hope she is doing well & finding her way in this crazy world. Someone helped me when I was new, too, so I guess the point I'm trying to make is that the culture hasn't completely gone to hell yet. :)

Botgirl Questi 8:46 AM  

Great post! We are all still figuring things out together to a great extent. RL is changing more rapidly than ever before (i.e. twenty years ago there was no public internet, no cell phones, etc.). Change in Second Life is even faster. Add huge shifts in population, extremely diverse groups sharing physical virtual space and one of the most extreme libertarian structures on the planet and it is bound to be messy.

That said, I think that respecting our fellow residents' stated boundaries is a good rule of thumb. If I think it is relevant to query about RL in a conversation, I usually ask if the topic is okay before launching into the actual substance. Attempted mind-reading is a practice I'm working to avoid...I try not to read intentionality into the words or actions of others.

Anyway, keep these great posts coming, please!

Prokofy 11:26 PM  

>I couldn't agree more, with both you and the above comments, that malicious "outing" (as to RL identity, gender, or anything else) is behavior beyond the pale, and that we should use all the force of public disapproval to discourage it.

Oh, that's a nice sentiment. I don't believe in any malicious outing either.

But here's the problem with it. When people stalk, harass, goad, needle, bate, and annoy you constantly -- as you do to me, Dale, constantly -- what recourse does one have? YOUR behaviour is what is beyond the pale then, not mine. You are trying to prove some macho thing, or just trying to do some lame pulling of wings off a fly -- or whatever.

So I think it's actually a very *good* thing to say, Dale, now, do you work at IBM? Because they have an ethics guideline for how people from their company should interact. I don't have knowledge that you work there; it hardly matters; it's just a hunch. But it's a hunch I'll go on and invoke to try to see if some external set of ethics might be used on you -- because you don't have your own internal restraints and keep harassing me.

Most people don't constantly bait and harass and taunt other people. It's not normal behaviour. Your continuing to do that is suspect. Use this occasion *to stop it*. *Leave me alone and stop being a dick*. If you have a consistent hatred, dislike, annoyance, derision about what I write *start your own blog*.

In short, if someone constantly needles and goads me who themselves is knowledgeable about my RL linkage to my avatar, yet continues to hide behind their avatar, eventually, I find a very effective way to get them to stop is to call them on the disconnect between their avatar, their secrecy, and what might be suspected of them. As noted, there isn't any other recourse.

IMs and logs should be shared. It is the only curb on theft, fraud, and bad behaviour available in SL where anonymous avatars abuse others with impunity.

Prokofy Neva

Ravishal Bentham 5:50 AM  

Grace you are on the money about this. I too came into SL in February 2006 and I also enjoyed participating in the Mill Pond community. Mill Pond was the first place that felt like home to me and I enjoyed the people and events. (I still have my Reginald made bunny slippers!)

I want to add that their seems to be a greater number of sociopaths among post June 2006 residents. These are people who treat others like objects, game pieces or some NPC (Non Player Character). They are rude, socially inept, and clueless when it comes to behaving like a normal, moral human being. Worst of all are are what the Ojays sang about in their song "Backstabbers". These people seek out wealth and fame without trying to earn it. They will lie, cheat, steal, slander, and destroy in an effort to gain a little power and presige for themselves. No doubt these people existed on the grid pre June 2006, but they seem to be everywhere now. Virtually everyone who has betrayed me and screwed me over has a Rez day after the floodgates were open. It has gotten to the point I simply do not trust as much as I used to anymore. If I have power and privledges of my own I am now loathe to share it for fear I will be usurped or smeared by he actions of a "backstabber".

isadorafiddlesticks 6:42 AM  

great post, thoughtful, well stated and articulate. this sort of post is so much better to read than most dramas concerning SL, particularly in the fashion blogs of late.

this what makes me stay in SL, apart from the fact that I can fly and make myself slimmer inworld...lol. the notion of seeing how SL is evolving much like RL when there is every chance to change or be someone else because it is after all SECOND LIFE?

anyway, i would be making my own blog post about that as soon as i organize my thoughts together.

charlanna, i love that quote too..:)

David Cheney 12:06 AM  

I had a similar "Mayberry"-like experience when I joined in March of 2006. Now, it seems I am entering a city. People very rarely speak to me, and when I speak to them I am often met with what I expect is suspicion.

Grace, I think you've touched on something larger... perhaps aspects of (or limits to?) social scalability?

Jordyn Carnell 2:56 AM  

somehow "don't be a dick" and "don't be an ass" have both served me well as guides to social behavior..

except in the bedroom.

Great post Grace!

Apture

DISCLAIMER

This blog contains my personal observations about evolving social spaces and virtual worlds. Statements and material posted here do not reflect the position of my employer. Included within are my experiences in the Second Life world. Second Life® and Linden Lab® are registered trademarks of Linden Research, Inc. No infringement is intended.

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP