Response to Article (Unassigned Entry)

Unassigned entry: I felt I wanted to respond to the Second Life article Dr. Lucas told us about in class: I apologize for any 'rantiness'.


When reading the article that Dr. Lucas brought up the other night, I felt I understood the writer's message. What surprised me more, strangely, were the many negative responses. I am not surprised that there are negative responses, the internet clearly opens the door for them, but I was surprised that they were the majority! (Especially the ones that felt the article nonsense.)

I felt that even though this crime was indeed a 'virtual crime', and the writer felt more inclined to worry about the welfare of others (comforting her friend and children, and even writing the article), didn't lessen the value that this was indeed an act of violence.

And just because it does happen in SL, and doesn't do physical harm, it is still breaking the laws of the world! Just as it would be breaking the laws of the world we physically live in:

CONDUCT BY USERS OF SECOND LIFE

• 4.1 You agree to abide by certain rules of conduct, including the Community Standards and other rules prohibiting illegal and other practices that Linden Lab deems harmful.
• [...]
  
• (x) "stalk", abuse or attempt to abuse, or otherwise harass another user.

Just because a virtual crime is a lesser crime, doesn't make it justified. That's like if I were to shove you onto the ground (in malice, not in a heroic, getting out of the way of the speeding car action), and said, "well, at least I didn't stab you!" Just because I didn't draw blood I'm justified for the action that I've done?

Just because someone acts hatefully virtually doesn't justify that it isn't done physically.

I think there is a sense of urgency to the article that might be a little overdone. However, I also believe we all experience a 'deer in the headlights' moment in the virtual world, and we all have a sense of urgency to defend ourselves in light of that.

Also, even though on the screen there are pixels, there is an emotional force behind that. The person in control. The avatar is the portal, in and out of those emotions and actions and reactions. And the portal through which consequences travel. (Or at least, should.) Also, SL members do spend time, money, and their energy on their avatars. It makes sense that someone would care what happens to that. Especially since it is an extension of one's own identity while you're playing SL.


One last thought: Stormhold, Caledon is two sims over (quick flying distance) from a School, where newbies can take classes about SL and get free items.