Post a comment
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
« Chestnut's Choices 7/22 - 7/28: Grand Reopening of The Freudian Slip, Vietnam Pilot on Combat Flight in RL and SL, Virtual Ability Celebration and More | Main | Ophelia's Gaze on Second Life Summer Swim Wear: Dark and Sexy Bikinis a Vampire Would Wear! »
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Classic New World Notes stories:
Sander's Villa: The Man Who Gave His Father A Second Life (2011)
What Rebecca Learned By Being A Second Life Man (2010)
All About My Avatar: The story behind amazing strange avatars (2007)
Fighting the Front: When fascists open an HQ in Second Life, chaos and exploding pigs ensue (2007)
Copying a Controversy: Copyright concerns come to the Metaverse via... the CopyBot! (2006)
The Penguin & the Zookeeper: Just another unlikely friendship formed in The Metaverse (2006)
Guarding Darfur: Virtual super heroes rally to protect a real world activist site (2006)
The Skin You're In: How virtual world avatar options expose real world racism (2006)
Making Love: When virtual sex gets real (2005)
Watching the Detectives: How to honeytrap a cheater in the Metaverse (2005)
Man on Man and Woman on Woman: Just another gender-bending avatar love story, with a twist (2005)
War of the Jessie Wall: Battle over virtual borders -- and real war in Iraq (2003)
Home for the Homeless: Creating a virtual mansion despite the most challenging circumstances (2003)
Bad Idea - it suggests that they are putting more of a wall between us and them.
Posted by: Hitomi Tiponi | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 09:04 AM
Bad. If LL is not involved in key cultural events within their own platform, they will have less and less cultural understanding of their userbase. Which means more platform decisions made with a total lack of social insight. And we all know how well those kinds of decisions work out in the end.
But given LL's firing of all the employees with the deepest social/cultural understanding of their userbase, this recent decision doesn't surprise me at all.
Posted by: Brian O'Blivion | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 09:23 AM
I think it's too early to know. Will the new community group prove up to the task? How will the loss of PR that presumably will result from this no longer being an "official" LL event impact upon participation and attendance? Is LL going to be entirely at arm's length, or will there be some support for the new event?
On a theoretical level, moving this away from corporate sponsorship, and putting it directly into community hands is a very good thing. Unless it tanks, in which case it was a very bad thing, right?
I think Brian, above, has a good point, too: does this further distance the Lindens from their customer base and culture?
I also worry about what this may mean for the LEA.
Posted by: Scylla Rhiadra | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 09:35 AM
good decision, LL needs to dump the legacy ties and stop directly sponsoring events that are today less and less relevant to the larger audience
Posted by: comoro Infinity | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 09:35 AM
Past 2005 LL were never really involved in it anyway, leaving it up to volunteers that spent all their time fussing and fighting and excluding groups and exhibits from participating.
Participants picked to head the group were met with animosity and people chose sides and attempted to sabotage one thing or the other all the time resulting in complaints to the Lindens who just plain didn't have time to babysit that kind of crap.
Posted by: Dirk Talamasca | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 09:43 AM
Good move, although the new name "Burn 2.0" kinda represents how people feel about the new Viewer.
-ls/cm
Posted by: Crap Mariner | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 09:48 AM
Could be good or bad. Depends on who is appointed to the Burn 2.0 team and how they are appointed. I do find it disturbing though to see LL abandon an event so closely tied to its founding inspirations.
Posted by: Tinsel Silvera | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 10:34 AM
Good idea. The event was started by Lab employees who were already a part of Burning Man culture. Almost all of them are gone now, leaving only well meaning Lindens who nevertheless have no clue what the point is. The Lab was beginning to think of Burning Life as a product to be produced, as a commodity to shovel out the door, a job to get done, rather than a full time community with it's own customs and traditions. The "event" is only the once-a-year expression of what should be a year-round meeting of minds. The Lab hasn't the time to preside over year-round communities. Nor should a company "sponsor" assume so much importance in the life of a non-commercial community. I think it will be good. Smaller probably, but good.
Posted by: Lonnie | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Feels like a burn.
Could be a plus for the event, though. First order of business: go back to the drawing board for a name. "2.0" is the new "dotcom": trite, overused, meaningless.
The cynic in me compels me to suggest "Afterburner", "Burnout" or "Ashes".
But if the goal is to rekindle the original spirit of the event, perhaps "Sparks" or "Wildfire" would be more to the point.
Posted by: Arcadia Codesmith | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Feels like a burn.
Could be a plus for the event, though. First order of business: go back to the drawing board for a name. "2.0" is the new "dotcom": trite, overused, meaningless.
The cynic in me compels me to suggest "Afterburner", "Burnout" or "Ashes".
But if the goal is to rekindle the original spirit of the event, perhaps "Sparks" or "Wildfire" would be more to the point.
Posted by: Arcadia Codesmith | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 10:43 AM
Personally it sounds like a good idea. You should mention that they didnt just "stop supporting" burning life, but they turned support over to the real-world team behind burning life.
If anything, that sounds like a rather excellent step. Linden Lab loses some ballast, so to speak, and in turn the event gains a very promising new "owner" of sorts, probably the best it could have right now outside of LL.
As for the naming, yeah its kinda been there, done that. But names only do so much, its the actual event that matters.
Posted by: Psistorm Ikura | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 10:53 AM
LL has a lousy track record when it comes to "officially sponsored" events.
If Virtual Worlds in general, and SL in particular is a living world, then constant evolution and change are indicators that it is still viable.
Posted by: Fogwoman Gray | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 10:59 AM
Good decision, Burning Life always conveyed a sense of tackiness and frivolity that I have tried to avoid since joining SL last Spring. Truthfully, I've always found the story of Rosedale's attendance at Burning Man a point of embarrassment since the event's drug-related notoriety and excess don’t reflect my values or interests as a Second Life resident and consumer.
I hope that SL will choose to invest in infrastructure level improvements, like the kind we have collectively undertaken to advocate in this blog (the Unity development platform and plugin or server side rendering, Onlive, OTOY) . . . and that the freedoms we enjoy each day as SL residents (anatomically correct avatars, adult content) will continue to be protected as other start-ups (Blue Mars, etc) strip away these freedoms in an attempt to correct SL’s perceived mistakes.
In such an event SL and it’s accumulated 10+ years of cultural history may itself become a symbol of far greater strength than these old desert orgies.
Posted by: Ehrman Digfoot | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 11:03 AM
Philip Rosedale said, a while back, that the Burning Man Era was over.
My first reaction was "well, that was a dope-slap to our best content creators." Then I calmed down, took a happy pill, and read his announcement.
Reaction 2.0:
If the "Burning Man Team" mentioned are the folks doing the RL event, well, wooo-hooo to that. This dancing fool will go to Burn 2.0.
As for SL? It's high time to focus Linden Lab's remaining staff on the core business: playing BDSM Ken & Barbie, or BDSM Ken & Ken, or BDSM Barbie & Barbie, or is it BDSM Gorean Barbie & Fuzzy the Goth Cat?
It gets so confusing. And where the heck is GI Joe in all this?
Time for another pill.
Posted by: Ignatius Onomatopoeia | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 11:04 AM
Burning Life has been my favorite event of the year.
The Burn 2.0 group isn't coming up in search yet but a Burning Life 2010 group with two members started by Dusty Linden does show in search.
It has been suggested there will be fewer land rush parcels this year. I worry that it will be less inclusive. Which goes counter to the idea of Burning Man (IMHO).
Posted by: Molly Montale | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 11:09 AM
Haha, how could they end sponsorship of the event and then rename it in the process? How does that make ANY sense?
Posted by: Metacam Oh | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 11:14 AM
I just have to add... being involved on and off with burning life for various kinds of projects I just would like to add. It's a pretty damn good idea. Burning Man (which I've attended in RL) is far different. Even community wise. Burning Life is not very freedom of expression friendly :) which I think is one of the huge huge huge important things about Burning Man itself. Anyhow. Burning Life is NOTHING like Burning Man and never has been and it's about time they ended that train wreck.
Posted by: ColeMarie Soleil | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 11:50 AM
Emotionally, it's not the best, but until The House Linden is in order with lag and things vital to the grid, I don't want them messing with anything below the infrastructure level.
We can't demand everything from everyone at once. Let's let Linden fix the axis this world is on before it floats off into space long before we worry about events on it.
If there is public support for an event it will happen. If not, well - I don't see why they should subsidize it. Provided we are not talking about Antfarm Fest 2010 of course.
Posted by: Adric Antfarm | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 01:04 PM
I agree that this will be yet another wall between SL users and others.
Posted by: Commizar Jannick | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 01:25 PM
As someone who has been to Burning Man I always thought that the in world event was nothing like the real one. Anyone who has been to Burning Man cannot consider what is done in a virtual experience all that valid to the real one.
Posted by: Phaid Turbo | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 01:29 PM
Renaming Burning Life it isn't "killing the Second life Culture" neither closer, LL has more to care about since ever (thought) so, it still official Second life event, but now in passionate resindents, I, in my sincere opinion don't see anything against, it is just a great second life celebration and it will continue to be the "gold" of this virtual community. Just let them party
Posted by: spyvspyaeon | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 01:39 PM
Never been to a "Burning Life", probably never will, so I clicked the "Don't know/don't care" choice, meaning the latter.
@Brian O'Blivion: "But given LL's firing of all the employees with the deepest social/cultural understanding of their userbase, this recent decision doesn't surprise me at all."
Yes, but they also discarded the one employee who went out of his way to dismiss the need for cultural understanding by flatly denying that culture's existence... so maybe it's not all bad.
@Mr Crap: Agreed; -that's- a good idea.
Posted by: Lalo Telling | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 01:41 PM
I am not a fan of Linden Labs events or the way that Dusty Linden ran it like a guard at a prison. I think it is a great idea to let Dusty and her bunch of power trippers run Burning whatever you call it. I heard that they made such a big deal about how they wanted to do it this year that Linden Labs told them they would not allow it to go on as planned.
Posted by: Muse B. | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 01:46 PM
It was a total lag monster. I crashed so much last time they had it. I voted I don't care.
Posted by: Egret Snook | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 01:57 PM
Total snooze. One of the better choices for extinction.
Posted by: Gorgon Bagley | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 02:03 PM
Burning fart would suit better. Fascist regulations, yawn, yawn...
Posted by: soror nishi | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 03:33 PM
"BURN 2.0" sounds like a name from buzzword hype of five years ago, when "Web 2.0" was still the sexy new term that nobody really could define, unlike it's current status the old tired "been there done that" term that still nobody really can define.
It sounds like a name a committee would come up with.
Posted by: Rob Knop | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 04:52 PM
...I should say, all griping about the (ahem) lame name aside, the idea of turning the running of the event over to a community group is a good one. LL lost 30% of their staff. They don't need to be doing this. They need to be providing the platform that enables people to do cool things like this.
I do hope they still support it with server space and such.
Posted by: Rob Knop | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 04:54 PM
Hang on a sec... didn't everyone complain last year about how LL was screwing it up with their corporate censorship?
And now everyone's complaining because LL is handing over the reigns to the RL BM people? (Who also, I assume, chose the new name everyone is blaming LL for?)
You guys are a bunch of nutjob whiners.
Posted by: Max Ennui | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 05:16 PM
Bad idea in terms of branding. Everyone is used to hearing about Burning Man. Now, the new name sounds like a piece of software. Next year is Burn 3.7 Beta, is that correct?
I think we should just call it Amazing Fruit Loops.
Better than Burn 2.0.
Oh well. I think there are much more important events than Burning Man anyway. Like Torley Linden's new shoes:
http://thebotzone.net/2010/07/20/torley-tweaks-the-second-life-experience/
___________________
Little Lost Linden
http://thebotzone.net
Posted by: Little Lost Linden | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 05:27 PM
Extremely Bad Idea. If you like Burning Life, that is. A majority of the above 'good idea' comments don't seem to realize that LL is NOT GOING TO PROVIDE THE SIMS! This means that any sims must be paid for by somebody.
So in effect, the event just got massively smaller and therefore massively less inclusive. and the number of prims available per artist way decreased.
How can any of that be good? Answer, it isn't! It is Bad. Very Bad for this event.
Interesting how LL has turned what they apparently consider to be a PR nuisance into a little profit center of rental sims.
The Lab has given up on the 'we are all in this together' idea. It is now Corporate Product and Consumer. And the dividing line is forever drawn.
Posted by: Scarp Godenot | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 05:39 PM
Here's my main beef with this: I'm fine with Linden Lab turning over the celebration to other people to run and organize.
But- What then gives them the right to rename it? It's not theirs anymore, we can call it Burning Life if we like and ignore this stupid Burn 2.0 name.
Posted by: Ananda Sandgrain | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 06:21 PM
A corporation announces that it no longer has anything whatsoever to do with an event and then renames it. This makes sense. Since I have never had anything to do with the event, it makes even more sense for me to also rename it.
Without LL, the event needs a sponsor. "Burning Jock Itch," will get the big pharma companies interested, don't you think? All we need now is an official mascot of the not-sponsored by LL SL Burning Jock Itch Event. I suggest Furries in speedos.
Posted by: Furries in Speedos | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 06:23 PM
Neutral. While I agree with LL's move I don't see it as positive or negative. In my opinion, it's the correct choice on principle (not sponsoring a specific event in SL, doing so plays favoritism.) While at the same time, I don't think anything particularly good or beneficial will result from it.
Posted by: Adeon Writer | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 07:03 PM
I'm not sure yet. It does strike me that the idea of corporate sponsorship (and censorship) is at odds with the concept of Burning Man. I do hope the resident group handles it well, though. If they don't, it could end the event. I'll have to wait and see.
Posted by: Doreen Garrigus | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 07:11 PM
Burning Life 2009... My favorite SL event so far. It was the first Burning Life attended by me.
My computer crashed during the land grab. I was so pissed off that I swore I'd boycott the event. I'm glad that I changed my mind.
Being landless at Burning Life was the best thing that could have happened to me. I relaxed and let my av wander around.
Aimless and oblivious is a good state of mind. No biting nails over petty office politics. There's too much of that in the real world.
Posted by: Armagost | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 07:30 PM
The survey wouldn't work in Firefox on my Mac. Of course, since my answer is "I don't care", that about sums up my opinion of the survey as well.
Relay for Life seems to have done okay all on its own, so I tend to think that if there are people who care about Burning whatever they will be able to make a go of it. Best wishes to them.
Posted by: Otenth Paderborn | Thursday, July 22, 2010 at 08:03 PM
If it means LL can have plausible deniability and the events will be on mature regions and that "nipplegate" is over then it is probably a good thing.
Posted by: Ann Otoole InSL | Friday, July 23, 2010 at 12:40 AM
Doesn't anyone else find these poll results somewhat ironic?
Ironic because a majority seem to be saying they want LL to have control over the event and yet I normally see people saying LL should stop trying to control residents so much!
Two things regarding the rename:
1. It's funny how a simple '2.0' in the name can cause so much drama (I imagined it would when I read the announcement and had a little smile to myself!)
2. I don't know for sure, but I would hazard a guess that as 'organization and ownership of the event' has been handed over to 'the official Burning Man team' (Philip's words) they had a say in it's rename. Who knows - it may have even been entirely their idea. Of course, that makes it not as much fun as being able to blame LL for deliberately renaming it along the lines of Viwer 2.0! ;-)
Posted by: Suella Ember | Friday, July 23, 2010 at 01:28 AM
If the Users of our Grid wish this Emulation of Burning Man to be, then let them, and them alone, organise, erect and operate the event.
The Lab, to be frank, is nothing more or less than a 3D Web Hosting Service, and the sooner it recognises and accepts that Fact, the sooner it will gain the all-important Market Share it and its investors crave.
If Users wish a Burning Man Emulation, or a Social Network in the Third Demention, or any other Service other than the Presentation of Prims on a Grid, let them and them alone manufacture and add the value they crave.
Yours in Userly Drunkenness,
M. Pontecorvo esq.
Posted by: Martien Pontecorvo | Friday, July 23, 2010 at 01:59 AM
I've always considered it a newbie event and, in my 2 years on SL, have never met anyone who has even been to the event -- most haven't even heard of it, or don't recall having heard of it.
Posted by: Ajax Manatiso | Friday, July 23, 2010 at 06:16 AM
I'm indifferent on it, only went to one Burning Life. But, take it from a corporate event to a more resident inspired event.
Posted by: Fuzzball Ortega | Friday, July 23, 2010 at 07:56 AM
Good idea. LL is not going to have the time or the staff to handle it well. I also think they are in lose-lose position when it comes to running the event.
It is the event I most look forward to. My friends in the Myst community enjoy it and come up with some really nice entries.
We may not like how the new Burn 2.0 is run... or we might. It could be a good or bad change. I suppose if we want it to be a good job, we need to participate in the management of the event.
Posted by: Nalates Urriah | Friday, July 23, 2010 at 08:40 AM
Good. The Lab needs to do the things only the Lab can do, and let residents do the rest. This is not something only Lindens can make happen.
Posted by: Jack Abraham | Friday, July 23, 2010 at 02:00 PM
Mixed. I'm fine with the Lindens not being involved in it, and wish they would similarly cede control over SL?B. On the other hand, the name change suggests that they're still trying to defend their trademarks through eradicating anything that seems to be potentially infringing, rather than judiciously providing permissions when appropriate. I don't see how Linden Lab would have been hurt in any way by letting them keep the "Burning Life" name.
Posted by: Samantha Poindexter | Saturday, July 24, 2010 at 04:54 PM
Art has the nasty habit to question taboo sometimes. Personally I like that aspect of art a lot. It makes people think, and thought sometimes seems to be a rare commodity.
As the maturity rating of SL7B got Rose Burchowski's instalation out of SL7B, one of the best things there was removed.
Wether or not you agree with that removal, it does not show a lot of promise to allow for an open door to creativity wherever it may lead.
Reading some of the previous comments make me think it is a really good decision to stop the sponsorship.
It does indeed make me wonder how you can think up a name for something you do no longer sponsor. But then again, I cannot really think burn 2.0 was meant to be a name, just an incentive to open a new chapter.
Call it Bill, George, anything but Burn/Fire/Ash.
Posted by: Veleda Lorakeet | Monday, July 26, 2010 at 04:37 AM
If they no longer run it as an SL project, then they no longer can dictate what you may or may not put out on it. I'm not saying that Burning Man should recreate Sodom or Gamorrah, but saying (as in years past) that everything has to be G-rated or nicer has caused many of us to not give a dang about it anymore. I'll build my cool stuff on my parcel -- LL can try to get good PR for its Hello Kitty ideology without me. Now that they are no longer in charge of it, perhaps some clever and neat stuff (that yes, might shock those of delicate nature) can be created once more.
Posted by: shockwave yareach | Monday, July 26, 2010 at 01:58 PM
www.burn2.org is up and humming. Free Plot lottery is closing fast so better hurry! Plot donation reservations links and volunteer opportunities are there. Make this YOUR BURN!
Posted by: Emcee Widget | Monday, August 23, 2010 at 07:20 AM