Leading Second Life Advocate Calls Second Life Too Time-Consuming to Use Much -- I Think He's Half Right

Technology journalist Mitch Wagner is a longtime Second Life advocate who once even hosted a talk show in SL, bringing luminaries the likes of Felicia Day and Jonathan Lethem into SL, who he often interviewed in the guise of a steampunk robot. Lately, however, he doesn't go into Second Life much anymore, and explains why here. Excerpt:

I love Twitter and Facebook in part because they’re very convenient... Second Life, on the other hand, takes time. I feel like once I log in I need to be on for at least a half-hour at a time. At minimum. Because it’s happening in real time, and everybody else is there at the same time I am. If I just log in and log out abruptly it’s like going to a party and turning on my heel and leaving without saying good-bye. It’s rude.

Interestingly, his post also provoked rude reactions from many of his readers, such as one informing him: "I am tempted to conclude that the shallow acquaintances and low-bandwidth experiences of the Web’s social networking are your territory." Others chide him for not being committed enough to the SL experience. Which are strange things to say about someone who hosted a long-running talk show in Second Life, and has been positively covering SL as a journalist for some 5 or so years. But there you go; the excommunication vibe is odd but unsurprising.

In any case, I think he's essentially right:

Most of the major negatives associated with Second Life are time-related. Downloading and installing takes time, learning to use the software takes time, finding good content and community takes time, and so on. Even the optimal Second Life experience, once all those time hurdles have been crossed, also takes time: When I was a Linden, staffers used to joke that any event in Second Life will take three times longer than you originally budgeted. (Only they weren't really joking.) Besides hardcore gaming, it's difficult to think of other non-passive online leisure activities that a large group of adults will devote their undivided attention to for large swathes of time. (Say over a half hour or more.)

This observation and others leaves Mitch downbeat on the future of virtual worlds:

I think Second Life, and virtual worlds, may have gone as far as they can go, that maybe the whole avatar-in-an-imaginary landscape metaphor is the wrong metaphor to best achieve the benefits that Second Life provides...

Here I disagree: There are many virtual worlds and virtual world-like games that are quite popular, and still gaining users. Overwhelmingly, however, most of the largest ones are those which allow time-shifting: 2.5D web-based worlds that you can participate in short bursts, while multitasking in other web windows. When Second Life and other 3D worlds are agile enough to provide that kind of experience, while also offering immersive entertainment that actually lasts 30-60 minutes from start to finish, then I think we'll start to see a return to growth and larger relevance. I also think anything which gets us to that point faster (think cloud and web deployment, Facebook Connect, etc.) is worth pursuing. While most everything else is, least far as growth is concerned, a waste of time.

Comments

[HeadBurro Antfarm]

I agree entirely with Mitch - the single biggest reason I don't log in (almost) at all these days is the time everything takes - I just don't have 2 hours every night to sink in anymore, my RL has grown more and more busy since I joined 4 years ago and now I just can't seem to work up the enthusiasm I once had (although I love SL just as much, which is weird). It's not the usual and repeating feeling of 'burn out' many folks share - it's deeper, like a sense of loss and disappointment stops me wanting to visit.

I don't want to go to dances or simple, quick social events - they don't interest me. I want to play, loose myself in the game, but too much stands between me and that lose of self - from lag and techie problems, to the simple fact the places I've chosen to play in are 95% American and therefore most of the folks are not in-world when I am.

And so I find myself playing Left 4 Dead 2 instead of logging in to SL - it works pretty much every time without lag or crash and I can always find folks to hook up and play with.

The odd thing is I don't want a shooty FPS experience from SL, I want the thing it *should* be able to provide but somehow struggles to - a strong sense of community and immersive, intelligent, open-ended role-play fun.

That's why I don't log in to SL these days, ymmv of course.

[Adeon Writer]

Nevermind the fact that a single Left4Dead campaign will typically last an hour to an hour and a half. And it's absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to play a full game of it with the same people from start to finish. At least one, usually more, of your team mates will bail on you, and get replaced with other people. The same goes for the other team. >_>

I don't know. Being in real-time is the whole point. It's not for everyone, but when virtual worlds stop being real-time, they lose everything that makes them virtual worlds in the first place.

[Laetizia Coronet]

Logging on to SL isn't something you don't do for five minutes unles you quickly want to check something. You log on, check and change your looks (well, unless you always wear a white suit of course), and for example go build something - which is a time-consuming and lonely process in itself.
And indeed, most of what happens is for an American timeframe, like Headburro says. Or for Europeans with insomnia, like I was when I was still living on my own. I loved the Thinkers discussions for example but nowadays I am asleep when they are on - and there is no alternative out there.
Virtual worlds are for the few, not for the masses. That's ok, unless your name is Linden Lab and you want to pull in the Farmville crowd.

[Ciaran Laval]

Facebook connect is not the answer here and never will be, it won't be the answer to people not playing World of Warcraft due to time constraints either, this isn't just a Second Life issue, there are only so many hours in the day and if you engage with Second Life or World of Warcraft then you'll have to concede time elsehwere, such as reading novels, watching television, yadda yadda yadda.

There is no one size fits all solution here, improvements can be made on out of world communication and tools to carry out tasks such as adverts and land settings, but time commitment will forever remain a problem, there is however a market for those who will commit time.

[Roslin Petion]

Wagner's argument makes sense when it comes to explaining why SL and other virtual world platforms will never be as popular as gaming or social networks. That said, the comparison should stop there.

The time you need to invest in SL to benefit from the medium is not a negative, it is what enables you to immerse yourself in the medium. There are no shortcuts to that. What LL needs to do is to take advantage of this. They need to highlight the immersiveness as a benefit and encourage more activity that takes advantage of it. I think it's a woeful shame that LL has never served as more of a patron to the creative types in SL. RP and art are two areas where we could drive more residents into SL at very little cost to LL. I think establishing some sort of Linden grant would be an inexpensive and effective way to do this.

[Ignatius Onomatopoeia]

As I noted on Wagner's blog, VWs are great for user-created immersive simulations. That's about it for my own usage as an educator. I do attend meetings, but in future, my students will come in, use my OpenSim simulation for a class, and leave. They loved that last time we did it in SL, before LL priced us off their grid with tier increases.

In future, I won't be having then go "explore a world" in SL or elsewhere: there's too much fighting the entire "creepy treehouse" preconceptions about MMOs that upper-income parents force-feed the kids.

The kids are all right; they are just augmentationists.

To them, and increasingly to me, the vision of a 3D Web just does not make a lot of sense. I hardly need an avatar to read this blog or check the weather.

[Medhue]

Whatever! If you play it like a game, you will get bored, just like you do with every game. In SL, you are your only limitation. You choose what you do and when you do it. You have the opportunity to not only play games, but also be involved in the game. If what you want is to be entertained and not have to be involved at all, then SL is not for you. Go turn the TV on or play xbox. I, personally, do not own a TV.

The amount of time you spend in SL, is probably equivalent to how much you have invested in it. I don't just mean a monetary investment, but personal investments too. Do you lead a group? Do other SL people rely on you? Do you run a business? Do you have close friends in SL?

Just my thoughts.

[Lili]

He's like saying, "I hardly ever mow my lawn anymore because my riding mower is soooo slow. I like to just jump in my car and go to the mall."

Seriously, if people expect Second Life to be "facebook", they are going to be unhappy.
Second Life is not email.
Second Life is not facebook.
Second Life is not a washing machine.
Second Life is not an mp3 player.
Second Life is not about social networking, but it is available to a limited extent.

I'm so sick of hearing people cry about how un-facebook-like Second Life is. It's like comparing a sheet of paper and a moose. If you want to immerse yourself in social networking, go some place that has that as it's center and leave those of us who use Second Life alone in our non-social network. Do all you social networker get on support forums from where you bought your toaster and complain about the lack of facebook-like social networking you experience when you make toast?

[Tinsel Silvera]

I am with Medhue on this one. Well said! As for Mitch, I had never heard of him before Second Life, seldom heard of him in the 4+ years I have been in Second Life, have not heard of him outside of Second Life. Definitely not an opinion I hold in any regard or lend any credence to. I only pay attention to the ones who are actively involved with Second Life.

[Hamlet Au]

Tinsel, like I noted, Mitch ran a Second Life talk show for quite awhile. If that doesn't qualify as "actively involved", what to you does?

[Tinsel Silvera]

I am only taking him at his own words that he seldom comes inworld anymore. You say he "ran" a show, as in past tense? If so, then he is no longer actively involved in SL. You are actively involved in SL. Dusan is actively involved in SL. I lend credence to your opinions, even if I do not always agree with them. There is a difference Hamlet.

[Aliasi Stonebender]

I find Mitch's assertion difficult to believe in a world where the most popular Massively Multiplayer game requires people to commit to several hours at a time on the activity that most consumes the upper end of play. (That is, raiding in World of Warcraft.)

At the same time, I can sympathize with the idea that Second Life, unlike World of Warcraft, doesn't really even have an option to just pop in for a few minutes to finish a quest or something... because it's not a game, it's a way to interact with people.

[Hamlet Au]

Tinsel, "seldom" isn't "never". 54% of returning SL users log in monthly less than 3 hours:

http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2009/08/sl-has-133k-hardcore-users.html

Are they not actively involved either? Also, isn't it worth trying to understand why very formerly passionate users wain in their activity levels? I genuinely don't understand the reaction, it sorta seems like saying, "You're not one of us."

[Tinsel Silvera]

I will not get into the semantics of actively, seldom and never. Their definitions stand on their own. However, I will concede that we do need to try and understand why people's activity levels wain. As for the statistics, there are so many versions (Linden Lab, Tateru, Tyche) it is hard to make them reconcile so I tend to take them all with a grain of salt.

[Caliburn Susanto]

I had never heard of Tinsel Silvera before I discovered Second Life, and have never heard of Tinsel Silvera in the 4-1/2 years I have been in Second Life, and in fact, I never heard of him before I read this blog entry, so my only logical conclusion is he has nothing worthwhile to contribute and his opinion is definitely not one I hold in any regard or lend any credence to.

Mitch, on the other hand, is a person of note, and the way I see it when he says SL is too time consuming, what he means is that he has better things to do than sit in front of the computer for endless hours doing silly things like making cartoon furniture, or waiting around for real time conversations or events, when asynchronous communication is much more time efficient to a busy and productive person like himself.

[Rawst Berry]

Agree with Lili 100%.
@HeadBurro: You say that 2 hours is to much time to sink into SL, but in the same post you say you want immersion, community, roleplay, etc... These things will and should eat up a lot more than 2 hours of your time. I can understand that lag and a lack of people make this difficult, but that means the problem is lag and a lack of people, not that it takes too much time.

If SL isn't quick enough for someone, then perhaps they shouldn't log in anymore. I have no idea how they expect this to be remedied. Luckily, Facebook and millions of forums exist for people who like fast communication. Go use them. Why do you want to change SL for those of us who do like extended periods of real-time socializing when you already have an alternative?

[Paisley Beebe]

I'd like to have seen this conversation back over on Mitch's blog I think, after all he started it. http://copperrobot.com/2011/02/why-i-hardly-ever-go-on-second-life-anymore/

[Lili]

It seems there is no answer for mitch. He says facebook does not deliver his desire to meet people from around the world. Of course it's obvious you build and create in facebook and it's ilk either.

Actually it just seems he was looking for a place to whine. As for this,
"But I think Second Life, and virtual worlds, may have gone as far as they can go, that maybe the whole avatar-in-an-imaginary landscape metaphor is the wrong metaphor to best achieve the benefits that Second Life provides, just as Usenet was the wrong metaphor for mass adoption of online discussions, and blogs turned out to be the right one." it's pretty apparent he has a different need for a virtual world than the people who love idea of a place to build and experiment. I get the impression he is one of those people who call the places he visits in Second Life "chat-rooms". Maybe that's the problem with all the facebook enamored users, they just want to chat, but apparently wish to see real people. So it's easy then, there's a place like that and it's been here a long long time. It's called the real world, and it sounds like he's discovered that, but he couldn't pass up the chance to kick at Second Life.

The more I think about it, maybe even the people who made Second Life in the first place, had a different desire than to build a fantasy world. They really thought this was going to be the future of chat-rooms. So I guess the stupid ones, like me, who like Second Life as it is are going to be the losers when these people give up on their 3-D facebook dreams and pull the plug in disgust. Taking the money of people who are willing to pay to have a place like this doesn't matter. I don't understand why all the people who want this "other" world don't just make one. They can leave Second Life alone and charge the people who want to stay, which is as it always should have been.

As for commenting on mitch's blog, that'll never happen. Not me.

[Rin Tae]

Immersion is the big point of virtual worlds. Otherwise the whole point of the 3D world would be wasted and all the time and effort put into creating the content meaningless. After all one need some time to explore them.
And the social interaction require that a certain kind of etiquette is observed. One can not go AFK without a word or log in the middle of a conversation without some explanation. One should also keep in mind that if they go to a event that is sheduled for 1 hour they wont have anything from it if they jsut jump in for 10 minutes, say something and then go to later look up what the responses have been like they could do on a forum. And building and creating need lots of time too as are games. And the most immersive game in SL is Role Playing in various places. And a scene can easily need anything from 3 to 10 hours to be completet. Sometimes it is days since it is rare that all participants can be online for such duration of time.
And this not only tells how big the appeal of the immersion into a virtual world is, but also how important it is to use the possibilites of a virtual world to it's fullest.

It is defintevly not for the quick look at the profile to see if someone has send you a messege or if a freind has uploaded a new picture.

A virtual world is best when used for interaction with others and this ... and this is good so ... needs time.

[Ciaran Laval]

@Caliburn Susanto I pretty much agree with you, Mitch's current work and social lifestyle mean he has less time for Second Life, although I would like to see asynchronous communication within Second Life improved myself :)

[Nickola Martynov]

I'm not sure what the problem is. I frequently log into SL for just a minute or two. I check messages, do a walkabout on my land, maybe even im someone.

When I have more time, I come back and go for a sail, build something or party.

It seems to me that Mitch has lost his connection with SL because other things in his life became more important. There's nothing wrong with that, just like there is nothing wrong with those of us who are still lured by this environment.

[Pathfinder]

Lightweight social media platforms (e.g., Facebook)are like magazines.

Virtual worlds are like participatory theater.

Two completely different phenomena. People would save a lot of time debating things if they simply remembered that fact.

I also thing augmented reality will be what ultimately collapses the metaphor of virtual worlds and allows broad adoption.

I blogged about this a week ago. http://bit.ly/e5aAiE

[Hamlet Au]

But is that the ideal metaphor, Path? Magazines are read by hundreds of millions of people every day. Participatory theater attracts, maybe, less than a hundred thousand, mainly confined to college and high school acting classes. The comparison seems to suggest why Second Life is so small -- there's very little demand for participatory theater.

[DMC Jurassic]

Here's an open source solution/answer to what may be the future of SL mainstream target marketing.

Fast, Easy* and Online** 1) Interactive Gaming, 2) Information Serving and 3) Real-Time Events/Meetings (including Social Entertainment and Business). M (former CEO) got the order around the wrong way.

Augmented Reality will be the logical next step towards interweaving SL or OpenSIM Virtual Reality with the Reality of people's daily lives. But it ought to be practical as a service that biases the First Life (i.e. this is what drives the Facebook social phenomena through the mainstream).

Second Life is an amazing forwards projecting think space, but sooner or later, the First Life must come first...

After five years of SL study, that's our conclusion and the way we're looking at this whole thing now.

David Michael Chen
DMC Jurassic
Founder
SCiENCEFiCTION.info
twitter.com/iSCiENCEFiCTION

* Quote, Philip Rosedale, Founder, Second Life (2010), “Fast, Easy and Fun” Linden Lab SL direction Strategy.

** Online, meaning Internet accessible for the mainstream, not requiring a client but in a Browser. In future, the Client’s purpose is probably best served as a tool for content developers.

First published on New World Notes (http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn) 02-19-2011 © 2011 www.scifipc.com

[David Cartier]

Mitch is a good guy, and even though he is a respected technology writer, I myself met him in SL.
As someone who socialised, theorised and moralised with Mitch back two, three years ago, I can't think of many more enthusiastic cheerleaders. He was pretty immersed. I had cut way back on my time in Second Life for a lot of reasons, but having found a great community and figuring out how best to optimise my computer ports and settings, dumping a lot of useless inventory and building more efficiently I find I have a really stable, non-lagged SL experience. And all of that has kinda dragged me back in by the ear to the point that I'm spending as much time logged as I did during beta.

[Lili]

"But is that the ideal metaphor, Path? Magazines are read by hundreds of millions of people every day. Participatory theater attracts, maybe, less than a hundred thousand, mainly confined to college and high school acting classes. The comparison seems to suggest why Second Life is so small -- there's very little demand for participatory theater.
Posted by: Hamlet Au"

So why does more make it better? In the days before the unlimited-anonymous-not responsible for anything users flooded into Second Life, I saw a lot more people and had many times more friends. There are less people in Second Life than a couple years ago, but a lot of the good ones have left in disgust of the flooding, lawless hordes.

It's funny, in real life my back yard is maybe the most popular spot in my neighborhood, during the summer. We have some amazing discussions and a great time. But still, we all know each other and I couldn't really accommodate more people if I even wanted to. Sometime I go to the mall with friends. We have fun, but we get pretty tired of it real soon. There are way too many people and way too much crass commercialism.

So why is it exactly, that those of us who love the neighborhood feel we have developed in some Second Life places to become the wild and crowded facebook style mall that seems to be the wet dream of some bloggers?

More, bigger, newer, trendier is not always the way to go. If Linden Lab would stop anonymous accounts and keep closer tabs on who is in Second Life, it could be a lovely little world again. At this point, I wouldn't even mind if they closed their marketplace and maybe even dropped Linden Money. It's the quest for dollars that ruin virtual worlds, same as it does real ones.

[Mitch Wagner]

I posted a follow-up here. A friend just described it as a "hey, stop throwing cabbages at me" post. However, I expect it will result in even MORE cabbages.

[Lili]

Ok Mitch. I never really thought you hate Second Life, that wasn't the problem. I even like how you say facebook didn't have the answers either.

I commented here because, on this blog, anything that can be used to show Second Life "just has to change and become more social networky (I know that's not a word)" Hamlet featured a comment of mine last year that explains the problem I have with people wanting to make Second Life something different. I have a lot of disabled friends and to them, Second Life is their social life. But, it's all in a virtual way. They come to Second Life and taste normality for a bit. Social networks can't offer that.

Now the problem I have with all the "change Second Lifers" is that it takes the focus off the virtual world we have there. It takes very little diversion for Linden Lab to forget that virtual world and think people really want the connected to real life stuff more. As evidence to that, look at the viewer 2 fiasco and all the effort to connect Second Life accounts to the real world internet. And now we're stuck with viewer 2, love it or not, because outside money paid for it and if they don't force us to use it too many questions will be asked.

That's enough, I could go on about this all day.
My barbs weren't all at you though, Mitch. I'm a pretty regular buster of Hamlet's chops too, and I respect him for allowing my different opinions here. I do cheer for things I like too though. And I would never throw a cabbage at anyone, they're too big :)

[Hamlet Au]

Lili, why do you think having social network integration *as an option* would disadvantage disabled people -- as opposed to making it easier for many more of them to find and get into SL in the first place?

[Lili]

It wouldn't disadvantage anyone, but, many people are in Second Life to get away from reality and or the real world. Many people with disabilities want to be in Second Life, without the tags that are applied to them in the real world. So these things are not very important to them. Let Linden Lab fix the problems Second Life has had for years, then they can worry about social networks.

One example of Linden Lab being distracted by social media, is viewer 2. Web profiles that when you opt-out of having them web viewable, do not function correctly inworld. The old profiles in Second Life were wonderful, even if they did need improvements. The new profiles are facebook.

Inworld search that needed improvement maybe, but it did work. Now, it's just google. The results returned are mostly paid ads. Also, useability has been destroyed.

I know, you just don't see these things as problems. But some people see Second Life as competing with other websites to communicate with people. At the same time though, most of the people I know see Second Life as an alternate reality, and communicating with the real world is the last thing on their list. There are far better places for that than Second Life, if that's what you need. Of these immersed people, a number of them use sites like flickr, blogs and forums, but it's all as their avatars, not as their real identity.

As such, we not only don't see the need for facebook style integration, it is unwelcome.

[Lili]

I left out an important thing.
What got all the people into Second Life in 2007? Was it facebook? No, it was advertising. You have to use facebook, to find anything useful on facebook. I know very few people who use it, or still do use it.

Which is a funny comparison to Mitch, most of the people I talk to who have used facebook, stopped because it is such a time-sink. It is too overpowering. There is a constant deluge of information--most of it trivial and unimportant--that you get pulled into responding too. Eventually, most people see how much of their time is being taken up by this and stop. It is true that you can get on facebook for a minute and jump back out, but if you are jumping right back in in five minutes later, what is the difference. Ok, maybe it is different for people who are at a job or something, I don't know.

Also, it's not just disabled people that I was referring to. The view I stated is shared by most people I talk to in Second Life.

Make facebook accessible from Second Life? I don't really see the point, when facebook is far more accessible on the facebook site. Of course, I don't see the point in there being facebook and twitter buttons everywhere you go. Are people really that narcissistic, or do companies just think we are? Or, is it just a question of all the places who use these buttons, wanting to get a little free advertising and appear hip while riding the current fads? I think maybe it's the last one there.

When you consider the insidious ways facebook and it's ilk, google included, mine you for data, why do you even want to use them? Look at the current war raging in Second Life over redzone and other spyware being used to track and identify avatars.

I keep hearing people say, "Privacy is dead, get over it". But is it dead, or do we think we have no choice in it? You do have a choice! You don't even have to use google. Yes it's true, you can stop using google and the world will not end. You can block a few IPs and not be tracked. It's all a question of what you want. The internet can empower you or it can imprison you, but you can not use the internet without being aware of the dangers. Go in blindly and you will get hurt.
In my own personal opinion, facebook and google are far more dangerous than they are useful. They are cataloging you, people. You are reduced to a cookie and an IP address with as much real information about you as they can possibly steal. And for what purpose? To make them rich. You are sold like slaves every single day.

[Hamlet Au]

"It wouldn't disadvantage anyone, but, many people are in Second Life to get away from reality and or the real world."

But Lili, can you specifically explain to me how having Facebook integration as an option would take that away? Those who want that separation can just not use the Facebook option. There's been a "First Life" panel in user profiles from the very beginning of Second Life; many use it, many don't, and that's totally fine. That option hasn't hurt immersionists' communities, so why would a Facebook option?

"What got all the people into Second Life in 2007? Was it facebook? No, it was advertising. You have to use facebook, to find anything useful on facebook."

Lili, this isn't accurate for at least two reasons: In 2007, what got people into Second Life was incessant media coverage. Linden Lab barely spent any money on advertising then. And because of Facebook's size and networking effect, it has indeed become the de facto discovery channel for Internet content. Like I mentioned, Facebook page views account for 25% of all Internet traffic, more than Google. It's very much the case that people now depend on Facebook to find online content in general.

[Lili]

Facebook is only a distraction for Linden Lab. Instead of spending time and money fixing the world, they are trying to placate the facebook herd. Facebook is a distraction in and of itself. Just look at the new viewer 2 profiles, they have the completion percentage bar, like facebook.

If someone loves facebook, use it. If someone wants to post about Second Life on facebook, more power to them. But posting to facebook from Second Life is something most people aren't interesting in. It's a waste of time for Linden Lab to even try it. People who are interested in facebook can post there, even when they are in Second Life. You don't have to do it from the viewer.

It may be all a moot issue for many of us soon anyway. If Linden Lab does not outlaw the use of redzone and other privacy rapers soon, most of the people I know will be on another grid. Even if they do that, we still may leave when they stop the inworld viewer 1 search.

Which is another thing. Finding places to go on a blog, facebook or any external site accounts for maybe 1% of my excursions in Second Life. Communications in inworld groups, the event viewer, friends and inworld search is what I use to find places to go. Almost never does a blog or site show me a place I even want to go to. Most of that information is about faux-art, faux-fashion or faux-something uninteresting. So maybe something like facebook for inworld or something would be useful for some, I don't know. But I do know, for me, external sites have no place for me when I am inworld. Only when I'm NOT in Second Life, do I even see these sites. I would definitely not see them, even if there was that option, from within Second Life.

But that's enough, I've spent so much time here on this, I feel like Mitch and I'm tired :)

[fr]

When I read all these comments about facebook integration in sl,what I find a bit anoying(mostly becouse it's such a non-issue that isn't worth argueing over)is that people automaticaly think it's going to be mandatory for everyone.It's as if you people come here and don't eve bother reading what Hamlet is clearly typing out for you.I'd like you to look at his comments above very carefuly.There is a word in these comments (and in the articles hes written on this topic)that Hamlet has used quite often.And that word is OPTIONAL.I'm pretty sure we're all adults with a reasonably good grasp of the english language,and we all understand what it means.The feature to link your profiles with facebook would be OPTIONAL.What that means is that no one will ban you or poke you with a stick if you chose not to use it.But just becouse you don't need it,doesnt mean that people who do,shouldn't have an option to do it if they want to.And I'm not saying all of this becouse I'm one of the pople who want to connect theyr sl to facebook.I don't use facebook and I couldn't care less about it.But I realize that I won't die,if one day there will be a button in my profile that allows me to connect it with facebook if I choose to do so.But since I won't,you know what I'll do?I'll gnore it!Simple!And I'm pretty sure you guys can easily do the same ;).There are many people who don't want this feature,but there are allso many who would benefit from it.What's so bad about these people having that option?

[brinda allen]

OK Mr. Au, Have a great time with "social media", go spend your time on Facebook and any other shallow log in/log out platform that pleases you.
But I'm curious, for one that's made at least a partial living from Secondlife {as a Linden for one}, and spending so much of your time writing this blog about Secondlife... why? Why even bother with Secondlife at any level... unless writing about Secondlife pays your wages.
Some months ago you abandoned us for Blue Mars or at least that was a perception.
While I often have appreciated your reporting. Your constant calling for the end of Secondlife as we know it and shilling for Facebook isn't what I expected.
For me you have lost credibility. But of course I'm sure what I think is of no consequence to you.

What do these people have in common?
@Medhue @Lili @Roslin Petion @Ciaran Laval @Laetizia Coronet @Tinsel Silvera @Adeon Writer @Ignatius Onomatopoeia @Aliasi Stonebender
@Rawst Berry @Paisley Beebe @Rin Tae @Nickola Martynov @David Cartier
Times up!

They have time to log in to a virtual world and immerse.
Some like Nikola seem to find similar things as I do. I can look at IMs to Email, see there's a minor question or issue from a resident, log in fix issue and log out. Other times I may spend what is and inordinate amount of time in-world... loving every minute of it.
After nearly four years in Secondlife I'm every bit as infatuated with the almost infinite possibilities.
For me the magic has never ended...

[Imnotgoing Sideways]

Time related... (=_=)

So, essentially we've gone from decrying instant gratification to embracing it? Well, I guess I am seeing that. Getting it done right now seems to be winning over getting it done right. (=_=)

Instant gratification has its IV feed. Just look at Steam. All those bloody games, right at player's fingertips, where efficient and relatively low polygon models crash-boom-bang for people on their way to bragging rights that they'll Twitter about. (=_=)

Oh, hang on... Why Twitter about it when the game can Tweet for you and spam your friends with every "trophy" you get. DX

@futzwad just got the Carpal Tunnel trophy for most accurate FPS mouse aiming. (=_=)

I mean, it saved time, didn't it? Crying bloody shame if anyone does anything creative... Let along talk for themselves. (=_=)

Immersion in SL is an art of pleasure. It's wooing the hottest lover you could find for night after night of... heh. =^-^=

But, looks like y'all are look'n for a Hustler mag to jerk off to. Find a page, fap-fap-fap, HNG! Okay, time to move on and pace in front of the microwave because you don't have all minute. (=_=)

No... Not for me. I like to be part of my entertainment. SL delivers that. I can connect with people. I can express myself in a way that's unavailable to me anywhere else, so far. (^_^)

Instant gratification has it place. Short bursts of whatever can be found everywhere. If that's what you seek and you're trying to find it in SL... You're barking up the most wrong tree ever. (=_=)

Don't think I'm afraid of change. I refused to join SL until Windlight. I embraced V2 with open arms. Zindra? I have land there. TOS "changes"... Funny, I figured them's was always the rule... Just un-written. (=_=)

Really, it's a form of self punishment to so deeply embrace something that gives you exactly what you don't want. (=_=)

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna run off and take on a habit of binge coffee drinking to help myself relax. (See how insane that sounds?) (^_^)y

[Hamlet Au]

"Your constant calling for the end of Secondlife as we know it and shilling for Facebook isn't what I expected."

Brinda, the reason I'm advocating Facebook as an integration option is ONLY because I think it's one of the best means to grow Second Life's userbase. And without growth -- let me spell it out plainly -- Second Life is going to be in grave trouble. I explain more in this post:

http://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2011/02/linden-lab-like-aol.html

I make some of my living writing about Second Life, yes, but believe me, I could make a much better living just writing entirely about something else. I'd rather write about SL and other user-generated 3D worlds full-time. I know how powerful a medium it can be to so many people. I wrote a whole book about that. But the dream of Second Life is in serious trouble, and I think it's going to require some brave strategic moves for it to thrive in the future.

[brinda allen]

Mr. Au...I bought and read your book, and that was after I had been in Secondlife for awhile.
When I read that, I saw someone immersed in this world I've come to love. You were here near the beginning.
You as much as anyone should understand that Secondlife is not easy... it will never be easy, at least the Secondlife I know and love.

I don't remember now how I found Secondlife, it wasn't the CSI episode and yes likely it was and advertisement somewhere.
Here's the thing... my guess is that you as well as most everyone that comes to Secondlife and decides to remain has had my experience with proselytising about this world... the very few we even talk into attempting Secondlife don't find what they are looking for. People want simple. People want quick. People want easy. People want Facebook.
With Facebooks track record of security... no way.

@Lili said it well..."Facebook is only a distraction for Linden Lab."

OK, let's say we get people to sign up... we've got sign ups now... what is it? less than 15% stay past first hour?
If Linden Lab wants to improve concurrency? There is a way... it was a way that seemed to work before. SECONDLIFE is not easy, don't dumb it down... restart the Mentor program... restart the Help Islands.

At the risk of irritating more than I may have already, my take of a great number of the people we all know:
About forty years ago when I was in my late twenties I asked a very brilliant friend of mine if she thought I was and elitist. {this friend had a PhD in education as well as a masters in speech pathology} She patted me gently on the hand and said, "No dear, and you may not be exceptionally bright... this world's full of dumb S.O.B's".

I'm still not and elitist and not nearly as bright as those that created our world... but if so many of us in-world can see so many of the problems, problems that could be fixed without a major outlay of cash. Why can't those that run this world. In some cases we all know why... to fix some would require saying a mistake was made.

If we don't help the ones that do sign up... signing up more won't help.

[Imnotgoing Sideways]

When Facebook allows me to register "Imnotgoing Sideways"... ~Maybe~... (=_=)

[brinda allen]

@Immy...OMG! I have a suggestion that would get me in such deep trouble........best left for and in-world chat =^..^=