Second Life's New Web Community Platform Comes With a Leveling System!

Linden Lab launched its new web-based Community Platform on the web, which you can read about here, and it comes with an intriguing feature: Roles and Ranks, which are awarded based on positive user activity on the website (helpful comments, etc.), and give you rights to special features. For example, a "Member" can add YouTube links to their posts, while a "Helper" can edit knowledge base articles. Plus you get one of these sweet icons.

That's right: Community Ranks are effectively an RPG-style leveling system that's now part of the official Second Life experience. Or if you prefer the current Silicon Valley jargon, gamification. (Digression: Who the hell coined that wack ass locution?) A leveling or achievement system for Second Life is something I've been longing to see, so I'm pleased to see this baby step in that direction. The next inevitable steps, I assume, is to make these Ranks visible in user's in-world profiles, and then confer points for positive in-world behavior. And while there's some resistance to the idea of leveling systems among the hardcore Second Life user community, I suspect they'll rather quickly embrace it. (If it's implemented successfully, that is.) In any case, we're about to find out: Community Ranks are not an opt-out feature.

Comments

[Adeon Writer]

I'm great with the system as-is, but I don't want to see them in profiles. Rez day is bad enough.

[Adeon Writer]

I should clarify that I say this because I cringe at giving Residents easy material to feel superior to others. The site is it's own system separate from the world, so it's great for what it is.

[Ossian]

If you want those ranks visible inworld, I'd suggest that each rank come with a special hat. For each rank, the hat is bigger and more elaborate.

The hats could come with shoes that match... each rank's shoes being wider and longer.

[JoJa Dhara]

i miss super vip like me ;-)

funny this!!

[Ciaran Laval]

This won't end well.... trust me on this.

The Jira does it better, people are just given powers based on trust and commitment.

[Ezra]

There's "Answers" as well, so is Second Life becoming a Q&A platform like Quora?

There's "Blogs", is Second Life becoming a blogging platform like Tumblr?

There's always been "Forums", has that forumicated Second Life?

Point is, I think you're reaching very far by suggesting 'Roles and Ranks', a relative common feature on most modern websites with an active community, has any implications whatsoever on Second Life as experienced through the viewer.

Imagine you'd said: "Community Ranks are effectively an RPG-style leveling system that's now part of the official Hulu experience."

How much sense would that make just because Hulu has a "Hulu Scorecard" for each of its members? It wouldn't make much, because Hulu's actual content has jack to do with the community features surrounding it. Second Life is no different when it comes to such features.

[Casius Masala]

Does gamification = fun?

This is as important as letting me "Tweet" my inworld snapshot.

woot

[Adeon Writer]

I do support Ossian's hat idea, however. Hats make ANYTHING better.

[Ciaran Laval]

I'm in favour of the hats too! Hats are fun!

[Ciaran Laval]

I'm in favour of the hats too! Hats are fun!

[Thadicus Caligari]

What the hell? Gamifcation like this didn't do There.com any good and probably caused its demise in many ways.

This is the dumbest idea I have heard of so far.

[Dale Innis]

I'd be fascinated to know what's behind your various intuitions about what would be good for Second Life; since they're pretty much always diametrically opposed to mine. :) Bringing this stupid "gamification" inworld would be hideous. It would also be a failure: if it actually meant anything it would be gamed to death, and if it doesn't mean anything it will be ignored. What a horrible waste of effort...

[Oliver]

LL dosnt know what to do with the wiki, one min it's open the next you have to get enough respect from LL in order to help people. It's stupid and flawed. We are not the sims online.

[Cato Badger]

"Rank" in my dictionary means something foul and disgusting. The very concept transgresses LL's own Guidelines which makes marginalisation a disciplinary offence. Particularly when the algorithm for calculation of the rank is secret and the general concern that it is provided to sycophants will cause those that wear the badges to be alienated by the majority.

[Raul Rehnquist]

"Community Ranks are not an opt-out feature" Have you actually logged onto the new Sl Forum ? The opt out feature is the older residents aren't logging in anymore. SL is not a game to win points and neither is it's forum. You can drop a pin there and hear it echo across all the boards in that forum. Ossian has it right, they should also give you a big red nose to wear along with the hat and big floppy shoes.

[Hamlet Au]

"I'd be fascinated to know what's behind your various intuitions about what would be good for Second Life"

Gamification/leveling systems have been proven to WORK, in numerous contexts and systems, from MMOs to message boards to social networks and beyond. They fairly reliably increase user activity and retention. That's why Silicon Valley is so excited about the category and is putting so much money into gamification-based startups -- proven results. It works with Plurk, which has one of the largest Second Life communities online.

But even if it doesn't work in the case of Second Life, isn't it worth trying out? This is what I mean by hardcore users' resistance to change -- an unwillingness to even consider experimenting with new ways of growth and retention. With so much at stake, why not at least try?

[Thaiis Thei]

Giving residents shiny icons to get them to improve your woefully inadequate support documentation only works if you haven't already alienated your longest running members, those who have been able to work things out despite LL's shocking doco. I predict a fail on this one.

[Ciaran Laval]

Hamlet I'd rather LL rolled out a standard for inworld leveling systems than the forum system, for example I'd love a levelling system for people on my RP sim, but I'd love it to be consistent in terms of behaviour with a system for my non RP sim, LL would be better off encouraging that than their forum system.

[Ezra]

@Hamlet

What would gamification encourage you to do in Second Life that you don't currently do?

How would my being able to see where you rank on a leaderboard or what your 'level' is improve my experience?

On sites like the StackExchange ones, gamification makes sense as it encourages people to compete to give the best answers. My being able to see others ranks and points on such a site gives me some at-a-glance measure of how much I can trust them.

With Second Life there is no one single core activity to build any 'gamification' around. Even with Yelp and all its varieties of categories, the 1 single core activity remains submit reviews.

Even if Second Life was a service with a clearly identified core activity, that doesn't mean 'gamification' is worth trying. Take Twitter for example, would 'gamification' work for it? Sure, if there were badges and points to be earned for up-voted tweets, people would probably tweet more thoughtfully and actively if those game-related motivations appealed to them. As is though, people are plenty motivated to tweet for whatever reason they have; economic, meeting new people, or directing traffic to their blog.

I don't believe gamification is worth trying for Second Life, and I don't have a problem with gamification. There's just nothing points, levels or badges would motivate me to do that I don't already do.

[Melissa Yeuxdoux]

Gamification? Is that making everyone wear short skirts?

Stick with Latin roots: ludification.

[Hamlet Au]

I like that, Melissa!

"What would gamification encourage you to do in Second Life that you don't currently do?"

Gamification is also essential for NEW USERS who don't do anything in Second Life -- the 95% who try SL but soon leave, but complaining that "there's no point" to Second Life. Leveling systems create a light, open-ended structure which encourages them to explore the world and learn more about what's there.

As for existing users, we're currently suffering a plateau in user hours, so leveling systems will gently and subtly encourage the established players to spend more time doing what they love doing. A similar thing happened with cross-game Xbox achievements -- users embraced them like crazy, at a level that totally took Microsoft by surprise.

[Ezra]

If new users see 'no point', then that's nothing gamification can help with. You said gamification works, and I agree, but in all cases I've seen of it working, it heightens existing activity and encourages the submission of more quality content; be it a review on Yelp or answers on a Q&A site.

Gamification probably hasn't ever solved a 95% churn issue. If a site like Hulu failed, it wouldn't be due to not enough gamification, it'd be due lacking content provided by the service.

For existing users I feel similar. Gamification rewards existing activity and encourages more of it. It doesn't fix problems, and if declining or stagnating user hours is a problem then the reasons need to be found and fixed.

I believe you give too much credit to gamification. It's no replacement for content, and its no problem solver. It's icing on the cake, it improves what's already there, it doesn't replace what's not.

[Tateru Nino]

It's definitely the thing I like least about the new system. A way of moulding behaviour essentially by a form of inverted peer-pressure.

[Tateru Nino]

I'll add that (as I've written before) achievements systems (and similar forms of gamification) are also the sorts of things I also like seeing least in games. And I'm a gamer, myself.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Well, speaking as a long-time and fairly prolific poster in the old forums (and even the pre-Jive ones), I agree with most of the criticisms of the new system articulated above. The ranking system is puerile, and reminds one a bit of the smiley face stamps and gold stars awarded in elementary school. It is also clearly intended to push a corporate agenda, although I suspect it's possible to overestimate that particular effect.

The one positive thing I'll say about it is that it has, ironically, levelled the playing field somewhat: there WAS, perhaps, a sense that prolific or well-known posters formed a kind of "elite," and that may well have discouraged new posters from participating. The new ranking system has reduced almost all of us to much the same level, and that, I think, is probably a good thing.

The problem, of course, is that this is a temporary situation. It remains to be seen whether the "new elite" that arises through this new system is a benevolent and welcoming one . . . or runs a closed shop on the behalf of LL.

[Pixel Dunst]

i am not that sl-old , but someone told me in the beginnings of SL there had been such a ranking system where one was able to 'like' and 'unlike' people which showed in their profiles ... and that this system caused a lot of trouble in the community ... so it was abandoned by LL ...
it's all just a little bit of history repeating

[Laetizia Coronet]

A dreadful idea. I have already seen people signing off with HR - Honored Resident - in front of their names. Seriously.

It is a fully automated fake pat on the back, to 'keep you with the program'; it means nothing whatsoever. I asked to be demoted and the reply was a promotion. Really now.

It will lead to drama and a false sense of entitlement. I want nothing of it. I don't do ranks. And I most certainly do not want to be confronted with such cheap low level management trickery in my spare time.

[Judi Newall]

They are rewarding people who spend more time on the web? Wouldn't that be at the expense of time spent inworld?

[soror nishi]

/me facepalms.

Is this competitive thing a male trait? Is killing more pigs than Jack a way to improve your self image?

Introduce this type of system and you introduce cheating and petty squabbles. It's the old psycho study of separating groups into Us and Them, it increases rivalry and infighting.

Not read Lord of the Flies recently?

[Crap Mariner]

The content that the Lab is duping their customers into providing for them for free has value, and I'm always amazed what meaningless and worthless trinkets are given in return for it.

So, how does this achievements system factor in people who posts a lot of helpful investigative journalism at their own site (Tateru) but rarely on the forums?

It doesn't. Narrow focus.

-ls/cm

[Hitomi Tiponi]

Just rewarding posting on the forums seems a negative way to award achievement - and is easily open to abuse. Hopefully it will not progress beyond the forums. Second Life does not equate to games with levels/objectives.

[Lalo Telling]

This:

Raul Rehnquist: The opt out feature is the older residents aren't logging in anymore.

And this:

Cato Badger: 'Rank' in my dictionary means something foul and disgusting.

(see also "gamey")

Pixel Dunst : ...in the beginnings of SL there had been such a ranking system [...] and that this system caused a lot of trouble in the community ... so it was abandoned by LL ...
it's all just a little bit of history repeating

There was; it did; it was; it is.

[Raul Rehnquist]

"But even if it doesn't work in the case of Second Life, isn't it worth trying out? This is what I mean by hardcore users' resistance to change -- an unwillingness to even consider experimenting with new ways of growth and retention. With so much at stake, why not at least try?"

The biggest problem with that is they didn't start everyone off on a level playing field from the beginning. If you want to implement a system like that you have to start everyone off at zero. They started some elite users off with an unfair advantage well ahead of the other participants. It's not fair or any fun to play any game where the deck has been so unfairly stacked in favor of a chosen few. Is that so hard to understand ? Do you get it now ?

[Crap Mariner]

I've decided to give up any and all resistance to the concepts of Achievements and Ranks and Some Customers Are More Equal Than Others and embrace these new Community Web Portal Forums Ranks.

So much so, that I'm going to start a new community, like tinies or furries or nekos.

We'll be the Tokens.

To get started, just pick up your base Community Forums Rank Icon Avatar from Marketplace:

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Community-Forums-Rank-Icon-Avatar/2012648

Or grab it for $0L from my Clocktree:

http://slurl.com/secondlife/Edloe/135/125/64

Then customize it for your unique Resident needs.

Once you're finished, proudly show off your uniqueness to the Flickr gallery:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/slranks/

Do not pass Go.
Do not collect $200L.
Go directly to Fast Easy Fun!

-ls/cm

[Adeon Writer]

It's absolutely worth trying out, so long as it's not forced on anyone who would hate it. ("Arg, get that field out of my profile.")

SL does need achievements. I fully agree on that point. Something to get new users started doing stuff, so they don't ask "Well, what is there to do here?"

[soror nishi]

Hmmm....did your blog run out of paper or just remove my post?

[soror nishi]

hmm...sorry...it ran out of paper...oh well... mine does too.

[Danielle]

People have always used “measurement systems” for bragging rights, whether its the size of their home TV monitor, or their bank account. Some folks place a lot of importance on it, others don’t care much or at all. For SL, we *already* have an achievement system of sorts, if you want to think of it that way. It’s just optional to apply it, and the “levels” are fuzzy:

* Account status and longevity
* How big your inventory is
* How big your L$ balance is
* How many meters of land/sims you own
* How big the groups you own are
* How many people are on your friends list
…etc.

People who find it important to brag about their “status” already use those measures to feel important. People who don’t need to brag can still measure themselves against their personal goals. For example, one of my personal ones is how many wiki pages I contributed to.

The point is to find measures that matter to *you*. Like everything else in SL, it’s “roll your own system”, and not everyone will care about the same things. An externally imposed system which has nothing to do with what you care about personally will be irrelevant to you, or an annoyance.

[Laetizia Coronet]

Funny how they anticipated protest by not making it an opt-out function. It's not that they don't know what their customer base wants - it's that they know all too well what they want.

[Dale Innis]

I think, Hamlet, that the existing users resist new things that *seem like awful ideas*. Not because they are new, but because they are awful. There are lots of new things that I would heartily support, but adding some kind of rank hierarchy to the world isn't one of them.

It has worked in some places; it has not worked in others. Has it ever worked in a place anything like SL?

Really, if the strongest response to "this seems like a bad idea" is "something like it once worked somewhere else" and "why are you afraid of change??", it doesn't say much for the quality of the idea. :)

I can imagine a very mild form of it, where one's rank didn't actually give one any privileges or powers, that might be kind of fun. But worth the trouble that it would be to implement, and the furor it would cause? Not at all sure.

[Hamlet Au]

"Has it ever worked in a place anything like SL?"

Yes, achievement systems have worked in virtual worlds. Habbo, the largest virtual world that's nearly all user-generated content, has achievement systems. The creators credit the system to helping user growth and retention. World of Warcraft, of course, has a leveling system that is a gamer variant of achievement awards.

[Tateru Nino]

"World of Warcraft, of course, has a leveling system that is a gamer variant of achievement awards."

That feels like the wrong end of the stick. Levels in gaming – derived from the experience points and levelling systems in tabletop wargaming – are rewards for game-players because each level confers additional ability and privilege. This takes place on an irregular logarithmic scale, with the usual rule of thumb being that roughly five levels of increase represents an approximate doubling in ability.

Additionally with the increase in ability, comes privilege of access: Access to better in-game gear or equipment, access to previously inaccessible areas, and so forth.

There are games which have done away with explicit levelling; where, for example, it confers none of these gains of ability or privilege, the concept is relatively meaningless and does not function as an indicator or as a reward.

As for Habbo, it’s an environment targeted at children, and the handing out of virtual candy (if you’ll pardon the metaphor) in the form of achievements is an important part of engagement in online experiences, for the socially underdeveloped – both simplified punishment and simplified reward are an important part of psychological and sociological maturation. I actually think such things are deleterious in more mature and adult social environments, in that they short-circuit social protocols, and skills that adults only keep sharp by continuous usage.

[Ezra]

The achievements in Habbo center around buying and taking care of pets, being nice to people and playing minigames. The tangible reward besides bragging points is that Pixel currency used to buy furniture.

Linden Lab doesn't sell pets or furniture, shouldn't have an interest in curating any type of community except an obliging one to the community standards, doesn't and shouldn't have a faux currency alongside L$.

Of course those are just my opinions. I believe Second Life is an antithesis to such an implementation as Habbo's. The Lab doesn't sell things, its users do, and its users are the ones that reward desired behavior; either through freebie packed group notices, RP meter systems, L$ spewing disco balls or whatever else.

Second Life and Habbo have different needs and the reasons an achievement system might work for Habbo don't apply to Second Life.

[Adeon Writer]

"Make your first friend"
"Rez one of each prim shape."
"Teleport someone to you"
"Camera on something far away from your avatar"
"Create and texture a soccer ball and kick it."
"Play a gesture"
"Give something you made to someone."
"Create a landmark and use it from somewhere else."

These are just a few off the top of my head.

[Dale Innis]

I think I've figured out part of why I always have such a negative reaction to Hamlet's suggestions about SL: Hamlet is talking as a business consultant or an investor, focusing on what might raise retention or profitability; whereas I'm talking as a resident, focusing on what I would actually like the world to become.

Is that accurate, Hamlet? You seldom talk about what you actually like in SL (I assume you still log in?), as opposed to what might raise user count or retention. Do you think you'd like SL better if it were more Facebook-integrated and had point-and-click movement, and minigames? Or is that just what you think it will take to get an order of magnitude higher concurrency?

[Ezra]

@Dale

Bingo, and why I asked off the bat "What would gamification encourage you to do in Second Life that you don't currently do?"

That goes for anyone pushing it. Its a trapping to always to be in the clouds with Second Life divining from afar what would be best. That's why I've been glad the new CEO is somewhat actually using SL, or has made clear aspirations to build things like a working war miniature game. Chances are if he announces a sweeping change to scripting, it'd have come from a valid stakeholder position.

These opinions hold weight best when someone has an actual perspective from the inside; a land owner, a content creator, a new user that never made it pass day 1, a long time user that's falling out of love now. Any number of stakes where the value of such a pitch as gamification can be linked to a personal problem solved moreso than the trend of it "working" for other things that aren't SL.

[Dale Innis]

Yep, good point!

I did a little more thinking about this, and posted about it (and about Hamlet):

http://daleinnis.wordpress.com/2011/03/06/gamificationing/

Some speculation about what "gamification" in SL I might like. (Hint: it wouldn't look very much at all like the new forum Ranks...)

[Hamlet Au]

Adeon, those are good starting suggestions!

[Hamlet Au]

"Levels in gaming – derived from the experience points and levelling systems in tabletop wargaming – are rewards for game-players because each level confers additional ability and privilege."

And a lot of achievement systems work this way -- unlocking additional content on the system. Also, MMO leveling and achievements share a very important common element: Public recognition of positive and successful online engagement and bragging rights of same. This is why this interaction is so common on the WoW chat stream: "Ding" - "Gratz". (I.E. "I just leveled up!", "Congrats".)

"As for Habbo, it’s an environment targeted at children... such things are deleterious in more mature and adult social environments"

Tateru, this is incorrect. Habbo's demographics are primarily teen and young adult -- you know, the very demographic Linden Lab needs to target, to grow. According to Quantcast, 38% of Habbo's userbase is 13-17, 23% are 18-34, and interestingly, 25% of its userbase is 35 and up.

To the second point, almost all social games and virtual worlds on Facebook have an achievement system, and a much older demographic, with the median age skewing toward the 30s and 40s, and are much larger than Habbo. We're talking games and worlds played by hundreds of millions of people, most of them adults. I'm not seeing much evidence of deleteriousness there.

[Hamlet Au]

"Do you think you'd like SL better if it were more Facebook-integrated and had point-and-click movement, and minigames? Or is that just what you think it will take to get an order of magnitude higher concurrency?"

Dale, I've been writing about all the amazing content and community in Second Life for nearly 8 years. Indeed, I'm pretty much the last of the 2003 Lindens still involved in Second Life. And I would like to keep writing about it and working in it for the rest of my career. But without significant user growth, Second Life will die, or become a shell of its former self. Like I said in the post about AOL a couple weeks ago, the main (really, only) reason I talk about Facebook integration and other things like that, is because Second Life's revenue model and userbase is unsustainable. It's as basic as that.

[Ananda]

I look this over, and while it might be fun to discuss how an achievement system or "gamification" could influence Second Life, this is nothing of the sort. It has nothing to do with activities inside the grid, or for that matter with promoting those activities in any sort of social media.

I have to conclude it isn't about the purposes you're suggesting but is just a set of ranks for gating people away from interfering with the forums too much, or spilling bad news on the public Linden news posts.

[Tateru Nino]

"To the second point, almost all social games and virtual worlds on Facebook have an achievement system"

And some of those games are failures. The fact is, we have no data to suggest that adding an achievements system makes any game more successful, appealing or engaging than an otherwise identical game without.

My contention is that nothing is gained, and that the side-effects may - for some things that you could bolt an achievements system to - be undersirable, such as the erosion of 'bebop reality', etc.

[Dale Innis]

Thanks, Hamlet, that's interesting! So, if I'm reading this right, you don't think you'd find these things valuable yourself, but you think that the only way the world can continue to be viable to support those other things that you DO find valuable, is to incorporate these things and thus draw in lots of paying customers / revenue, who for whatever reason aren't drawn in by the stuff that you (and I) find valuable.

That's sort of a sad thought. Are there really not enough people in the world who appreciate the content and community for what it is, or who would appreciate it if we could publicize it better and perhaps make it more accessible, to make a viable customer base? Not every service has to have millions of customers to survive.

My worry is that, if the platform adds things that are there just to attract millions of new casual users at the Farmville or Tower Defense level of interaction, say, why would we expect that the parts that we like, the user-generated content and the amazing community, would continue? That is, if the company becomes viable by making its product more and more like some sort of "Sims/WoW embedded in Facebook" thing, what incentive will it have to continue supporting UGC at all?

I'd rather SL remain a slowly-growing world based on user-generated content and community, than that it strive to be a huge and quickly-growing enterprise by transforming itself into something in which UCG and community might perhaps be allowed to remain, as a sort of nostalgic old hanger-on, until someone decides some costs need to be cut, and all that "rezzing" stuff isn't really our core business anymore, anyway.

Seems to be a sort of "destroying the village to save it" thing going on there, no?

[Laetizia Coronet]

"23% are 18-34, and interestingly, 25% of [Habbo's] userbase is 35 and up."

These must be the people who ran off during the crackdown on age play in SL...

[Arcadia Codesmith]

The current trend in MMO gaming is to deemphasize the level system with a fast, shallow leveling curve, getting quickly to end-game content.

(That doesn't make me happy. I find end-game raids and PvP bore the tears out of me, and the journey to max level is much more fun than the destination).

This particular system is a variation on systems that have been used for websites for ages before 'gamification' became the buzzword of the week.

I for one wouldn't mind a "trophy case" tab for achievements and awards... but though the interface ought to support it, the biggest category of awards should be user-generated. A ribbon for participating in a charity fund-raiser would be more meaningful to me than one for frequenting the official forums.

And I should definitely have the option to selectively display certain achievements of a personal nature :)

[Machine]

Hamlet,

You are forgetting that many people do not use SL for a game, like myself.

The best approach that SL can take is to provide a reliable and flexible platform that sim owners can use to do whatever they want to do, and not impose any SL wide systems like ranks and roles.

There are many role playing sims that have roles and ranks. If this is what will attract new users, new users simply need to be directed to RPG sims.

[Kim Anubis]

Any system that allows a forums user who makes lots of drama posts able to edit the Knowledge Base -- the only documentation we have -- while the same ability is not offered to Residents with years of actual experience and in some cases one or more "official guide" how-to books under their belts ... Well, bring on the big hats and clown shoes.

It doesn't help that the icons are shaped like pawns.

I love SL, and I like and respect the folks working at the Lab, so that is all I'll say.

[Arcadian Vanalten]

Meh. Relevance? Personally, I never pay attention to those metrics on who posts the most on forums. "Mouthy" does not equal "Insightful."

For those who really need the external validation of the virtual cookie and pat on the head, go for it. Personally, I probably won't even notice or care about my title or anyone else's. I'm not here for that.

If I want games, I'll go fire up one of the other MMORPG's I play. For me, SL's more of a social and creative venue than a game, and when I log on, I won't be here to rack up some sort of silly, pointless badge collection.

As a social playground and concept sandbox, SL is unbeaten and, as far as I'm concerned, unbeatable thus far. It even handles story-driven RP w/ combat meters fairly well (lag issues notwithstanding).

As a WoW/Guild Wars style game, well, it's about like entering your stock Porsche 911 in the mudbogging competition. It's not what it's set up to do very well, and by the time you DO get it to do that (I'm sure someone out there has Monster Truck-ified a Porsche), you give up what made it great in its native territory. SL should not waste its time trying to be what it's not, when it's outlasted so many other worlds like There, etc by being what it IS.

[Arcadia Codesmith]

The attitude that the Lab should be nothing but an agnostic platform provider is a crippling one.

Only users can grow a user community, but they can't do it alone. They need a strong infrastructure that constantly expands its capabilities in response to demand.

This is no different than mesh import or puppeteering. It may be a system that's only of interest to a certain portion of the user base, but for those users it's very interesting indeed.

If you want a world that's narrowly targeted to your vision of what a virtual world should be, there are plenty of tools available to roll your own.

For the rest of us, a broad vision of what the world should be (for example, one that's not solely reliant on private for-profit creators) is the best course.

[Pyewacket]

How UTTERLY ridiculas.. who makes up this stuff? This is insane..im speachless ..and to prasie it !! its like farmville or somthing .. 'good social behaviour'?? turn citizens into robots!*laugh Out very loud

[Matthew Perreault]

The stupidest stupid idea ever to come from Stupidtown.